2 ms·
the existence of a body named X does not imply they were doing X, or doing X well. a better argument would be that trump doing this is possibly toxic because t
by dnautics 6mo ago
the existence of a body named X does not imply they were doing X, or doing X well.
a better argument would be that trump doing this is possibly toxic because the process of resetting becomes overly political and associated with trump shenanigans. i guess that argument was too sophisticated to make
- notahacker 6mo agoThe possibility a body may have not being doing X perfectly does not mean that anybody should even consider the possibility that centralising X in the hands of the "vaccines cause autism" and "we have different ways of calculating percentages" division of the executive branch instead - the thing that actually happened - is anything other than a bad idea. Linking Trump's characteristic firing of anybody who questions his actions to a replication crisis he and his acolytes wouldn't be interested in solving even if they had the slightest understanding of it is far too disingenuous an argument to elicit a "sophisticated" response, or indeed anything other than contemptuous dismissal.