My son actually just did this topic in his first debate scrimmage. They lost (got trounced by sophomores who had been doing it longer). It's the issue of whether character matters in politics. For some, Trump was just too much (ranging from vulgar to mean) despite the policy of the other side. It's not just a Trump thing....it came up the other way with Bill Clinton and Biden (though no one so far has come forward with definitive evidence he's involved in his son's shady business dealings)
Vaccine
- Thread starter Multi Sport
- Start date
My son actually just did this topic in his first debate scrimmage. They lost (got trounced by sophomores who had been doing it longer). It's the issue of whether character matters in politics. For some, Trump was just too much (ranging from vulgar to mean) despite the policy of the other side. It's not just a Trump thing....it came up the other way with Bill Clinton and Biden (though no one so far has come forward with definitive evidence he's involved in his son's shady business dealings)
I see a whole lot of "I don't know what I'm talking about, so here's my conclusion".
So you have nothing on Biden but that's still good enough for you?
Good one Magoo, you old bean! I see the comprehension still eludes you.
MicPaPa
GOLD
More personality over policy nonsense.
Let me try it this way by combining the two. Trump had a very clear record. Given his extensive list of policies and accomplishments, specifically where on that list, in order of importance to you, would you rank his personality and mean tweets?
I comprehended your "not competent to discuss" part, after which you went right ahead anyway and ended with a mathematical conclusion. Show your work.
US Presidential elections are a binary process. US Presidents are also a representative of, for better or worse, the character and stature of the nation. I think records are more important, but character counts too. Whether that's enough to cost or gain my vote depends on who the other side puts up against him. I'd prefer to have someone else in 2024 for the simple reason that I can guess on the likely D choice and I'd rather have someone with good policy and good character beat that D choice. The reality is, whether you agree or not, Trump is poison for many people, like my mom or my writer friend, both of whom are lifelong Rs, but are both NeverTrumpers.
You'r comprehension failed when I explained it wasn't a mathematical conclusion. There are different ways to analyze the problem. Between EvilGalie and I, one of us has specific training in evaluating evidence (hint: it's not him) but we can both do it, though in different ways based on our training, each of which is equally valid.
So the words "probability" and "orders of magnitude" have no meanings to lawyers?
And as for "equally valid", lawyers can often a good living presenting nonsense. Mathematicians cannot.
yes they do....it's just less precise than what evil goalie is used to.
Some of the biggest nonsense on the planet is produced by mathematicians (as COVID and its models have well illustrated). Mathematics is only as good as the inputs you get in there. Because of their training, mathematicians are sometimes not able to see the big picture or these limitations. It's why most orgs don't let them have the final say in anything. As the scene from "Margin Call" illustrates, they pay the idiot who can't keep but mixing his metaphors a ton of more money because he has something the mathematicians don't. "Moneyball": same thing.
MicPaPa
GOLD
Exactly, great point - as I recall from my childhood days that is exactly where elections based on personality mattered, in school.
As any logical and clear thinking adult (I say this loosely) would realize from the past 12 months, grown up elections have direct and serious consequences - most important on my list is 13 Marines would still be alive and hundreds of Americans would not have been left behind in Afghanistan.
Maybe the problem is those high schoolers should've been being taught that life is a little more tougher than mean and vulgar, just a thought.
I'm going to pull a fence sitter move and say why can't I have both?
If you forcing me to choose...right now I'd rather have mean tweets than President Schleprock.
I recall from my childhood days the thing which mattered most was: a) what their posters looked like, and b) what they promised. The kid who promised the no homework always won. Some things don't change o mater how old we are.
That's a pretty amazing statement.
Are you suggesting that mean tweets was t's only damage?
Ptolemaic system ring any bells?
Are there any Ptolamaic scientists still practicing? Your best example is an ancient superstition?
MicPaPa
GOLD
No! fence sitter? call me shocked!
Not forcing anything on you, we both live in the same system - two parties, two primaries, two candidates - then pick one. Specifically, the last election couldn't have been any clearer. Both candidates had well-defined records, and for those of you for whom it matters, well defined personalities.
Let me try and clear up my point and ask again, specifically where did personality / mean / vulgar/tweets fit on your list of importance for the 2020 presidential election?