5 ms·

You think you're going to get a solid answer interviewing some random person on the street? That's what an intelligent person would call a strawman. Do you want

by aydyn 2y ago

You think you're going to get a solid answer interviewing some random person on the street? That's what an intelligent person would call a strawman. Do you want me to point you to the video of well-educated coastal elites calling the assassination attempt a Hoax? There are of course more than one reason why people voted for him, but there's literally tons of comments in this very thread explaining why with no nonsense and under no uncertain terms. Ironically, a lot of those comments get flagged and are no longer visible.

kulahan 2y ago
No, I think there needs to be a culture of talking to and respecting people with different opinions. And before you jump to the extreme of “but they don’t want me to EXIST!”, that’s not the point. The point is that we temper each other, partially by negotiating, and partially by simply making the “other side” more used to our ideas. That just happens with repeated exposure. If something is scary, but generally not bad, people can get used to it, but only if they’re exposed to it regularly. You get used to public speaking after the ten thousandth time instead, because you’ve likely already confronted every fear you had in real life by now. Ironically, this is extremely easy to fix. Politicians can simply get along in public. We’ve got studies showing that political extremism can die almost overnight when the opposing politicians simply explain that they do respect their opponent. As for the people here explaining themselves clearly - that’s because dang has done a good job of fostering a community of high quality commenters. You won’t find this kind of discourse anywhere else, and it’s the main reason I treasure this site.
- aydyn 2y ago
  > No, I think there needs to be a culture of talking to and respecting people with different opinions. Absolutely. > As for the people here explaining themselves clearly - that’s because dang has done a good job of fostering a community of high quality commenters. Hard disagree. The level of political discussion on HN is barely a step above r/politics. This is a forum for 110 IQ codecels who think minor domain expertise means they are smarter than everyone else in all aspects. The contempt for ordinary people in this very thread is nauseating.
  - Jerrrrrrry 2y ago
    holy fuck this was the most based fucking thing i have read in a long time
tomrod 2y ago
> You think you're going to get a solid answer interviewing some random person on the street? Yes. We educate the population for good reason. People _should_ understand that a tariff is a tax imposed on consumers, and if done with reasonable intent it is to prop up a key industry despite the distortionary effects with a particular goal in mind, such as national security, improvement of the populace, etc. "Bringing back manufacturing" is not a coherent goal, it just sounds like one, because as soon as the tariffs are removed the US is back to offshoring again OR the purchasing power of the dollar is so low that it doesn't matter. "Establishing manufacturing in key industries" is a completely reasonable goal -- which Biden did (solar, among others). So once again, the Trump policy set is not actually good policy.
- aydyn 2y ago
  Again: people _should_ understand that a president getting shot at live on television is not a hoax. Do you really think farming plebs for political gain on social media is going to break for democrats? Really? That feels a bit out of touch to me.
  - tomrod 2y ago
    > people _should_ understand that a president getting shot at live on television is not a hoax. I am not seeing how this tangent is connected to the rest of the conversation. Can you please explain why you thought it related to discussions regarding interviews of random individuals on the street? > Do you really think farming plebs for political gain on social media is going to break for democrats? Really? That feels a bit out of touch to me. Are you saying I'm farming plebs for political gain on social media for the democrats? That's weird. I've no association to any political party nor do I care for their political gain. I think political parties are unfortunate and strongly prefer ranked choice voting explicitly to weaken their grip. That said, I do analysis for policy and strategy, so perhaps I should have been more explicit in my recommendation that actual outcomes-focused policy is better for people than vibes-focused word salads (which Trump often espouses as well as most Republicans and Democrats as they attempt to make soundbites) regardless of political affiliation. Please forgive my clear lack of clarity.

by aydyn 2y ago

kulahan 2y ago

No, I think there needs to be a culture of talking to and respecting people with different opinions. And before you jump to the extreme of “but they don’t want me to EXIST!”, that’s not the point. The point is that we temper each other, partially by negotiating, and partially by simply making the “other side” more used to our ideas. That just happens with repeated exposure. If something is scary, but generally not bad, people can get used to it, but only if they’re exposed to it regularly. You get used to public speaking after the ten thousandth time instead, because you’ve likely already confronted every fear you had in real life by now. Ironically, this is extremely easy to fix. Politicians can simply get along in public. We’ve got studies showing that political extremism can die almost overnight when the opposing politicians simply explain that they do respect their opponent. As for the people here explaining themselves clearly - that’s because dang has done a good job of fostering a community of high quality commenters. You won’t find this kind of discourse anywhere else, and it’s the main reason I treasure this site.

aydyn 2y ago
> No, I think there needs to be a culture of talking to and respecting people with different opinions. Absolutely. > As for the people here explaining themselves clearly - that’s because dang has done a good job of fostering a community of high quality commenters. Hard disagree. The level of political discussion on HN is barely a step above r/politics. This is a forum for 110 IQ codecels who think minor domain expertise means they are smarter than everyone else in all aspects. The contempt for ordinary people in this very thread is nauseating.
- Jerrrrrrry 2y ago
  holy fuck this was the most based fucking thing i have read in a long time

tomrod 2y ago

> You think you're going to get a solid answer interviewing some random person on the street? Yes. We educate the population for good reason. People _should_ understand that a tariff is a tax imposed on consumers, and if done with reasonable intent it is to prop up a key industry despite the distortionary effects with a particular goal in mind, such as national security, improvement of the populace, etc. "Bringing back manufacturing" is not a coherent goal, it just sounds like one, because as soon as the tariffs are removed the US is back to offshoring again OR the purchasing power of the dollar is so low that it doesn't matter. "Establishing manufacturing in key industries" is a completely reasonable goal -- which Biden did (solar, among others). So once again, the Trump policy set is not actually good policy.

aydyn 2y ago
Again: people _should_ understand that a president getting shot at live on television is not a hoax. Do you really think farming plebs for political gain on social media is going to break for democrats? Really? That feels a bit out of touch to me.
- tomrod 2y ago
  > people _should_ understand that a president getting shot at live on television is not a hoax. I am not seeing how this tangent is connected to the rest of the conversation. Can you please explain why you thought it related to discussions regarding interviews of random individuals on the street? > Do you really think farming plebs for political gain on social media is going to break for democrats? Really? That feels a bit out of touch to me. Are you saying I'm farming plebs for political gain on social media for the democrats? That's weird. I've no association to any political party nor do I care for their political gain. I think political parties are unfortunate and strongly prefer ranked choice voting explicitly to weaken their grip. That said, I do analysis for policy and strategy, so perhaps I should have been more explicit in my recommendation that actual outcomes-focused policy is better for people than vibes-focused word salads (which Trump often espouses as well as most Republicans and Democrats as they attempt to make soundbites) regardless of political affiliation. Please forgive my clear lack of clarity.