Resolved: Trump Era Republicans Are Uniquely Bad in American Political History

[Hellbound]

If you had a substantive point, you wouldn't need to appeal to a flat tire analogy. You could simply make your substantive point in terms of the thing itself.

Anyway, if I understand the gist of your analogy, you're arguing that Trump/the GOP isn't uniquely bad at this point in history, but they could still do with some fixing. Is that correct?

If it is, then you and I are probably in almost perfect agreement here. Probably we only disagree on the exact form the fix should take.

Which is fine, yet the entire argument seems to be that if it isn't uniquely bad, just sit back and wait.

Analogies are to expand upon relevant aspects of a point. Analogies are not proof, they're used to provide clarity to the point being made, which that did rather well to everyone except you. Just because a flat tire isn't unique doesn't mean it isn't a problem. Just because it's not the end of the world doesn't mean it can be ignored. If it's not fixed, it can lead to more severe problems.

Likewise the current situation.

Yet with every new issue this argument is brought up that it's "business as usual", nothing to worry about, just let it keep going. it'll be fine, no need to be alarmed or take any action other than the usual. The flat tire is fine until we're driving on the rim, then we can take action.

For someone who discards analogies as being unnecessary, you focus the majority of effort on similarly unnecessary points. Instead of arguing about the uniqueness, argue about the thing that needs to be done. The uniqueness or not is immaterial and irrelevant.

 

[Hellbound]

My "stance" is that I'm pointing out that everybody behaves badly around analogies, pretty much guaranteeing they'll never work, and yet all quietly pretending that arguments by analogy are actually useful. Drop the pretense and stop wasting everybody's time with analogies that aren't going to work anyway, is what I say.

If you treat an analogy as an argument, instead of an illustration, then the problem isn't in using analogies.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Either you're literally advocating murder, or you're sending up the original argument for comedic purposes.

Either way, the analogy seems to be failing in your hands. Q.E.D.

How would an analogy be in someone's hands? It's not a physical object. Perhaps you could explain your meaning using some kind of comparison to something else? There's a word for that, I can't quite recall it, it's on the tip of my tongue like a tiny amount of something I'm close to identifying by taste but haven't yet.

 

[Belz...]

My "stance" is that I'm pointing out that everybody behaves badly around analogies, pretty much guaranteeing they'll never work, and yet all quietly pretending that arguments by analogy are actually useful. Drop the pretense and stop wasting everybody's time with analogies that aren't going to work anyway, is what I say.

Analogies are useful. It's just that everybody's too stupid to accept other people's analogies.

 

[turingtest]

Another thread "bobbed." And no Bob in sight. Huh.

 

[theprestige]

Analogies are useful. It's just that everybody's too stupid to accept other people's analogies. : )

I wouldn't say stupid, but otherwise, yes, that's the gist of it.

 

[Molinaro]

This story on CNN.com tells all you need to know about a significant portion of the current crop of Republicans:

In a new national Monmouth University poll just four in 10 self-identified Republicans believe that Trump mentioned Biden in his call with Zelensky.

"Mentioned". Over half don't even believe that Biden was mentioned in the phone call. The party of ignorance. The party of stick your fingers in your ears and go la la la la la la la la.

 

[xjx388]

And this:


... is literally a concession.

For it to be a concession I would have had to have had a different opinion beforehand. In this case, it's simply an expression of disinterest in the topic, "Trump is a uniquely bad President," because I already think he's bad enough to get rid of.

Honestly, I don't think you are open to good arguments. I think you're more interested in pushing an agenda.

And what agenda do you think I'm trying to push?

As I said, give me a good argument and I'm open to it. That hasn't happened yet.

And this pretty much proves my point.

You are demanding that we "establish" something that is common knowledge and happening right out in the open, i.e. the GOP enabling Trump by either carrying his water or turning a blind eye.

Wrong. I am rejecting appeals to "common knowledge," from the get-go. If it's common knowledge, it should be quite easy to support. Take birtherism. If it's so obvious that the GOP as a party is espousing this CT, it should be quite easy to show where the GOP espoused it. The problem with the OP is that it took some very Trumpian views (birtherism, illegal voters, etc) and used them to brand the party as a whole. That's what I want to see some support for.

This is the same disingenuous game conservatives on this forum and elsewhere continue to play.

Just keep denying and make everyone else prove the same established facts over and over.

Yes . . .that game is one side gets to argue by assertion (the "common knowledge" argument) and the other side has to provide pristine sources for anything they say.

But we can easily stop this game. Let's hold each other to the same standards and try to find some common ground in respect.

 

[Ziggurat]

How would an analogy be in someone's hands? It's not a physical object. Perhaps you could explain your meaning using some kind of comparison to something else? There's a word for that, I can't quite recall it, it's on the tip of my tongue like a tiny amount of something I'm close to identifying by taste but haven't yet.

Metaphor. The word you're looking for is metaphor.

 

[Frank Newgent]

It's not just me. Everybody here nitpick analogies and rejects them. The only ones who accept analogies are those who were already convinced without the analogy.

Do you think Trump is like a master baker?

 

[TragicMonkey]

Do you think Trump is like a master baker?

I'd rather not speculate on soggy bottoms there.

 

[luchog]

Yes . . .that game is one side gets to argue by assertion (the "common knowledge" argument) and the other side has to provide pristine sources for anything they say.

It's only an argument by assertion if you've been living under a rock for the last ten years.

 

[theprestige]

Do you think Trump is like a master baker?

Yes.

 

[Belz...]

Do you think Trump is like a master baker?

More like master faker.

 

[xjx388]

Which is fine, yet the entire argument seems to be that if it isn't uniquely bad, just sit back and wait.

I don't think anyone has said, "just sit back and wait." Indeed, I support an impeachment inquiry and wonder what the hell took so long. What I do push back against is the FUD that seems rampant, as if the Trump era is an existential crisis for the US -nay, the world! That's a bit much. I also push back against the whole appeal to silence that happens a lot: If the GOP/conservatives don't say what the other side thinks they should say, the whole party is enablers/racists/yadda yadda.

Analogies are to expand upon relevant aspects of a point. Analogies are not proof, they're used to provide clarity to the point being made, which that did rather well to everyone except you. Just because a flat tire isn't unique doesn't mean it isn't a problem. Just because it's not the end of the world doesn't mean it can be ignored. If it's not fixed, it can lead to more severe problems.

The nation doesn't have a flat tire, though. The government is operating. It may not be operating to your liking but so what?

Likewise the current situation.

Yet with every new issue this argument is brought up that it's "business as usual", nothing to worry about, just let it keep going. it'll be fine, no need to be alarmed or take any action other than the usual. The flat tire is fine until we're driving on the rim, then we can take action.

For someone who discards analogies as being unnecessary, you focus the majority of effort on similarly unnecessary points. Instead of arguing about the uniqueness, argue about the thing that needs to be done. The uniqueness or not is immaterial and irrelevant.

Well, it's not immaterial or irrelevant to this thread -it's the very point. And those things are being discussed in other threads.

 

[autumn1971]

The Democrats had them when they were segregating and lynching.

Well, now that they’re only segregating and encouraging lynching we can all sleep peacefully

 

[xjx388]

It's only an argument by assertion if you've been living under a rock for the last ten years.

"The GOP is uniquely bad," is an assertion. "The GOP espouses birtherism," is an assertion. In the former case, an assertion is all it can ever be, for reasons discussed by others in this thread. In the latter, an appeal to "common knowledge," is not appropriate. In fact, it's widely-known (as long as we are indulging "common knowledge" arguments) that the existing rumors of his supposed Kenyan birth were circulated by members of Hillary Clinton's campaign and considered as ammo to use against him. There were also plenty of people on that bandwagon that weren't members of the GOP so you can't even say this is a uniquely republican thing -more a whackadoodle thing. Sure, you can argue that the Tea Party republicans were big on this, but they are hardly representative of the GOP as a whole.

Similar for Trump's claims of "Illegal voting;" that's a Trump thing not a GOP-as-a-whole thing.

I've also been told that the GOP is "carrying his water" and enabling him. That's another one of those assertions that will be very hard to back up. Paul Ryan stepped down because of Trump and many GOP congresscritters are retiring in his wake. They may not want to impeach him because of the damage it will do to the party as a whole but that certainly does not imply that the GOP supports, buys into or otherwise enables Trump's nonsense.

 

[dudalb]

Well, about Boss Tweed: Other city machines might give a widow a bag of flour and a bushel of coal. Tweed's fellahs would give her a job sweeping floors at city hall.

About the Know Nothings: Hell's afire, they're still with us.

Boss Tweed and Know Nothings in one post.

Makes me want to put on my "Gangs Of New York" DVD again, since both play a major role in that excellent film.

 

[johnny karate]

For it to be a concession I would have had to have had a different opinion beforehand. In this case, it's simply an expression of disinterest in the topic, "Trump is a uniquely bad President," because I already think he's bad enough to get rid of.

I really don't like it when arguments devolve into definitional pedantry, but dude... seriously?

Definition of concession
1a: the act or an instance of conceding (as by granting something as a right, accepting something as true, or acknowledging defeat)

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/concession

And what agenda do you think I'm trying to push?

The same one you were pushing seven years ago when you insisted over the course of several pages that a downward trend in unemployment was actually an upward trend: Defend all things Republican and attack all things Democrat, facts and reality be damned.

As I said, give me a good argument and I'm open to it. That hasn't happened yet.

Your idea of a good argument is what someone with the same ideology as yours posts on their blog.

Raise your standards, and then maybe we can have an actual discussion.

Wrong. I am rejecting appeals to "common knowledge," from the get-go. If it's common knowledge, it should be quite easy to support. Take birtherism. If it's so obvious that the GOP as a party is espousing this CT, it should be quite easy to show where the GOP espoused it. The problem with the OP is that it took some very Trumpian views (birtherism, illegal voters, etc) and used them to brand the party as a whole. That's what I want to see some support for.

Trump is the GOP, whether you want to accept it or not. The GOP gave him the nomination. The GOP elected him President. The GOP does his bidding.

You want to separate Trump from the GOP? Let me know when they make any real effort to hold him accountable.

Yes . . .that game is one side gets to argue by assertion (the "common knowledge" argument) and the other side has to provide pristine sources for anything they say.

It's not about sides, but rather the nature of the claim.

If someone tells me it's raining, I probably don't need to have that confirmed with additional data.

If someone tells me it's raining cocktail wieners, I might need to take a look for myself.

That you want to start from the disingenuous position of feigning ignorance about how far the GOP has bent over backwards to enable Trump and insist that we "prove" it to you is silly.

But we can easily stop this game. Let's hold each other to the same standards and try to find some common ground in respect.

Well, you haven't been held to any special standard and respect needs to be earned.

 

[luchog]

" In fact, it's widely-known (as long as we are indulging "common knowledge" arguments) that the existing rumors of his supposed Kenyan birth were circulated by members of Hillary Clinton's campaign and considered as ammo to use against him. There were also plenty of people on that bandwagon that weren't members of the GOP so you can't even say this is a uniquely republican thing -more a whackadoodle thing. Sure, you can argue that the Tea Party republicans were big on this, but they are hardly representative of the GOP as a whole.

Oh well, since we're dragging conspiracy theories into this... No, sorry, I'm not interested in going down that BS rabbit hole. The source of the rumour was GOP candidate Andy Martin, a big fan of numerous conspiracy theories; and the one Clinton campaign staffer who circulated it was subsequently fired. Guess who was the biggest promoter of Birtherism? Oh that's right, Donald Trump and the mainstream GOP.

So, clearly you have nothing but BS conspiracy theories and half-assed attempts at whataboutism to contribute, and I can safely ignore you from here on out. Thanks for that.