|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On March 05 2018 22:03 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2018 21:52 LegalLord wrote:
Obama being historically 8th ranked is nostalgia at best. He was merely ok as president, not “one of the best” by a long shot. I'm not too clued up on US history, but name 8 presidents you'd rank above Obama? My guess would be, in no particular order of presidents who you might rank above Obama: Washington Jefferson Lincoln F. Roosevelt T. Roosevelt Eisenhower ^ Those I think are undisputably better presidents than Obama, who truly shaped the nation. Clinton (I'd rank him above Obama, but I'm guessing lots of Americans wouldn't, and I think history won't be kind to him) Madison? Truman? Adams? Reagan (not that I would rank him high, but I imagine there are plenty of Americans who do) Kennedy (not a president that did much, but might score for nostalgia?)
Those six are pretty clearly above Obama, yes. I’d also include (in chronological order) Madison, Monroe, Jackson, Wilson, Truman, Kennedy, and the other Clinton. Arguable would be Polk, L. Johnson, Reagan, and perhaps some others who are borderline. Adams definitely isn’t in the list of top presidents.
The list that puts Obama at eighth looks to be very much slanted in such a way to spite Trump. Even people who generally liked Obama (I include myself in that list, though he did make some pretty important and idiotic fuck-ups like literally any other presidents) don’t really think of him as a top 10 without deluding oneself into it based on hating Trump. But I suppose history will show whether or not the things Obama did were ultimately well-founded or just temporary successes that ended up on the wrong side of history.
|
I wouldn't put Obama anywhere near top 10, but still comfortably in the top 50%. Not one of the best, but there are enough mediocre/shitty presidents that there's definitely a large gap between him and Trump.
|
I don't know, if you account for inflation based on population, world presence, military power, etc; the amount of shit Obama had to deal with can easily rank him high.
|
If you judge them outside of their respective times of being president, then the list doesn't work. The early founders didn't have this scale and complexity to work with. I would take T Roosevelt and replace him with Kennedy, just for the social impacts Kennedy had. Truman inherited FDRs legacy and didn't do much afterwards. Eisenhower took what FDR started and essentially moved it forward. Other than that, I don't really have an opinion.
|
*haven't posted here in awhile*
Is there any point in talking to Trump supporters at this point? They live in a parallel reality to ours, where FOX/other Murdoch outlets/Breitbart/InfoWars are legitimate, honest journalistic outlets, and every other outlet in the entire world is part of a giant conspiracy to undermine the right-wing.
That's really what it comes down to. If you think FOX is genuinely "fair and balanced," then Trump (if you are morally capable of putting aside his active campaigning for a child molester, which even the FOX hosts stopped denying eventually) seems like a competent and well-meaning guy that's being undermined by career bureaucrats. If you give any credibility at all to CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, PBS, BBC, WaPo, NYT, the Guardian, Reuters, McClatchy, WSJ, LA Times, Vox, Bloomberg, etc. etc. then he's a corrupt, petulant moron of the highest degree being kept afloat by a Republican Party that is now complicit in the corruption.
After his refusal to divest his financial holdings, Charlottesville, DACA, Roy Moore, escalating civilian casualties in the Middle East/Africa, near-universal corruption in his cabinet, etc., I doubt there are any actual independents left. There's four groups now: the anti-Trumpers, the deluded ones who entrust their immortal souls to FOX [et al.], and the ones who know the pro-Trump media are liars but don't care because they're enthusiastically malicious. And a comparatively small group who don't pay any attention to the news and only know what they see on social media, but that sector is probably split roughly halfway between left- and right-wingers.
|
We don't have the necessary perspective to judge Obama because I don't think we can yet fully perceive the economic effects of his fiscal policies (low interest rates etc).
|
On March 06 2018 00:50 LightSpectra wrote:
*haven't posted here in awhile*
Is there any point in talking to Trump supporters at this point? They live in a parallel reality to ours, where FOX/other Murdoch outlets/Breitbart/InfoWars are legitimate, honest journalistic outlets, and every other outlet in the entire world is part of a giant conspiracy to undermine the right-wing.
That's really what it comes down to. If you think FOX is genuinely "fair and balanced," then Trump (if you are morally capable of putting aside his active campaigning for a child molester, which even the FOX hosts stopped denying eventually) seems like a competent and well-meaning guy that's being undermined by career bureaucrats. If you give any credibility at all to CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, PBS, BBC, WaPo, NYT, the Guardian, Reuters, McClatchy, WSJ, LA Times, Vox, Bloomberg, etc. etc. then he's a corrupt, petulant moron of the highest degree being kept afloat by a Republican Party that is now complicit in the corruption.
After his refusal to divest his financial holdings, Charlottesville, DACA, Roy Moore, escalating civilian casualties in the Middle East/Africa, near-universal corruption in his cabinet, etc., I doubt there are any actual independents left. There's four groups now: the anti-Trumpers, the deluded ones who entrust their immortal souls to FOX [et al.], and the ones who know the pro-Trump media are liars but don't care because they're enthusiastically malicious. And a comparatively small group who don't pay any attention to the news and only know what they see on social media, but that sector is probably split roughly halfway between left- and right-wingers.
And Trump supporters think the left wing lives in a parallel reality. Isn't tribalism fun?
Why, I have absolutely apropos generalizations of the other side, but when the right generalizes me, it just misses all the diversity of thought and critical thinking! You're in an echo chamber of your own construction. People generally won't try to disabuse you of all your tribal thinking when your whole point is you're checking out from democratic governance (and you're really just looking for other people who think like you to pat you on the back for giving up on talking in civil society).
|
On March 06 2018 00:58 kollin wrote:
We don't have the necessary perspective to judge Obama because I don't think we can yet fully perceive the economic effects of his fiscal policies (low interest rates etc).
I guess not all the effects, but we recovered from the recession at least.
|
On March 06 2018 01:03 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2018 00:50 LightSpectra wrote:
*haven't posted here in awhile*
Is there any point in talking to Trump supporters at this point? They live in a parallel reality to ours, where FOX/other Murdoch outlets/Breitbart/InfoWars are legitimate, honest journalistic outlets, and every other outlet in the entire world is part of a giant conspiracy to undermine the right-wing.
That's really what it comes down to. If you think FOX is genuinely "fair and balanced," then Trump (if you are morally capable of putting aside his active campaigning for a child molester, which even the FOX hosts stopped denying eventually) seems like a competent and well-meaning guy that's being undermined by career bureaucrats. If you give any credibility at all to CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, PBS, BBC, WaPo, NYT, the Guardian, Reuters, McClatchy, WSJ, LA Times, Vox, Bloomberg, etc. etc. then he's a corrupt, petulant moron of the highest degree being kept afloat by a Republican Party that is now complicit in the corruption.
After his refusal to divest his financial holdings, Charlottesville, DACA, Roy Moore, escalating civilian casualties in the Middle East/Africa, near-universal corruption in his cabinet, etc., I doubt there are any actual independents left. There's four groups now: the anti-Trumpers, the deluded ones who entrust their immortal souls to FOX [et al.], and the ones who know the pro-Trump media are liars but don't care because they're enthusiastically malicious. And a comparatively small group who don't pay any attention to the news and only know what they see on social media, but that sector is probably split roughly halfway between left- and right-wingers. And Trump supporters think the left wing lives in a parallel reality. Isn't tribalism fun? Why, I have absolutely apropos generalizations of the other side, but when the right generalizes me, it just misses all the diversity of thought and critical thinking! You're in an echo chamber of your own construction. People generally won't try to disabuse you of all your tribal thinking when your whole point is you're checking out from democratic governance (and you're really just looking for other people who think like you to pat you on the back for giving up on talking in civil society).
That "we're both just judging from our tribe" stuff kinda loses meaning when check beyond America's borders and see how everyone else looks at you.
|
On March 06 2018 00:58 kollin wrote:
We don't have the necessary perspective to judge Obama because I don't think we can yet fully perceive the economic effects of his fiscal policies (low interest rates etc).
I'd also say there's also too much American exceptionalism and it's too recent to have Obama's drone policy in the Middle East (and Middle East policy in general) properly judged.
|
I don’t know why I would spend time trying to change the mind of Trump supporters when there are so many unaffiliated voters and unhappy moderate Republicans to attempt to win over. If conservatives get crushed in congress come November, who cares what Trump supporters believe?
|
I'd judge Obama fairly well for actually trying and partially succeeding on setting America on a course for better healthcare.
That sorta stuff scores a lot higher for me then 'leaving behind a decent economy' ect.
|
On March 06 2018 01:03 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2018 00:50 LightSpectra wrote:
*haven't posted here in awhile*
Is there any point in talking to Trump supporters at this point? They live in a parallel reality to ours, where FOX/other Murdoch outlets/Breitbart/InfoWars are legitimate, honest journalistic outlets, and every other outlet in the entire world is part of a giant conspiracy to undermine the right-wing.
That's really what it comes down to. If you think FOX is genuinely "fair and balanced," then Trump (if you are morally capable of putting aside his active campaigning for a child molester, which even the FOX hosts stopped denying eventually) seems like a competent and well-meaning guy that's being undermined by career bureaucrats. If you give any credibility at all to CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, PBS, BBC, WaPo, NYT, the Guardian, Reuters, McClatchy, WSJ, LA Times, Vox, Bloomberg, etc. etc. then he's a corrupt, petulant moron of the highest degree being kept afloat by a Republican Party that is now complicit in the corruption.
After his refusal to divest his financial holdings, Charlottesville, DACA, Roy Moore, escalating civilian casualties in the Middle East/Africa, near-universal corruption in his cabinet, etc., I doubt there are any actual independents left. There's four groups now: the anti-Trumpers, the deluded ones who entrust their immortal souls to FOX [et al.], and the ones who know the pro-Trump media are liars but don't care because they're enthusiastically malicious. And a comparatively small group who don't pay any attention to the news and only know what they see on social media, but that sector is probably split roughly halfway between left- and right-wingers. And Trump supporters think the left wing lives in a parallel reality. Isn't tribalism fun? Why, I have absolutely apropos generalizations of the other side, but when the right generalizes me, it just misses all the diversity of thought and critical thinking! You're in an echo chamber of your own construction. People generally won't try to disabuse you of all your tribal thinking when your whole point is you're checking out from democratic governance (and you're really just looking for other people who think like you to pat you on the back for giving up on talking in civil society).
The difference is one side is right and the other is wrong.
When Trump lies, is caught lying, claims he never said the thing he was recorded on tape saying, the side that calls him out for lying is correct, and the one that backs him up is wrong.
|
On March 06 2018 01:03 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2018 00:50 LightSpectra wrote:
*haven't posted here in awhile*
Is there any point in talking to Trump supporters at this point? They live in a parallel reality to ours, where FOX/other Murdoch outlets/Breitbart/InfoWars are legitimate, honest journalistic outlets, and every other outlet in the entire world is part of a giant conspiracy to undermine the right-wing.
That's really what it comes down to. If you think FOX is genuinely "fair and balanced," then Trump (if you are morally capable of putting aside his active campaigning for a child molester, which even the FOX hosts stopped denying eventually) seems like a competent and well-meaning guy that's being undermined by career bureaucrats. If you give any credibility at all to CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, PBS, BBC, WaPo, NYT, the Guardian, Reuters, McClatchy, WSJ, LA Times, Vox, Bloomberg, etc. etc. then he's a corrupt, petulant moron of the highest degree being kept afloat by a Republican Party that is now complicit in the corruption.
After his refusal to divest his financial holdings, Charlottesville, DACA, Roy Moore, escalating civilian casualties in the Middle East/Africa, near-universal corruption in his cabinet, etc., I doubt there are any actual independents left. There's four groups now: the anti-Trumpers, the deluded ones who entrust their immortal souls to FOX [et al.], and the ones who know the pro-Trump media are liars but don't care because they're enthusiastically malicious. And a comparatively small group who don't pay any attention to the news and only know what they see on social media, but that sector is probably split roughly halfway between left- and right-wingers. And Trump supporters think the left wing lives in a parallel reality. Isn't tribalism fun? Why, I have absolutely apropos generalizations of the other side, but when the right generalizes me, it just misses all the diversity of thought and critical thinking! You're in an echo chamber of your own construction. People generally won't try to disabuse you of all your tribal thinking when your whole point is you're checking out from democratic governance (and you're really just looking for other people who think like you to pat you on the back for giving up on talking in civil society).
Just because two sides disagree with each other does not make them equally valid (or invalid). There is a very big difference between "You disagree with us, and we disagree with you" and "One side values facts and data and science to build their reality, and the other only values lies and *alternative facts* to inform their worldview."
|
On March 06 2018 01:12 Plansix wrote:
I don’t know why I would spend time trying to change the mind of Trump supporters when there are so many unaffiliated voters and unhappy moderate Republicans to attempt to win over. If conservatives get crushed in congress come November, who cares what Trump supporters believe?
Because condemning a third of the country to 'unsalvageable deplorables' is kind of a troubling?
|
On March 06 2018 01:09 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2018 00:58 kollin wrote:
We don't have the necessary perspective to judge Obama because I don't think we can yet fully perceive the economic effects of his fiscal policies (low interest rates etc). I'd also say there's also too much American exceptionalism and it's too recent to have Obama's drone policy in the Middle East (and Middle East policy in general) properly judged.
Obama did try to play down that bolded part as much as he could, because he knew the numbers. And he knew that there was a lot of work to be done before that bold statement rang true. I find the bold part true to some extent in areas that don't factor in academics (what the students are retaining), and fraudulent in others (anything with a physical capacity involved). Now, brains != brawn and all of that. But hey, take what we can get until the education system improves (We're screwed until 2020 when we can hopefully be rid of devos).
|
On March 06 2018 01:12 Plansix wrote:
I don’t know why I would spend time trying to change the mind of Trump supporters when there are so many unaffiliated voters and unhappy moderate Republicans to attempt to win over. If conservatives get crushed in congress come November, who cares what Trump supporters believe?
Who are you thinking of when you say "moderate Republicans"?
|
On March 06 2018 01:15 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2018 01:12 Plansix wrote:
I don’t know why I would spend time trying to change the mind of Trump supporters when there are so many unaffiliated voters and unhappy moderate Republicans to attempt to win over. If conservatives get crushed in congress come November, who cares what Trump supporters believe? Because condemning a third of the country to 'unsalvageable deplorables' is kind of a troubling?
It's definitely troubling, but it's almost certainly true. When I debate on online forums or in front of groups of people, and if the topic is extremely polarizing, very rarely am I actively trying to convince my opponent to come to my side. Such a thing is practically impossible, and not really practical. In reality, he and I are both trying to convince the swing voters/ moderates/ people who are on the fence to join a side. That's how you win elections too, imo, by appealing to the X% of purple voters who are actually open-minded enough or undecided enough to follow you over your opponent (and, by proxy, making sure you focus on purple states when it comes to the electoral college).
Obviously, you don't announce that the other side is a lost cause, as that's just bad optics for you, but you definitely want to fight the battles you can win and not waste as much time on the battles that won't be fruitful.
|
On March 06 2018 01:03 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2018 00:50 LightSpectra wrote:
*haven't posted here in awhile*
Is there any point in talking to Trump supporters at this point? They live in a parallel reality to ours, where FOX/other Murdoch outlets/Breitbart/InfoWars are legitimate, honest journalistic outlets, and every other outlet in the entire world is part of a giant conspiracy to undermine the right-wing.
That's really what it comes down to. If you think FOX is genuinely "fair and balanced," then Trump (if you are morally capable of putting aside his active campaigning for a child molester, which even the FOX hosts stopped denying eventually) seems like a competent and well-meaning guy that's being undermined by career bureaucrats. If you give any credibility at all to CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, PBS, BBC, WaPo, NYT, the Guardian, Reuters, McClatchy, WSJ, LA Times, Vox, Bloomberg, etc. etc. then he's a corrupt, petulant moron of the highest degree being kept afloat by a Republican Party that is now complicit in the corruption.
After his refusal to divest his financial holdings, Charlottesville, DACA, Roy Moore, escalating civilian casualties in the Middle East/Africa, near-universal corruption in his cabinet, etc., I doubt there are any actual independents left. There's four groups now: the anti-Trumpers, the deluded ones who entrust their immortal souls to FOX [et al.], and the ones who know the pro-Trump media are liars but don't care because they're enthusiastically malicious. And a comparatively small group who don't pay any attention to the news and only know what they see on social media, but that sector is probably split roughly halfway between left- and right-wingers. And Trump supporters think the left wing lives in a parallel reality. Isn't tribalism fun? Why, I have absolutely apropos generalizations of the other side, but when the right generalizes me, it just misses all the diversity of thought and critical thinking! You're in an echo chamber of your own construction. People generally won't try to disabuse you of all your tribal thinking when your whole point is you're checking out from democratic governance (and you're really just looking for other people who think like you to pat you on the back for giving up on talking in civil society).
So you agree -- there is nothing I can say that will change your mind? We live in parallel realities?
I mean, at this point the only thing we can do is debate the merits of the news we choose to believe. I can show you numerous examples of how FOX and Breitbart et al. have straight up lied, been extremely misleading, or been gravely erroneous with a microscopic correction/retraction. I can show you how many people would have to be in on this vast left-wing conspiracy for the thousands of media outlets in the world that aren't owned by the Murdochs, Sinclairs, and Mercers to be actively lying in order to undermine your views. I can show you numerous examples where FOX et al. have alleged some massive scandal, but right-wing politicians do nothing about it; whereas when every other media outlet alleges a massive scandal, the right-wing politicians take it seriously as if it's based in reality. I can show you how it is extremely suspicious that Trump meets with Rupert Murdoch on a weekly basis and have a demonstrable feedback loop for each other.
I can do all these things, but what point is there? I'm sure you have a rationalization for every single argument I can make. It makes no difference what I say. You trust FOX. I trust the thousands of independent media outlets not owned by a rich mogul who has openly admitted to being favorable to the right-wing. Likely nothing but a direct intervention from God himself is going to change that.
|
On March 06 2018 00:50 LightSpectra wrote:
*haven't posted here in awhile*
Is there any point in talking to Trump supporters at this point? They live in a parallel reality to ours, where FOX/other Murdoch outlets/Breitbart/InfoWars are legitimate, honest journalistic outlets, and every other outlet in the entire world is part of a giant conspiracy to undermine the right-wing.
That's really what it comes down to. If you think FOX is genuinely "fair and balanced," then Trump (if you are morally capable of putting aside his active campaigning for a child molester, which even the FOX hosts stopped denying eventually) seems like a competent and well-meaning guy that's being undermined by career bureaucrats. If you give any credibility at all to CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, PBS, BBC, WaPo, NYT, the Guardian, Reuters, McClatchy, WSJ, LA Times, Vox, Bloomberg, etc. etc. then he's a corrupt, petulant moron of the highest degree being kept afloat by a Republican Party that is now complicit in the corruption.
After his refusal to divest his financial holdings, Charlottesville, DACA, Roy Moore, escalating civilian casualties in the Middle East/Africa, near-universal corruption in his cabinet, etc., I doubt there are any actual independents left. There's four groups now: the anti-Trumpers, the deluded ones who entrust their immortal souls to FOX [et al.], and the ones who know the pro-Trump media are liars but don't care because they're enthusiastically malicious. And a comparatively small group who don't pay any attention to the news and only know what they see on social media, but that sector is probably split roughly halfway between left- and right-wingers.
whether there's a point depends on what your objective is, and on how ardent they are, and what topics you discuss.
you're not gonna convince die-hard trumpists anymore than you'll get someone to give up their religion.
seriously tryin to convince the less die hard is possible, but very difficult, and requires patience beyond my limits, as well as some skills/techniques i'm not that familiar with.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
