3 ms·

I get that idea because all of the sources you're citing are extremely far-right biased publications [1] or like one-off tweets that you've cherry picked from a

by djaque 6y ago

I get that idea because all of the sources you're citing are extremely far-right biased publications [1] or like one-off tweets that you've cherry picked from a background of more grounded discussion. None of this compares to the clear message that has been coming from the highest offices of our government for the past three months. What's ironic is that I think you're using the "both sides" argument right here for all of the wrong reasons I complained about in my original post. Even if the democratic party organized an effort to discredit health experts and denounce the virus (which they didn't), why does that matter? They would also deserve to be shamed just as the current administration does. I care about having a competent federal response to this ongoing crisis, not for example holding up federal stimulus checks to make sure your signature gets printed on them for your reelection campaign [2]. Also, please note that I've sourced that fact from the BBC, a reputable news source. [1] https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/media-bias-ratings https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/media-bias-ratings [2] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-52293910 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-52293910

ufmace 6y ago
I like to wait a while before responding to contentious political posts, in the possibly vain hope of keeping the temperature below boiling. Since you seem to be implying that I'm using a poor argument style, let me provide my own example of a poor argument style I see a lot nowadays: The Dems do something dirty. They find something similar that the Repubs did, and publish 10,000 articles about it and scream at the top of their lungs, even if it isn't as bad. Then, when anybody points out that the Dems did that too, or worse, or first, you can accuse them of making a "both sides" argument and shut down any display of how bad their own side is. Nice little trick they have there. Works even better when their media allies refuse to publish anything negative on them. Then you can smear anybody that publishes articles on the dirty things they did as "extremely far-right based publications". Am I completely crazy here, or did Trump institute a relatively loose restriction on travel from China when this thing was kicking off, the Democrats screamed that he was an evil racist bigot for doing that? Then later, they screamed that he was incompetent for not instituting a more severe ban earlier on. I find it interesting that the most extreme stuff seems to be coming from the press, admittedly on both sides. The actual elected officials in charge of stuff seem to be getting along relatively well. Republicans and Democrats, moderate and extreme, left and right, don't seem to have all that much bad to say about each other. Is that so bad? I'm fine with it. Maybe we could all focus on getting along and getting through this rather than trying to dunk on the other side for some imperfect calls made when nobody had enough information yet. I'm not perfectly innocent, but I'm willing to stop if you are. I'll also add that I looked at the allsides.com site you linked. I'll admit that I wasn't expecting much, but I actually find their ratings to be quite respectable. I suspect many on the extremes of both sides would quibble with the groupings, but it seems like a pretty good first-pass on ratings.

by djaque 6y ago

ufmace 6y ago

I like to wait a while before responding to contentious political posts, in the possibly vain hope of keeping the temperature below boiling. Since you seem to be implying that I'm using a poor argument style, let me provide my own example of a poor argument style I see a lot nowadays: The Dems do something dirty. They find something similar that the Repubs did, and publish 10,000 articles about it and scream at the top of their lungs, even if it isn't as bad. Then, when anybody points out that the Dems did that too, or worse, or first, you can accuse them of making a "both sides" argument and shut down any display of how bad their own side is. Nice little trick they have there. Works even better when their media allies refuse to publish anything negative on them. Then you can smear anybody that publishes articles on the dirty things they did as "extremely far-right based publications". Am I completely crazy here, or did Trump institute a relatively loose restriction on travel from China when this thing was kicking off, the Democrats screamed that he was an evil racist bigot for doing that? Then later, they screamed that he was incompetent for not instituting a more severe ban earlier on. I find it interesting that the most extreme stuff seems to be coming from the press, admittedly on both sides. The actual elected officials in charge of stuff seem to be getting along relatively well. Republicans and Democrats, moderate and extreme, left and right, don't seem to have all that much bad to say about each other. Is that so bad? I'm fine with it. Maybe we could all focus on getting along and getting through this rather than trying to dunk on the other side for some imperfect calls made when nobody had enough information yet. I'm not perfectly innocent, but I'm willing to stop if you are. I'll also add that I looked at the allsides.com site you linked. I'll admit that I wasn't expecting much, but I actually find their ratings to be quite respectable. I suspect many on the extremes of both sides would quibble with the groupings, but it seems like a pretty good first-pass on ratings.