361–370 of 564 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can't have a mature dialog with people who don't believe facts.
I'm a structural biologist studying viruses that has voted for many republicans. Do I fit your definition of not believing facts?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>On one side are the computer scientists and engineers who understand the nature of the problem There are a hell of a lot of computer scientists and engineers who vote republican, certainty not a majority but definitely a large enough minority you can't discount them. They just don't broadcast it for reasons that should be obvious to anyone reading these comments.
They're embarrassed to be seen supporting candidates that are so transparently anti-science, anti-education and anti-reason?
Conservatives tend to not speak up because the hyperbolic vitriol has gotten out of hand.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t mind alienating you; the masters tools will never dismantle the master’s house. I've never heard this phrase before, but it equally applies to the situation where one thinks only they can wield a weapon. We can't assume that because we are "right," we have nothing to fear from the people who are "wrong" using our worst tactics against us. This is wrong whether it's one side "lying for Jesus," or the other sid…
> It's simply not possible to continually raise your defenses and offenses and end with a win-win, and when it comes to a roughly evenly divided society, win-lose is lose-lose. This only works when both sides engage in good faith. That is not the case currently. We are better off excluding them than letting them abuse the process in bad faith like they always do. The ones advancing this argument are always the ones w…
There are hundreds of millions of nominally reasonable people who fall into opposite tribes just by happenstance. If you attack their tribe as a whole they'll stick to their tribes because of tribalism, but if you act reasonably, even if the tribal figureheads are acting in bad faith, the members of each tribe can be persuaded reasonably.
Every line in tribe B's media about how party A is destroying the world with its anti-X agenda is perfectly mirrored by a similar line in tribe A's media about how party B is destroying the world with its anti-Y agenda. "Excluding" doesn't cut off people you disagree with, it makes them stronger, by consolidating them further into their tribes and cementing their opinions ("fight makes right")! We can try to see things from the point of view of reasonable people on both sides, or we can fail as a pluralistic society.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
This divisive rhetoric is what got us here in the first place; a breakdown in civil communication. The blue team mimics the red team in this respect. I wish we could have a more mature dialogue but I wonder if we're past that. Violent communication is normalizing.
>In 1995, then-Republican House Majority Leader Dick Armey famously referred to Frank as "Barney Fag" in a press interview.
Don't act like the past was some civil utopia.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you explain which of abvdasker's, hackerswords's, unsui's posts were not nice? I sincerely want to know, so I can argue against you further without being "unnice".
“Cut the bs” paints someone as a bad faith conversationalist. You can reply to that but I think I’ve said my part.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can't have a mature dialog with people who don't believe facts.
This is a lesson from Gödel, Escher, Bach's Tortoise and Achilles stories too. Because the Tortoise refuses to accept Modus ponens (if A implies B, and A, then B), Achilles is unable to convince it of anything. The facts Achilles tells the Tortoise aren't any less true for its stubborn refusal to accept them, but Achilles won't convince the Turtle of them. If people won't be reasoned with, don't waste your time tryin…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Excessive money printing that also happened under an R admin? Freedom reducing laws like laws that limit the freedom to access a safe abortion? Or laws that limit the freedom to vote? What freedoms specifically? Increased taxes for who? Taxes were massively cut for wealthy people a couple years ago and the only proposal to raise them that got any traction recently didn’t even raise them back to the previous level - s…
All fair points on the money printing parts. I am well aware Trump printed trillions as well. I wasn't a fan then and not now. state laws != federal laws. I am pro-choice but I think allowing states to make decisions for their own is good and the system is working as intended. I want states to have more freedom to legislate what their constituents want than a giant federal government making decisions for the whole na…
You know what goalpost doesn't move? Not having ICUs at full capacity with people who could have just taken two shots 6 months ago.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Excessive money printing that also happened under an R admin? Freedom reducing laws like laws that limit the freedom to access a safe abortion? Or laws that limit the freedom to vote? What freedoms specifically? Increased taxes for who? Taxes were massively cut for wealthy people a couple years ago and the only proposal to raise them that got any traction recently didn’t even raise them back to the previous level - s…
All fair points on the money printing parts. I am well aware Trump printed trillions as well. I wasn't a fan then and not now. state laws != federal laws. I am pro-choice but I think allowing states to make decisions for their own is good and the system is working as intended. I want states to have more freedom to legislate what their constituents want than a giant federal government making decisions for the whole na…
Vaccine mandates are a pretty normal requirement at a lot of places. I worked in healthcare - flu shots were mandatory with very rare exceptions. When I was a kid I had to have MMR, polio, whooping cough, etc, vaccines to be able to enroll in school. This sudden “but muh freedom” crap doesn’t really hold up to scrutiny when the same party saying vaccines should be optional because it is a personal medical choice is the same group saying other medical procedures (that are potentially necessary) should be banned (abortion, in case that wasn’t clear) - even though they are also personal medical choices and nobody is trying to even mandate them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
This divisive rhetoric is what got us here in the first place; a breakdown in civil communication. The blue team mimics the red team in this respect. I wish we could have a more mature dialogue but I wonder if we're past that. Violent communication is normalizing.
I'll risk making this a partisan issue and say the anti-intellectual and anti-science bent seems increasingly prevalent among Republicans like Mike Parson and their constituencies. One of the most shocking statistics I've seen recently is the Pew poll which shows that in the space of 2 years Republican attitudes about higher education saw a 20-point swing such that that most Republican voters now believe college is n…