Can you please give an example of a well reasoned argument that’s relevant here?
I’m not sure of the relationship of reason to people that aggressively disregard objective fact and fluidly move the goalpost of their burden of proof.
Look up how to debate. Success is not measured by how bad you make the opponent look. That may work on one person, but you have to repeat it for every person who advances the same argument. Instead, take apart their argument, reveal underlying motives, expose untruths with irrefutable documentation, uncover false logic and bad assumptions, and respond without attacking the messenger.
For instance, “The economy is terrible! Everything is so expensive.” Well, stuff -is- expensive. But is the economy really the reason behind it? The US stock indexes are at record highs. Most companies have been beating the expected earnings per share. Isn’t it more likely that things are expensive because companies are taking more profit to give to their shareholders? Which candidate do you believe is more inclined to change that?
The object is not to defeat the opponent. It’s to prevent others from being convinced by their arguments.
Can you please give an example of a well reasoned argument that’s relevant here?
I’m not sure of the relationship of reason to people that aggressively disregard objective fact and fluidly move the goalpost of their burden of proof.
I like to ask who will replace the main stream media, and how that won’t make them the new mainstream media.
IME this just leads to “yeah, but ours will be different/better!” type responses like…
“Politicians suck, but ours are good”
“Stop giving out all these services with our tax dollars but don’t touch our Medicare”
“Gay marriage shouldn’t be legal, but my gay daughter is fine.”
“Immigrants are evil, except for the waiter at my favorite Mexican restaurant, he is one of the good ones”
I/Me/Mine is ALWAYS the exception to every rule for them.
So the NEW mainstream, MY mainstream, will be different and tell the REAL truth.
Look up how to debate. Success is not measured by how bad you make the opponent look. That may work on one person, but you have to repeat it for every person who advances the same argument. Instead, take apart their argument, reveal underlying motives, expose untruths with irrefutable documentation, uncover false logic and bad assumptions, and respond without attacking the messenger.
For instance, “The economy is terrible! Everything is so expensive.” Well, stuff -is- expensive. But is the economy really the reason behind it? The US stock indexes are at record highs. Most companies have been beating the expected earnings per share. Isn’t it more likely that things are expensive because companies are taking more profit to give to their shareholders? Which candidate do you believe is more inclined to change that?
The object is not to defeat the opponent. It’s to prevent others from being convinced by their arguments.