4 ms·

Here's a good guideline: in order to avoid looking like you're advocating for one particular candidate in these sorts of discussions, it's best to always use tw

by hugh 18y ago

Here's a good guideline: in order to avoid looking like you're advocating for one particular candidate in these sorts of discussions, it's best to always use two examples: one which makes one party look bad, and another which makes the other party look bad. So if you're going to talk about an example of dishonesty on the part of the McCain campaign, you should follow it up immediately by an example of dishonesty on the part of the Obama campaign. That way, everybody stays happy, and it stops things from degenerating into political arguments.

MaysonL 18y ago
The trouble is - the vast majority of the dishonest and dishonorable lies are coming from one side. Obama isn't deliberately lying - McCain and company are. Repeatedly. After the lies have been exposed. On national TV.
- hugh 18y ago
  If you really believe the unlikely proposition that one political party is honest and the other is full of liars, then I'm sure you can find other sites upon which to put forth that argument.
  - Retric 18y ago
    If you disagree with someone's statement provide counter evidence of such things. Otherwise your attacking the person and not the argument. PS: The stance that both sides of a debate always deserve equal time pervasive and wrong. When someone says the acceleration due to gravity of an object is always 100km/s^2 they are wrong and there is little point in giving them identical amounts of time. Think about the coverage given to the anti global worming / evolution / science crowd and ask your self is this reasonable?
timr 18y ago
Given that the parent post chose his examples to make one side look good, I don't think my response was inappropriate (in fact, all really did was counter his primary argument using his own example). It's important to be civil and logical; it's not important for every participant in a debate to make the other side's arguments for them.
- hugh 18y ago
  it's not important for every participant in a debate to make the other side's arguments for them Ah, but there shouldn't be "another side" in these sorts of discussions. I'm just trying to propose ways in which it's possible to discuss politics in the abstract without the discussion veering off into arguments about the boring minutiae of giant douche vs turd sandwich that is going to be infecting the rest of the internet for the next couple of months.
  - DanielBMarkham 18y ago
    "I'm just trying to propose ways in which it's possible to discuss politics in the abstract" I believe this is called being mature. Good luck with your effort. It's tough, and if you make the slightest mistake (such as using examples that tilt against the same party) you're sure to be punished.

by hugh 18y ago

MaysonL 18y ago

The trouble is - the vast majority of the dishonest and dishonorable lies are coming from one side. Obama isn't deliberately lying - McCain and company are. Repeatedly. After the lies have been exposed. On national TV.

hugh 18y ago
If you really believe the unlikely proposition that one political party is honest and the other is full of liars, then I'm sure you can find other sites upon which to put forth that argument.
- Retric 18y ago
  If you disagree with someone's statement provide counter evidence of such things. Otherwise your attacking the person and not the argument. PS: The stance that both sides of a debate always deserve equal time pervasive and wrong. When someone says the acceleration due to gravity of an object is always 100km/s^2 they are wrong and there is little point in giving them identical amounts of time. Think about the coverage given to the anti global worming / evolution / science crowd and ask your self is this reasonable?

timr 18y ago

Given that the parent post chose his examples to make one side look good, I don't think my response was inappropriate (in fact, all really did was counter his primary argument using his own example). It's important to be civil and logical; it's not important for every participant in a debate to make the other side's arguments for them.

hugh 18y ago
it's not important for every participant in a debate to make the other side's arguments for them Ah, but there shouldn't be "another side" in these sorts of discussions. I'm just trying to propose ways in which it's possible to discuss politics in the abstract without the discussion veering off into arguments about the boring minutiae of giant douche vs turd sandwich that is going to be infecting the rest of the internet for the next couple of months.
- DanielBMarkham 18y ago
  "I'm just trying to propose ways in which it's possible to discuss politics in the abstract" I believe this is called being mature. Good luck with your effort. It's tough, and if you make the slightest mistake (such as using examples that tilt against the same party) you're sure to be punished.