Addressing Political Conspiracy Theories and a Political Conspiracy Thinker

I posted this link: U.S. Republican senators ask Treasury for any reports on Hunter Biden: https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN1XW254?fbclid=IwAR2ETf8NPTN4ZFQyft6wk1p1OjHfv2pFQn7SJ5irzeX5oyX7A17am_GEb_k

Then I commented that “it is almost like Republicans forgot who is on trial” (They need to remember that it’s all about Trump and it is Trump’s Impeachment in question, not Biden’s).

“Almost like the Dems are completely innocent of rigging elections.” – Conspiracist

My response, Okay, please provide evidence of Democrats doing that if you want to bring up the claim.

“How Democratic Superdelegates Decided the 2016 Election: “The effect of Superdelegates on the Democratic nomination process has never been more apparent than in the 2016 election. Created in 1982 largely by the party establishment, the superdelegate was to serve as a safeguard to ensure a populous candidate did not take the nomination, and keep the Democrats out of the White House. This election more than any prior, proves no one can say what a populous candidate might be able to do once they get to the presidential debate stage. Polls show if Bernie Sanders were allowed to run as the Democratic nominee, he would do quite well against Donald Trump.” https://www.huffpost.com/entry/how-super-delegates-decid_b_10098414?fbclid=IwAR2CsXmNzYmESV9Ot2I0u_rxx1oJrusC_YcJ5uNvKW6z-v5Hc-i5o19SNSY.” – Conspiracist

“It’s like no one at DOJ is listening. There is some compelling evidence that should at least be looked at, evaluated, but the door seems to shut at both State and Justice,” said an American who has been contacted for help and briefed on the evidence. But let’s not talk about how corrupt the Dems and the media are. Ukrainian to US prosecutors: Why don’t you want our evidence on Democrats? “Ukrainian law enforcement officials believe they have evidence of wrongdoing by American Democrats and their allies in Kiev, ranging from 2016 election interference to obstructing criminal probes. But, they say, they’ve been thwarted in trying to get the Trump Justice Department to act.” https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/437719-ukrainian-to-us-prosecutors-why-dont-you-want-our-evidence-on-democrats?fbclid=IwAR1nsvK1xNMWuQV7H63Ge3dPCRsr4mTS4UTESTQ2jPjiV1OLU87pm8P1MHs.” – Conspiracist

My response, I agree that, to me, the superdelegates are an undemocratic way of picking the Democratic nomination but it is not rigging elections as you imply. If there is Evidence in Ukraine then he should offer it up not make evidence lacking claims. So still no evidence of rigging elections by Democrats. And that meme is on the level of an incoherent conspiracy theory. Please provide me with evidence of elections rigging. If there is Evidence in Ukraine then he should offer it up not make evidence lacking claims. So still no evidence of rigging elections by Democrats. And that meme is on the level of an incoherent conspiracy theory. Please provide me with evidence of elections rigging. Snopes, explains how the Debunked Ukraine Conspiracy Theory is Knocked Down – Again: https://www.snopes.com/ap/2019/11/13/debunked-ukraine-conspiracy-theory-is-knocked-down-again/

My response, I see you now add your claim to blanketly expand to the Media and that as well holds a burden of proof. When you say media, what does that mean how fox news is largely “fake news” promoting Trump lies? Fox News? More Like Trump’s Impeachment Shield. “Researchers have found that Fox News isn’t very effective at informing Americans. A 2012 study by Fairleigh Dickinson University reported that watching Fox News had “a negative impact on people’s current events knowledge.” Aides to Nixon did propose to him a plan to create sympathetic television news coverage; Roger Ailes backed the idea; and it eventually evolved into Fox News. And today Fox gives President Trump an important defense system that Nixon never had. Fox was the most popular television network for watching the first day of impeachment hearings this week, with 2.9 million viewers (57 percent more than CNN had), and Fox viewers encountered a very different hearing than viewers of other channels. With Rep. Adam Schiff on the screen, Fox News’s graphic declared in all caps: “TRUMP HAS REPEATEDLY IMPLIED THAT SCHIFF HAS COMMITTED TREASON.” At a different moment, the screen warned: “9/26: SCHIFF PUBLICLY EXAGGERATED SUBSTANCE OF TRUMP-ZELENSKY CALL.” Fox downplayed the news and undermined the witnesses. While Ambassador William Taylor was shown testifying, the Fox News screen graphic declared: “OCT 23: PRESIDENT TRUMP DISMISSED TAYLOR AS A “NEVER TRUMPER.” It also suggested his comments were, “TRIPLE HEARSAY.” Yet if Fox News doesn’t inform citizens, it does sway their votes. Two Stanford scholars, Gregory J. Martin and Ali Yurukoglu, published a paper in American Economic Review in 2017 suggesting that without the network, the Republican share of the vote for president would have been 0.46 percentage points lower in 2000, 3.6 points lower in 2004 and 6.3 percentage points lower in 2008. While Democrats feel victimized by Fox News and allies like Rush Limbaugh, it’s also true that this right-wing cocoon is a disservice to its own true believers — because it feeds them misinformation.” https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/16/opinion/sunday/fox-news-donald-trump.html?auth=login-facebook&fbclid=IwAR0nF769KVxmJnJ9bmKsbuUx7MS_QM5NA4uaumo_Ll3M9LqP88JVWoX2Fig&login=facebook

My response, I am for no one as a president as I am against all single leaders. But if it is going to happen it should be direct democracy no super delegates no electoral college just people voting. And I voted for Burnie as I feel he matched my views the best and didn’t like how the Democratic party arranged voting that worked against him but I still don’t think it was rigged it had an undemocratic style to me of the electoral college I also don’t agree with but don’t call it rigging elections. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_democracy

“Providing evidence of corruption in the media linked to the government is something that is NOT BELIEVED because the mainstream media tells you NOT TO BELIEVE IT.” – Conspiracist

My response, So you have a conspiracy theory, not evidence, got it.

“THAT INCLUDES ALL NETWORKS.” – Conspiracist

My response, So you want to make claims on feeling, not facts? Yet I am confused you posted here two news sources as your evidence at the start of this duologue and yet you don’t trust them? Odd.

“Yes, cuz the mainstream media says it’s a conspiracy theory. The evidence is there but mainstream media says don’t believe it cuz it’s just a conspiracy theory. Just like all evidence. You form a theory based on the evidence.” – Conspiracist

My response, You are not showing up as a rational thinking person, just an emotional person I see you have faith beliefs similar to religion even though you are an atheist like me. You should think about investing this and change.

“Mainstream media ignores the evidence of their choosing while exaggerating the other evidence.“ – Conspiracist

My response, And you have this knowledge how and from what trustable source?

“Both networks favor a political party; they do their best to make their side look good. If that is not corruption then what is??“ – Conspiracist

My response, And are you making a universal claim? Do you have universal evidence to support this claim? Are every media source precisely the same or do you have evidence that some are more trustable? Facts, not your feeling, please?

“My evidence is their words and actions. Facts are documents from those conspiring together and some get leaked or hacked and those FACTS are made public.” – Conspiracist

My response, You make evidence lacking claim after claim. Please provide me with sources, not your feelings? Here you go to see the evidence. “Media Bias Ratings: AllSides Media Bias Ratings help you identify different perspectives so you can know more, understand others, and think for yourself. We’ve rated the bias of nearly 600 media outlets and writers. Scroll down to see the full list of media bias ratings.” https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/media-bias-ratings?fbclid=IwAR1jw6ISivmSQvBlYVk3Lpp5U4q1SOQgAiQVrwg5JRw0qADw_0oUFC22dTE

My response, “How To Detect Bias In News Media: Media have tremendous power in setting cultural guidelines and in shaping political discourse. It is essential that news media, along with other institutions, are challenged to be fair and accurate. The first step in challenging biased news coverage is documenting bias. Here are some questions to ask yourself about a newspaper, TV and radio news.” https://fair.org/take-action-now/media-activism-kit/how-to-detect-bias-in-news-media/

My response, “How biased is your news source? You probably won’t agree with this chart.” https://www.marketwatch.com/story/how-biased-is-your-news-source-you-probably-wont-agree-with-this-chart-2018-02-28

My response, Here is Fox News: 10% true 11% mostly true 19% half-true https://www.politifact.com/punditfact/tv/fox/

My response, Here is CNN News: 16% true 35% mostly true 20% half-true https://www.politifact.com/punditfact/tv/cnn/

Try wikileaks, Wikileaks Proves Primary Was Rigged: DNC Undermined Democracy. 20,000 freshly leaked emails reveal resentful disdain toward Sanders, as party favored Clinton long before any votes were cast. https://observer.com/2016/07/wikileaks-proves-primary-was-rigged-dnc-undermined-democracy/?fbclid=IwAR1buJ_KTeXFLv5eOxf1QojfMbiIlretndoAtV7ss7Ty0_3hdq7_nEaClfM.” – Conspiracist

My response, So are you believing a source from the news media? And how do you validate your universal claim about news media? You need to validate this and have not. Do you think “You” don’t have a burden of proof responsibly in this claim? You need to prove your claims, please do so? The Democratic party is different than the national vote for president. The Democratic party can nominate undemocratically I don’t think they should but they didn’t break anything against their own rules. Rather we see the rules where undemocratic. This is not the same as claims that they rigged the election. They used all the undemocratic rules to push who they preferred over what the people wish. There are many undemocratic rules in American politics and I wish they all were changed. I don’t see anything about lawbreaking and that is much different. I think as I said I would have preferred Burnie and never wanted Clinton but in the end, I voted for her over Trump as it was the most reasonable thing to do. We don’t have real democracy in our American politics especially voting.

My response, “The core facts are straightforward: As Barack Obama’s presidency drew to a close, the DNC was deep in debt. In return for a bailout, DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz gave Hillary Clinton’s campaign more potential control over its operations and hiring decisions than was either ethical or wise. But those operations were mostly irrelevant to the primary and couldn’t have been used to rig the process even if anyone had wanted to use them that way; the primary schedule, debate schedule, and rules were set well in advance of these agreements. “I found nothing to say they were gaming the primary system,” Brazile told me. And while that contradicts the more sensational language she used in her book, it fits the facts she laid out both in her original piece and since.” https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/11/14/16640082/donna-brazile-warren-bernie-sanders-democratic-primary-rigged

My response, You posted a link from the Observer here is info on them. “These media sources are slightly to moderately of a conservative in bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes) to favor conservative causes. These sources are generally trustworthy for information, but may require further investigation.” https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/new-york-observer/

“I believe wikileaks. Their publications have never been retracted for inaccurate information.” – Conspiracist

My response, And WikiLeaks is a Russian backed source. There is Evidence of the leader working with Russia never against them. Also, the same things exposed don’t show a crime by the Democratic party as I have already explained. “How WikiLeaks Blew It: The sad downfall of Julian Assange and his empire of secrets. One mistake WikiLeaks has made is that, over time, it has allowed itself to be associated with a particular political agenda — notably Assange’s. Since 2010, however, it has been pretty hard to make the case that WikiLeaks is a neutral transmission system. Nearly all its major operations have targeted the U.S. government or American corporations. When WikiLeaks released U.S. government cables, its stated purpose was to reveal “the contradictions between the US’s public persona and what it says behind closed doors. Assange also hasn’t improved his credibility with his TV talk show, The World Tomorrow — particularly with its first episode, a softball interview with Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah. It doesn’t help that the show is aired by RT (formerly Russia Today), a network funded by the Russian government. And in an ironic twist, the transparency advocate has now cast his lot with Ecuadorean President Rafael Correa, a past World Tomorrow guest and a leader with a less-than-sterling record on press freedom.” https://foreignpolicy.com/2012/08/16/how-wikileaks-blew-it/

“Ok, you win, keep believing the Intel agencies. I will believe those who exposed their lies. Have you even read what WikiLeaks has published or just dismissed it as Russian propaganda?? This info can be corroborated by Edward Snowden. “WikiLeaks published 676 source code files today which it claimed are from CIA, It says the CIA disguised its own hacking attacks to make it appear those responsible were Russian, Chinese, Iranian or North Korean. Experts who’ve started to sift through the material said it appeared legitimate – and that the release was almost certain to shake the CIA.” https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4367746/WikiLeaks-says-CIA-disguised-hacking-Russian-activity.html.” – Conspiracist

My response, Saying the CIA can do something is not proof of what they may have done. Are you saying what exactly about this proposed info? Are you implying that the CIA hacked the Democratic party emails? Here is what WikiLeaks owner said, at the Embassy, a reporter asked Assange what he thought Guccifer 2.0 was. Previously, he had been asked about the persona and its publications, and he had said, “Now, who is behind these, we don’t know. These look very much like they’re from Russians. But in some ways they look very amateur, and almost look too much like the Russians.” Once, he had casually implied to me that he thought Ukrainian operatives might be running the persona; he had also tried to steer people to the view that it was controlled by genuine Eastern European activists. Now the reporter was asking directly what he thought, and he tensed up. “I have to think whether that limits any possibilities,” he told me. “I don’t—I don’t want to comment on the record.” https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/what-the-latest-mueller-indictment-reveals-about-wikileaks-ties-to-russia-and-what-it-doesnt

My response, Info from Politifact states, “A number of documented instances where WikiLeaks’ and Russia’s interests have lined up through the years raises questions about whether this alignment is purely coincidental, or if a more direct relationship was behind WikiLeaks’ conduct in 2016.” https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2019/mar/18/wikileaks-russias-useful-idiot-its-agent-influence/

My response, Russia, and WikiLeaks go back before 2016. According to Vox News, “Throughout WikiLeaks’ existence, the allegedly pro-transparency group has had strange, shadowy, but very well-documented connections to the Russian state. The connections range from sharing purloined documents with a pro-Russian dictator to Assange receiving money for appearing on Russian state TV to WikiLeaks’ key involvement in NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden ending up in Russia. These incidents don’t prove, as some have alleged, that Assange is some kind of paid Russian agent, or that WikiLeaks is a Russian front organization. But they do show that WikiLeaks, an organization purportedly devoted to transparency, is at a minimum okay with helping out the world’s most aggressively authoritarian leader.” https://www.vox.com/world/2017/1/6/14179240/wikileaks-russia-ties

Dirty Devin Nunes Isn’t Investigating Ukraine Scandal, He’s A Key Part Of It

“Yea and none of this reflects on the Obama admin who was supposed to prevent anyone from meddling in our elections.” – Conspiracist

My response, And what claim are you making? And how is a lack of prevention of election meddling, even if we agree with you, the same thing as active meddling against elections?

“Damien Marie Athope only that there are people who are conspiring together to push a false narrative onto the American public and IT’S NOT RUSSIA.” – Conspiracist

My response, What is the false narrative are you claiming? You talk like a conspiracy theorist all undefined claims without details or confirmed evidence. Provide me with evidence, not opinions.

“If you want evidence, just watch the major news networks and that will confirm it all. The conspiracy is to keep society enslaved with an improper education and a high cost of living. Now if you need help finding evidence of that then you are not researching.” – Conspiracist

My response, Saying watch the news media is an unspecific hasty generalization claim without meaning it is yet another of your logical fallacies offered as if they are reasonable.

My response, “Hasty generalization is an informal fallacy of faulty generalization by reaching an inductive generalization based on insufficient evidence—essentially making a rushed conclusion without considering all of the variables.” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faulty_generalization?fbclid=IwAR0U15eicpq8xfvyFoFmV6LOqnUSV-wTgaFVngTPkn6c9qTgymXdD7iT9i4#Hasty_generalization

My response, Another logical fallacy you have used a few times is a false equivalency.

My response, “False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which two completely opposing arguments appear to be logically equivalent when in fact they are not. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency.” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence?fbclid=IwAR0L9HrlLIFofNdJIF9VayyV3IOLulFbaw0zw8O0FTgqEQ3rAFi2fVv4y94

My response, Make a detailed specific claim to a particular issue that you have evidence for in addition to a reasonable justification for it. Do that, and then we can go from there. You have posted lots of nonsense unrelated to the main post and shift everything rather than clear intellectually honest dialogue about what the primary post references but rather delve into red hearing fallacies and misdirection “Whataboutism” fallacies.

My response, “Red Herring logical fallacy generally involves “attempting to redirect the argument to another issue to which the person doing the redirecting can better respond. While it is similar to the “avoiding the issue” fallacy, the red herring is a deliberate diversion of attention with the intention of trying to abandon the original argument.” https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/150/Red-Herring

My response, “The logical fallacy of avoiding the issue occurs when someone deliberately tries to avoid a subject rather than giving sound reasoning for their conclusions regarding the subject. There may be many reasons why someone may want to avoid a subject. On frequent reason for this avoidance occurs when someone wants to hide the fact that their belief system breaks down in this area.” http://www.seekfind.net/Logical_Fallacy_of_Avoiding_the_Issue__Avoiding_the_Question__Missing_the_Point__Straying_Off_the_Subject__Digressing__Distraction.html#.XeF9y-hKiM8

My response, “Whataboutism, also known as whataboutery, is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent’s position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument. It is particularly associated with Soviet and Russian propaganda.” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

“Yea it’s hard for those that are “woke” to help those “unwoke” to understand. You taint all controversial evidence as backed by Russia. While those in our government continue to deceive you into thinking that Russia and China are invading our privacy. So unless you are willing to accept alternative news sources, who point out our government secrecy, then their secrets will never be exposed.” – Conspiracist

My response, What I find interesting is that you seem to only dislike the Democratic party I have not heard from you any confirmation that you see the Republicans as harmful. Also as you said you don’t see Russia as involved and yet oppose all government but Russia? I can’t take you seriously as you are not able to talk in reasonable truth. Tell me what Russia and Republicans have done wrong and I will at least see you can see both sides. I also have asked for detailed information and credible sources you have dodged this like one evading truth. It is self-delusion, to label, yourself woke and offer no valid justification for such a label. Rather you are protecting yourself from having no evidence. You can lie to yourself but not to me. I asked you to fulfill your burden of proof and to that, I was given yet another logical fallacy saying that I have to believe in your alternative-news sources that you have not validated or justified. You are the burden of the proof holder to your claims, not me.

My response, “The burden of Proof” fallacy is when someone makes an argument based on unsound reasoning. The burden of proof is one type of fallacy in which someone makes a claim but puts the burden of proof onto the other side. For example, a person makes a claim. Another person refutes the claim, and the first person asks them to prove that the claim is not true. In a logical argument, if someone states a claim, it is up to that person to prove the truth of his or her claim.” http://www.softschools.com/examples/fallacies/burden_of_proof_examples/521/?fbclid=IwAR1U8sn21hNEWK4AS7jS_6E4w90gDCpKdNcDQZ5eSoUw6rjPm66M7ner_D0

“Here is woke. In the past 50 years, every single Republican administration has ushered in a recession! Each one is worse than the last! With Baby Boy Bush going far enough to damage the global market and forever jade the American dollar. Meanwhile, the Republican criminals attack and occupy a sovereign nation that never threatened or harmed the United States. Why don’t you wake up to that? – Commenter to the Conspiracist

“Damien, here are but a few examples of my political conspiracy theories.” – Conspiracist

My response, 1… As for your first meme that is a different issue, not proof Russia did not medal in our elections. “Russia’s interference was a multi-faceted, coordinated, and well-planned campaign aimed at undermining the backbone of democracy.” https://www.businessinsider.com/evidence-russia-meddled-in-us-election-2017-6

My response, 2… As for your second meme I already told you that I think the Democratic party acted undemocratically pushing the picking of the 2016 president nominate. And I think they should have done differently always supporting democracy.

My response, 3… As for your third meme this is not evidence of anything just propaganda as you seem to offer it as proof Russa was not involved, when it was as well as other factors as well but one truth can exist with others and the fact you don’t get this is odd if not intentional in your proposed reasoning. Yes, the self-described “pied piper” strategy, of the Clinton campaign proposed intentionally cultivating extreme right-wing presidential candidates, hoping to turn them into the new “mainstream of the Republican Party” in order to try to increase Clinton’s chances of winning. The Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee called for using far-right candidates “as a cudgel to move the more established candidates further to the right.” Clinton’s camp insisted that Trump and other extremists should be “elevated” to “leaders of the pack” and media outlets should be told to “take them seriously. “In this scenario, we don’t want to marginalize the more extreme candidates, but make them more ‘Pied Piper’ candidates who actually represent the mainstream of the Republican Party,” the Clinton campaign wrote. As examples of these “pied piper” candidates, the memo named Donald Trump — as well as Sen. Ted Cruz and Ben Carson).” https://www.salon.com/2016/11/09/the-hillary-clinton-campaign-intentionally-created-donald-trump-with-its-pied-piper-strategy/

My response, 4… Your fourth meme is little more than propaganda and insinuations meant to allude to conspiracy and creates a “False Dilemma” as in he has lied and he has posted things that are true. “A False Dilemma is when only two choices are presented yet more exist, or a spectrum of possible choices exists between two extremes. False dilemmas are usually characterized by “either this or that” language, but can also be characterized by omissions of choices. Another variety is the false trilemma, which is when three choices are presented when more exist.” https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/94/False-Dilemma And the governments want him to stop because he is exposing illegally gotten state secrets.

My response, 5…Your fifth meme as well is utter nonsense mindless conspiracy theory propaganda. Here is info from Snopes, “There is significant circumstantial evidence that the attacks on the DNC were closely linked to Russian intelligence agencies. Multiple security researchers have looked at forensic evidence from the attacks and concluded that the attackers used the same kind of techniques that Russian intelligence agencies have used against other targets around the world.” https://www.snopes.com/news/2016/07/25/what-we-know-so-far-about-wikileaks-dncleaks/

My response, 6… Your sixth meme is a commenting on tribalism thinking in politics not providing or proving anything of evidence. There are important issues like universal health care as you have addressed and which party is more in support of this and which is not? Simply this meme acts as in ideas are equal when they are not which creates a False Dichotomy and acts as if the only or main issue one side dislikes the other is to control which denies the many contrary positions like one side fighting for social justice and the other against it or disregarding it. I ask you to please name for a Republican social justice champion? There few if any social justice champions on the right compared to the left, It’s not even close and as people’s lives are on the line it is this that is a clear factor your meme ignores. “A False Dichotomy, or false dilemma, is a dichotomy (a set of two mutually exclusive, jointly exhaustive alternatives) of arguments that ignores the potential for an infinite set of alternative arguments; for an infinite number of overlapping arguments; or for the potential that neither part of the dichotomy is correct.” https://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php/logical-fallacies/false-dichotomy-logical-fallacies/

My response, 7… And as for your seventh meme, this is a clear “Hyperbolic fallacy which occurs when something is stated much more strongly than the observations behind it support.” I agree that all undemocratic rules that work against good ethical democracy should end. Gerrymandering like the electoral college needs to go. But it is in error to label this treason. You need to focus more on how to remove your fondness for logical fallacies and improve your critical thinking skills. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Hyperbole

My response, What is gerrymandering? – According to USAToday: “The dictionary definition; Let’s start with Merriam-Webster: “to divide (a territorial unit) into election districts to give one political party an electoral majority in a large number of districts while concentrating the voting strength of the opposition in as few districts as possible.” So what does that mean in practice? On the national level, it all begins with the U.S. Census. The census is taken every 10 years, recording population shifts around the country. It’s used to determine how many congressional representatives each state gets of the total 435. If your state grew in population, you get more representatives. If it shrunk, you lose representatives. It’s then up to the states to redistrict. How does redistricting work? Each state has its own process for redistricting, according to the Brennan Center for Justice. In most states, state legislators draw up maps, and the governor has the power to veto it. A few states have independent commissions that create the maps, in order to stop politics from getting in the way of the process. Which brings us to… How is redistricting different from gerrymandering? Redistricting simply refers to the act of redrawing district lines. Gerrymandering is the deliberate process of redrawing lines to sway electoral outcomes in favor of a certain political party. A 2010 Wall Street Journal column from Republican strategist Karl Rove may state it best: “He who controls redistricting can control Congress.” Where does the term come from? While gerrymandering has been an issue throughout much of the history of the country, the term can be traced back to Elbridge Gerry, the governor of Massachusetts back in 1812, according to the Library of Congress. Gerry used his power to push through a redistricting map that would keep his political party in power. The resulting map looked like a salamander, so the Boston Gazette called it a “Gerry-mander.” https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/04/19/what-is-gerrymandering/100641646/

My response, Here is a definition of critical thinking by the International Foundation for Critical Thinking, “Critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action. In its exemplary form, it is based on universal intellectual values that transcend subject matter divisions: clarity, accuracy, precision, consistency, relevance, sound evidence, good reasons, depth, breadth, and fairness. It entails the examination of those structures or elements of thought implicit in all reasoning: purpose, problem, or question-at-issue; assumptions; concepts; empirical grounding; reasoning leading to conclusions; implications and consequences; objections from alternative viewpoints; and frame of reference. Critical thinking — in being responsive to the variable subject matter, issues, and purposes — is incorporated in a family of interwoven modes of thinking, among them: scientific thinking, mathematical thinking, historical thinking, anthropological thinking, economic thinking, moral thinking, and philosophical thinking.” https://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/defining-critical-thinking/766

My response, I also think you would benefit from getting more skilled at intellectual honesty. “Intellectual honesty is an applied method of problem solving, characterized by an unbiased, honest attitude, which can be demonstrated in a number of different ways: One’s personal beliefs or politics do not interfere with the pursuit of truth; Relevant facts and information are not purposefully omitted even when such things may contradict one’s hypothesis; Facts are presented in an unbiased manner, and not twisted to give misleading impressions or to support one view over another; References, or earlier work, are acknowledged where possible, and plagiarism is avoided. Harvard ethicist Louis M. Guenin describes the “kernel” of intellectual honesty to be “a virtuous disposition to eschew deception when given an incentive for deception”. Intentionally committed fallacies in debates and reasoning are called intellectual dishonesty.” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_honesty

My response, Now, what do your responses have to do with the main post?

Those are cute little Facebook memes. Now, let’s get back to the reality of the United States in recession and over a million Iraq citizens who were murdered or exiled from their nation for no reason. Let’s talk about the criminal Republicans outing a CIA Operative over their Lie about WMD. Let’s talk about the criminal Republican party carpet-bombing Baghdad for 2 weeks straight while they sold suckers like you a line about force-feeding Democracy to a sovereign nation. – Commenter to the Conspiracist

My response, “Why are conspiracy theories so prevalent now? One reason is today’s us-versus-them politics. Another may be the desire to impose a narrative on events people find inexplicable and threatening. When the other side is deemed a villain, conspiracy theories are easier to accept. Maybe they don’t seem quite as outlandish as they otherwise might.” https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2019/1029/Conspiracy-theories-rising-in-US-politics-Why-now

“What do my comments have to do with the original post?? All my comments promote meddling in elections like you accuse the one in the post.” – Conspiracist

My response, Your comments don’t address the main post pointing out Republican elections meddling with foreign governments and everything you posted seems to actively try to point blame on democrats who did not medal with foreign governments when the meme was exposing this hypocrisy on the right. You posted over and over whataboutism and other fallacies rather than address the facts against republicans this post highlighted.

“Morals have nothing to do with politics.” – Conspiracist

My response, Most of life involves morality in one way or another. Some of the morality in political issues of our time, include affirmative action, assisted suicide, abortion rights, the rights of people of color, women’s rights LGBTQIA rights, stopping spanking and circumcision, affordable housing, living wages, helping the elderly and disabled, immigration, police, military, wars, stem cell research, care for the environment, clean air and water, helping homeless, the gap between rich and poor, the role of markets, and the forcing of religion in public life, etc.

You wrote “Morals have nothing to do with politics” – and in one simple sentence you dehumanize and remove your personal responsibility from the expressions, management, and responsibilities of our lives together… This sentence of yours forms a foundation block of enabling any and every state-sponsored atrocity in history – by removing the humanity and the human impact from political decisions and policies. – Commenter #2 to the Conspiracist

“Yea, I see that happening all the time, if politics had any morals then why is trump POTUS??” – Conspiracist

Because some people’s morals are downright atrocious, Ignorance, lack of empathy and a powerful perpetual message stream of lies and misinformation that people have become dulled to and do not take the time to evaluate if they are being duped. – Commenter #2 to the Conspiracist

“Don’t look now but you are making my case for politics without morals, given the way they spread misinformation.” – Conspiracist

Agreed… The point that I would make in return is that politics is ALWAYS about ‘morals’ – but that is lost on the amoral and the immoral. – Commenter #2 to the Conspiracist

“If politicians made decisions based on morals then we would have universal healthcare and education but decisions are based on currency and how to make it. saw your list of political morals and how many are we STILL FIGHTING FOR???” – Conspiracist

No? How are ethics and politics separate? – Commenter #3 to the Conspiracist

My response, Your confusion is that because one side “the right” is often acting without ethics that there are no ethics involved and in that case, you are being a limited thinker. I am a leftist and most of my political views are or involve ethics. And as for your statement on universal health care, do you deny that there are many striving to have universal health care that is in politics?

“I see the left act the same as the right, there are many examples of them doing so, and I only need to point to their voting record on most of the issues at hand. I seem to recall the left having a majority under Obama for 2 years and where are we at??” – Conspiracist

My response, So you don’t know how to reason if you think they are the same or need to be better educated. Well under Obama there was an active effort to improve health care on many levels that the right was at war against at all levels. One big change most people can agree was good was removing the limitations on preexisting conditions. I agree more should be done but the right didn’t want anything done and that is the war of morality we face. You seem to have a thin layer of thinking on issues. I am not a democrat as I am a Socialist Anarchist but still see the left at most levels more on ethical pro-social stances than those on the right. I don’t think Obama is without any flaws he did things I didn’t like but to act as if he is even close to the monster Trump is holding ethical errors quite profound.

“How about old slick willy, let’s start there and go forward. Now W. was no Clinton in the bedroom, his way of doing things politically was pretty similar. Then on to Obama who campaigned on the progressive changes, but got business as usual and now instead of rodham and more of the same business as usual, you seem to think trump is different somehow, truly I really don’t see that much of a difference in the way the politicians vote, except for a select few.” – Conspiracist

Your politics are your morals in action. One has entirely to do with the other. – Commenter #4 to the Conspiracist

Your Whataboutism is noted. – Commenter #3 to the Conspiracist

Trumpism is a cult: Conservative evangelicals and Catholics are claiming anyone who disagrees with Trump is in league with Satan – and AG Bill Barr agrees. In dangerous defense of Trump, the religious right has begun fighting a holy war https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2019/11/dangerous-defense-trump-religious-right-begun-fighting-holy-war/?amp&fbclid=IwAR0JgKwszNYLtO9q4AOWP-qG-DreZPzFjhRwIiAmGzeyhNcOShA_1AROc-k

Here are my blogs on Trump:

Trump is One of the Most Reactionary Forces of Far-right Christian Extremism

Addressing Political Conspiracy Theories and a Political Conspiracy Thinker

A question in my Atheists Against Trump group

We are Trumpatized (at a point of Traumatized Safety)

Closest Match: Anarcho-Communism

The Atheist-Humanist-Leftist Revolutionaries Shows in the prehistory series:

Damien Marie AtHope (Said as “At” “Hope”)/(Autodidact Polymath but not good at math):

Recent Posts

Archives

Categories

Pages

Meta

Advertisement

Pin It on Pinterest