2016 elections - because it's never too early

[Malthus]

We have a wørd for this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truthiness

Yup. They mention that in the in-depth article that follows.

http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21706498-dishonesty-politics-nothing-new-manner-which-some-politicians-now-lie-and

Reagan's words point to an important aspect of what has changed. Political lies used to imply that there was a truth—one that had to be prevented from coming out. Evidence, consistency and scholarship had political power. Today a growing number of politicians and pundits simply no longer care. They are content with what Stephen Colbert, an American comedian, calls "truthiness": ideas which "feel right" or "should be true". They deal in insinuation ("A lot of people are saying..." is one of Mr Trump's favourite phrases) and question the provenance, rather than accuracy, of anything that goes against them ("They would say that, wouldn't they?"). And when the distance between what feels true and what the facts say grows too great, it can always be bridged with a handy conspiracy theory.

One interesting aspect to this debate is to what extent (if at all) academic trends have been responsible for this. The articles mention the importance of "gatekeepers" to preserve at least some notion of what is true and what is not. Part of what I found unpleasant about academia in the humanities was what I saw as a growing indifference to any notion of objective truth having any substance or reality. This I thought eroded the value of the humanities as a "gatekeeper" - if everything is subjective, we can't brand politicians like Trump as "liars"; they just have a different notion of what is true, one that resonates with their audience. 

I cannot help but wonder how the rise on American evangelism has prepped the ground for this kind of thinking.

There has been a concerted and conscious attack on critical thinking and reason as a way of justifying the teaching of "alternate theories" of creation, for example. The problem with things like that is you cannot limit the damage to only the actual target. If you are being told that science and reason and objectivity are all optional when it comes to creation or climate, then of course they are optional when it comes to things like the record of the Clintons, Obama's birth, the impact of immigration, or whatever other populist bullshit someone like Trump is willing to peddle to appeal to the ignorant, now made even MORE ignorant because we've actually made ignorance itself a virtue.

That's a good point, but it only holds true for America. The Economist article notes that the same sort of thinking has arisen elsewhere, such as in Poland, which while they have a religious tradition have no tradition of evangelism (though perhaps communism fills a similar role in truth-denying).

[derspiess]

Because Gore knew lots of stuff, and Bush didn't. By demonstrating that, Gore showed himself to be an asshole in the eyes of americans. That was my takeaway at least.

It was *how* he demonstrated it-- the sighing and eye-rolling-- that was considered off-putting.

[Berkut]

It's funny - today there is now the "Is Trump Healthy" question on CNN, and questions about why he won't release his medical records.

Again, this matters not at all. Spicey and Marty are going to cheerlead him regardless - they don't care if he is sick or healthy, that isn't the point.

And people who don't like him are probably MORE inclined, if anything, to take solace in the idea that even if elected, maybe he won't last long. Anyone would be better.

[Barrister]

It's funny - today there is now the "Is Trump Healthy" question on CNN, and questions about why he won't release his medical records.

Again, this matters not at all. Spicey and Marty are going to cheerlead him regardless - they don't care if he is sick or healthy, that isn't the point.

And people who don't like him are probably MORE inclined, if anything, to take solace in the idea that even if elected, maybe he won't last long. Anyone would be better.

And, surprise, surprise, Trump is NOT going to release his medical records on Dr Oz today.  They'll do it 'later'.

[derspiess]

So... how are Marty and I cheerleading Trump?

[Berkut]

So... how are Marty and I cheerleading Trump?

I have no idea how you manage to live with it, myself.

[derspiess]

Wow.  Okay.

[Zanza]

So... how are Marty and I cheerleading Trump?

The US general election is a zero sum game. Being negative about one candidate has the same effect as being positive about the opposing candidate. To give an example, some posters here have completely accepted the "crooked Hillary" theme so they don't even have to be positive about Trump to support him. Participating in tainting his opponent is all Trump needs to win in a zero sum game.

[Berkut]

So... how are Marty and I cheerleading Trump?

The US general election is a zero sum game. Being negative about one candidate has the same effect as being positive about the opposing candidate. To give an example, some posters here have completely accepted the "crooked Hillary" theme so they don't even have to be positive about Trump to support him. Participating in tainting his opponent is all Trump needs to win in a zero sum game.

It's actually worse than that.

When the "Crooked Hillary" thing is trivially proven to be completely false, and yet people continue to push it anyway, then it is clear that their position is not actually based on their distaste with Clinton honesty at all, especially given that the alternative is objectively radically more dishonest in any case.

Being ignorant of the truth might be sort of excusable. Knowing the truth, and actively perpetuating the lie anyway means that there is another motive in play.

[derspiess]

So... how are Marty and I cheerleading Trump?

The US general election is a zero sum game. Being negative about one candidate has the same effect as being positive about the opposing candidate. To give an example, some posters here have completely accepted the "crooked Hillary" theme so they don't even have to be positive about Trump to support him. Participating in tainting his opponent is all Trump needs to win in a zero sum game.

I don't accept that.  Hillary and Trump are both awful.  Trump's foibles are well-documented here so no need to beat that dead horse.  I'm just helping to provide some balance

And I'm voting Johnson.  Probably

[Legbiter]

Bloomberg poll has Trump +5 in Ohio.

FiveThirtyEight now projects Clinton will lose Ohio and currently barely holds Florida at 50.4%

Trumpening.

[Ed Anger]

So... how are Marty and I cheerleading Trump?

The US general election is a zero sum game. Being negative about one candidate has the same effect as being positive about the opposing candidate. To give an example, some posters here have completely accepted the "crooked Hillary" theme so they don't even have to be positive about Trump to support him. Participating in tainting his opponent is all Trump needs to win in a zero sum game.

I don't accept that.  Hillary and Trump are both awful.  Trump's foibles are well-documented here so no need to beat that dead horse.  I'm just helping to provide some balance

And I'm voting Johnson.  Probably

Vote Jill Stein. She's woke.

I hope I used that right.

[derspiess]

Vote Jill Stein. She's woke.

I hope I used that right.

Sorry, but my backup candidate should Johnson fail me (heh) is Vermin Supreme.

[Barrister]

So... how are Marty and I cheerleading Trump?

The US general election is a zero sum game. Being negative about one candidate has the same effect as being positive about the opposing candidate. To give an example, some posters here have completely accepted the "crooked Hillary" theme so they don't even have to be positive about Trump to support him. Participating in tainting his opponent is all Trump needs to win in a zero sum game.

Dud this is a discussion board with at most 80-some people reading.  My (or Speiss) pointing out that Clinton is a terrible candidate doesn't make it any more likely that Trup is going to win the election.

[Ed Anger]

Spicy and me are kingmakers, being from a swing state. We rule, the rest of you drool.