• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Cont: The Trump Presidency: Part 23

Status
Not open for further replies.
thaiboxerken said:
I'm not surprised at all. The "conservative" mindset is one that denies reality that they don't personally experience or is close to. They don't believe that covid-19 is more than a flu simply because they have not experienced it or know people that have.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that's true, unfortunately. Cognitive dissonance when confronted with direct evidence that one is wrong, can be resolved by doubling down on the fiction rather than changing one's mind.

This is one of the reasons I have been negative about the belief that filming everything will provide objective evidence to back up our version of a claim.

We only need to recall Skeptical topics like the Patterson-Gimlin film, or the Zapruder film... or even video of an inauguration... to appreciate that just because it's right in front of our eyes doesn't mean we're seeing the same thing.

And it's been studied to death. "They Saw a Game: A Case Study (1954)" being an early example, but it's well replicated. Topics on Wikipedia include Naïve realism (psychology)WP and Selective perceptionWP.

I'm trying to remember who said it, but it went something like: "Quacks don't need to lie - their patients are happy to do it for them." And in the healthfraud world, we observe it as those patients who write blogs about how well they're doing on the quack remedy... right up until they're too weak to wipe their coughed up blood off the keyboards anymore.

So in this example, I can see some of my coworkers getting COVID19, spending a month in intensive care, and coming out of it saying it's just like the flu, right?

Just as a comparison, my dad does not believe in mental illness. So when my friend had a floridly schizophrenic psychotic episode right in front of him, my dad's response was that obviously she was just acting. Because the alternative would be to be proven wrong.

So, again, to recap: Cognitive dissonance when confronted with direct evidence that one is wrong, can be resolved by doubling down on the fiction rather than changing one's mind.
 
blutoski said:
I'm not sure that's true, unfortunately. Cognitive dissonance when confronted with direct evidence that one is wrong, can be resolved by doubling down on the fiction rather than changing one's mind.

This is one of the reasons I have been negative about the belief that filming everything will provide objective evidence to back up our version of a claim.

We only need to recall Skeptical topics like the Patterson-Gimlin film, or the Zapruder film... or even video of an inauguration... to appreciate that just because it's right in front of our eyes doesn't mean we're seeing the same thing.

And it's been studied to death. "They Saw a Game: A Case Study (1954)" being an early example, but it's well replicated. Topics on Wikipedia include Naïve realism (psychology)WP and Selective perceptionWP.

I'm trying to remember who said it, but it went something like: "Quacks don't need to lie - their patients are happy to do it for them." And in the healthfraud world, we observe it as those patients who write blogs about how well they're doing on the quack remedy... right up until they're too weak to wipe their coughed up blood off the keyboards anymore.

So in this example, I can see some of my coworkers getting COVID19, spending a month in intensive care, and coming out of it saying it's just like the flu, right?

Just as a comparison, my dad does not believe in mental illness. So when my friend had a floridly schizophrenic psychotic episode right in front of him, my dad's response was that obviously she was just acting. Because the alternative would be to be proven wrong.

So, again, to recap: Cognitive dissonance when confronted with direct evidence that one is wrong, can be resolved by doubling down on the fiction rather than changing one's mind.
Click to expand...

Sad, but true. I've seen it happen here in ISF many times.

Example 1: a poster claimed a criminal charge had been dropped against a defendant. When the court document showing the defendant had been acquitted of that charge was quoted and cited, the poster insisted the court document was wrong.

Example 2: a poster claimed that a specific legal term was not used in a court verdict document. When presented with the quote and citation showing it had, indeed, been used, the poster insisted it was a 'clerical error' because the clerk had used a 'standard form' (which doesn't exist).
 
Stacyhs said:
Sad, but true. I've seen it happen here in ISF many times.

Example 1: a poster claimed a criminal charge had been dropped against a defendant. When the court document showing the defendant had been acquitted of that charge was quoted and cited, the poster insisted the court document was wrong.

Example 2: a poster claimed that a specific legal term was not used in a court verdict document. When presented with the quote and citation showing it had, indeed, been used, the poster insisted it was a 'clerical error' because the clerk had used a 'standard form' (which doesn't exist).
Click to expand...

"Here's a scanned image of Obama's birth certificate."
 
Stacyhs said:
Sad, but true. I've seen it happen here in ISF many times.

Example 1: a poster claimed a criminal charge had been dropped against a defendant. When the court document showing the defendant had been acquitted of that charge was quoted and cited, the poster insisted the court document was wrong.

Example 2: a poster claimed that a specific legal term was not used in a court verdict document. When presented with the quote and citation showing it had, indeed, been used, the poster insisted it was a 'clerical error' because the clerk had used a 'standard form' (which doesn't exist).
Click to expand...

There's also a phenomenon I call the merry-go-round or conveyorbelt argument tactic.

Basically, we disprove claim A with evidence B, which they deny with claim C and we disprove in turn with evidence D.... all the way to we disprove claim Y with evidence Z. Next step: deny evidence Z with... claim A. And we get to bring that up all over again as if it wasn't disproven half an hour ago.
 
blutoski said:
So, again, to recap: Cognitive dissonance when confronted with direct evidence that one is wrong, can be resolved by doubling down on the fiction rather than changing one's mind.
Click to expand...

Yes, consider the level of cognitive dissonance it takes for a man who was born into wealth, got handed everything he ever wanted, and bailed out of every failure, to be hailed as hero to the "Pull yourself up by your bootstraps" crowd.
 
Trump just suffered a humiliating failure at his rally in Tulsa, his poll numbers are really bad and now he is screaming "election fraud" which is being called a setup. Trump knows that things look bad for him in the upcoming election.

Trump has a well known history of corruption when it comes to getting elected. Russians were caught interfering in the last presidential election. John Bolton claims that Trump asked China for help getting re-elected and Trump was impeached for holding back approved funding for Ukraine in attempts to extort them to conjure up dirt on the Biden's.

Trump, the pathological liar that suffers from narcissistic personality disorder obviously has a long record of lying about his ratings and many other things such as his inauguration turn out etc. We have seen that no amount of evidence seems to sway his enablers support for him, especially the Republicans that are on the payroll.

It was recently revealed the the President has emergency powers that are kept classified from public knowledge. Given the horrendous dishonesty and behavior of the president it is unnerving to consider what those unknown powers might make him capable of? When he stated that the president has "absolute power" when referring to his power over state decisions maybe he was right, and just decided not to play that card until something more important was at stake.

As a hypothetical idea think about the election taking place using mail in voting and many of the ballots end up under corrupt Republican control. The ballots are defaced, destroyed, duplicated or something else happens to them to suspiciously prove the election was rigged. Trump uses the situation to claim that American democracy is under attack and he invokes his secret presidential powers. If the only safeguards that Americans have to correct the crimes and to hold Trump accountable are to be controlled and decided upon by the corrupt Republican Senate or the now increasingly compromised Department of Justice under Bill Barr, Americans may lose control of their democracy.

Now think of how many government watchdogs are getting fired and replaced by Trump loyalists.

What might the payoff be for Trump loyalists if they handed Trump a dictatorship? The national debt has increased by $5.2 trillion under Trump and there may be a nice slush fund around just from the $1.5 trillion dollar tax break which went mostly to the wealthy and big businesses.

What does it take for Mitch McConnell to stand at a podium and tell America just prior to Trump's impeachment trial in the Senate, that he is completely compromised as far as his oath of office and his duty to the American people is concerned and that he will be working directly with Trump's legal team? He exhibited no fear of any meaningful push back by the American public or any agency that may hold him accountable.

There is no evidence of meaningful election fraud in the past and Americans aren't making any effort to stop Trump from spewing these lies. His base may get played again and accept that the election was rigged contrary to all evidence that is presented.

Trump wants total power and now that he is screaming election fraud it will be interesting to see if Trump invokes his classified presidential powers and America loses it's democracy. Witnessing the needless death toll of tens of thousands of Americans from the coronavirus is not reassuring at all and the nonsense continues as cases and deaths spike once again.
 
blutoski said:
I'm not sure that's true, unfortunately. Cognitive dissonance when confronted with direct evidence that one is wrong, can be resolved by doubling down on the fiction rather than changing one's mind.

This is one of the reasons I have been negative about the belief that filming everything will provide objective evidence to back up our version of a claim.

We only need to recall Skeptical topics like the Patterson-Gimlin film, or the Zapruder film... or even video of an inauguration... to appreciate that just because it's right in front of our eyes doesn't mean we're seeing the same thing.

And it's been studied to death. "They Saw a Game: A Case Study (1954)" being an early example, but it's well replicated. Topics on Wikipedia include Naïve realism (psychology)WP and Selective perceptionWP.

I'm trying to remember who said it, but it went something like: "Quacks don't need to lie - their patients are happy to do it for them." And in the healthfraud world, we observe it as those patients who write blogs about how well they're doing on the quack remedy... right up until they're too weak to wipe their coughed up blood off the keyboards anymore.

So in this example, I can see some of my coworkers getting COVID19, spending a month in intensive care, and coming out of it saying it's just like the flu, right?
Click to expand...

It is though. It's like they had the Spanish Flu .....in 1917.

We can all think that cognitive dissonance is unusual. We live in a country where 80 percent of the population believe in a mystical magic man who has lived eternally and will live for eternity despite there isn't a shred of evidence. And lets not forget 40 percent of them are Democrats.


People will believe what they make their minds up to believe.
 
Trump Tweets

Biden failed with China. They took us to the cleaners! I got $Billions out of China, and gave much of it to our targeted farmers!
 
Trebuchet said:
So far the administration is just getting their criminal friends off. If they remain in power it'll shift to actively prosecuting their enemies. Remember "lock her up"? If Trump is reelected they'll try to do so. They've packed the judiciary so they can get away with it.
Click to expand...

FWIW, they already did investigate and re-investigate Hillary for brazenly political purposes, among a lot of other brazenly political investigations that went nowhere, because their basis was partisan conspiracy theory level crap.

Armitage72 said:
Already blocked by the Senate Democrats as being completely inadequate, as they prepare their own bill for tomorrow.
Click to expand...

If I understand the Republican bill correctly, it's effectively just saying "let's investigate what the problem is" and not much more. Like that hasn't been done ad nauseum already, with the recommendations almost always ignored.

Elsewhere...

Republican literally try to drown out judiciary hearing on AG Barr by pounding the dais

There's no rule against doing so, after all, perhaps because elected adults are expected to not act like 2 year olds.
 
Dozens of Secret Service agents quarantined after Tulsa rally

The mass quarantine has led to the decision that Secret Service agents involved with presidential trips must be tested for coronavirus for the next couple of weeks, according to an email sent to agency personnel. The email sent out Wednesday was confirmed by the law enforcement official. Agents must now be tested 24 to48 hours before a presidential trip, the email said. The new testing mandate will be in place until July 4.

The law enforcement official said the number of quarantined agents is on the "low" side of dozens. A Secret Service official said the quarantining will not impact the agency's operations. The news was first reported by The Washington Post.

A US Secret Service source who worked advance for Saturday's rally and is now quarantining told CNN that agents from Dallas and Houston worked the event as well, and they had been warned before the trip from those field offices that they would need to quarantine when they got home.

The steps come after two Secret Service agents who attended the rally tested positive for coronavirus, a person familiar with the matter previously told CNN.
Click to expand...
 
I am more pessimistic then ever about a peaceful ouotcome to all this.
I have never in Historyr read where a natoin has gone this far down the path that America is going on and massive political violence has not resulted.
 
The worst violent outcome I see after a Trump loss is a couple of radical rightwing attacks, which will cause them to be labeled Domestic Terrorists and make it much harder for them to get mainstream support in the future.
It will be ugly, but the net effect might be better than what we have now.
 
Yesterday, my girlfriend came across someone on Facebook arguing the Civil War was about states’ rights.

I just had a horrible thought.

50 years from now, we will probably have overwhelming evidence about President Trump breaking laws, squashing investigations, trying to enrich himself, and generally being self-centered to the detriment of the US. And there will be a swath of citizens saying, “it wasn’t about self-enrichment, it was about presidential rights.”
 
Craig4 said:
It's interesting that only the Americans on the committee wore masks. That filthy Trumptrash are as stupid as they are treasonous.
Click to expand...

Seems to sum up the attitude of many in that party, the mask protects others not yourself so they won't wear them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom