"Emotionally true" is not a term that society should accept. Relativism at its finest.
-
-
-
Any argument that includes "should" is reason-free.
-
this is one of the most absurd psuedo-intellectual things I've ever read. how can one have a discussion about policy without "should"?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I love your show. You have been voice of reason in these challenging times. I am always surprised to hear that your audience is criticism of
-
Trump bc I assume ppl who listen like your logic& reason-based approach to topics. Appeasing you critics by inviting a Trump "supporter" was
-
generous & open minded. Adams claims not to be a Trump supporter and to be very liberal. He then proceeded to explain, justify, excuse and
-
recast every lie, misdirection, outburst & manipulation as tools of the most brilliant "persuader" of all time. The fact the Adams refused
-
to use the word "lie" preferring to say Trump's statements don't pass the fact-checks was the first big red flag is what turned out to be an
-
2 hour long Trump promotional ad. Adams rejected every reasoned argument and response from you as emotional, false anologies, a victim of
-
cognitive dissonance, etc. Adams' says anology is the crutch of those without reasons, then turns around and uses the "story" of when to buy
-
Kim- spot on. My take, too
- 6 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I'm trying to decide if Scott is completely and totally disingenuous, or if he has been completely and totally persuaded by Trump.
-
Was "Right about everything as his predictions show" not one of the options?
-
No, because that is simply a result from a guess you could have easily been wrong about. My point is based on your entire conversation.
-
Pointing out the falsifiability of his predictions makes them all the more credible when they turn out to be correct.
-
But none of them are which would point the other way. His climate discussion was off, his jobs claims on clean tech was wrong ect.
-
Did you listen to the podcast?
-
In its entirety. If one listens, as you did, with the assumption that they are at odds on everything, that's what one is likely to hear.
-
I would go so far as to say almost everybody made that assumption. Not trying to single you out. :-)
- 8 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
The reason the master persuasion theory is so convincing is because it succesfully predicted the election landslide. ...oops. LOL.
-
I caught that too, he said he had a huge win and then admits he scraped by.
-
Landslide electoral college win, which is the game he was playing. That's Scotts reasoning.
-
But it wasn't a landslide electoral win, it was one of the smallest on record.
-
How many states did he win out of 50? I forget. Help me out.
-
But that's a pointless number, the number that matters is electoral count, not number of states won no?
-
For a person saying the general election numbers don't matter, only the EC number do this seems like a slick distraction.
- 12 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.