2020 Election MEGAthread

[Jibartik]

You just dont do that mr president, it isnt cool!

Im glad pat finally found jesus.

btw to answer your page, the link is how a conservative acts.

[BlackBellamy]

Six Reasons To Vote For Trump:

https://twitter.com/stillgray/status...22044933206016

[Castle2.0]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...-pandemic.html

US overdose deaths on track to hit an all-time high amid the 2020 pandemic: Drug fatalities have surged by at least 19% in Connecticut, 28% in Colorado and 30% in Kentucky, report finds

[Jibartik]

Originally Posted by Castle2.0 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...-pandemic.html

US overdose deaths on track to hit an all-time high amid the 2020 pandemic: Drug fatalities have surged by at least 19% in Connecticut, 28% in Colorado and 30% in Kentucky, report finds

You dont care about any of that at all.

[Jibartik]

Originally Posted by douglas1999 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Nice zing, it was obviously a rhetorical question and you know that. It follows logically from the swiss cheese example. I'm saying many of those things *are* authoritarian, he legally cannot impose them by decree. Yet you're suggesting he is to blame for not imposing them? And then also saying you don't like authoritarianism? You've gotta the see the internal contradiction in that.

Also he never said it was "fake". There are like a billion statements of him acknowledging the danger. Please find me the clip where he said it was fake. Also people act like he just makes statements himself; he's the president, he's surrounded by medical advisers that relay relevant information about the pandemic to him, and then because he's not very articulate he botches them when answering press core questions off the cuff. Totally worth criticizing him for those type of things. It's not even remotely fair however to say that he's "responsible for 200k deaths". That's absurd and hyperbolic and partisan, and it's a central line to the democratic campaign rhetoric.

And, still, the extremely low mortality rate for this virus VS the economic impact is the central question. Now people are even trying to pass the buck on that to trump "well the lockdowns are necessary because you did such a bad job mister!" Like get real, every single state and local economy hardest hit by lockdowns is democratically governed. It's just like when they say the rioting is "on trumps watch". Like okay, that's a pretty easy game to play. Here watch: Everything bad that happened in the country during Obama's two terms is Obama's fault. See, it's a magic trick!

No no no, it is not logical to follow every example to its extreme.

Oh you want to clean your living room?? Whats next, you're going to quit your job and start sweeping the whole city, then start creating an enforcement mob that goes door to door and forces each person to clean and quit their jobs and take their kids to put them into cleaning camps??

NO

I just want to clean my friggin living room.

You never have listened to anything ive said ever.

[douglas1999]

Originally Posted by Jibartik [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

No no no, it is not logical to follow every example to its extreme.

Oh you want to clean your living room?? Whats next, you're going to quit your job and start sweeping the whole city, then start creating an enforcement mob that goes door to door and forces each person to clean and quit their jobs and take their kids to put them into cleaning camps??

NO

I just want to clean my friggin living room.

You never have listened to anything ive said ever.

It's a reductio ad absurdum, you take the apparent logic of something and point out the extreme example in order to point out an internal inconsistency of the original argument. I was not saying locking people in their homes is good, I was saying it would be illegal for the president to do, much like many of the things in the swiss cheese example. It therefore makes no sense to blame him for not doing them. If you are going to blame him for not doing them, *you* are the one arguing for authoritarianism.

And I do listen to everything you say, I like responding to your posts I'm not trying to be hostile to you.

[FatherSioux]

Originally Posted by douglas1999 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It's a reductio ad absurdum, you take the apparent logic of something and point out the extreme example in order to point out an internal inconsistency of the original argument. I was not saying locking people in their homes is good, I was saying it would be illegal for the president to do, much like many of the things in the swiss cheese example. It therefore makes no sense to blame him for not doing them. If you are going to blame him for not doing them, *you* are the one arguing for authoritarianism.

And I do listen to everything you say, I like responding to your posts I'm not trying to be hostile to you.

Also better known as Nut-picking

[FatherSioux]

Covid stats from CDC

Starting in week 30 of 2020

17
17.1
16.7
15.7
14.5
13.6
12.6
12
11.3
11.1
9.7
7.2

% Death rate due to PIC(Pneumonia, Influenza or KungFlu)

Clearly on the decline, yet we don't hear this good news. It's almost like there is a narrative being pushed that isn't matching reality.

[BlackBellamy]

Originally Posted by douglas1999 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It's a reductio ad absurdum, you take the apparent logic of something and point out the extreme example in order to point out an internal inconsistency of the original argument.

I mentioned it before, it's an appeal to purity. He claims you took an extreme position and argues against that. You can tell people do that when they restate the claim in their opening, like when they say "so what you're saying..." and then they gaslight you about what you claimed.

It's similar to Patriam going "oh so we should withdraw from the world" when I said we didn't have any international problems to solve.

I don't think it's particularly insulting to say argument techniques like that are immature.

It's naive to think you can overcome the basis of someone's ideological argument by providing a 'gotcha' example. You're insulting the intelligence of your opponent because you're basically accusing them of having such a basic or incomplete understanding of their own position that they are now vulnerable to such a basic attack.

Like I've been a conservative for three decades and I'm going to listen as someone tries to explain the basic tenets to me and convince me I'm wrong about the thing I've really thought long and hard about.

[Woke Locc]

Small correction: Pelosi and Mnuchin(Trump) are very near to a stimulus deal, which McConnell has sworn to never bring to a vote.

This is all very Constitutional