Spartacus521 Posted March 31, 2016 Posted March 31, 2016 I feel the show is really going overboard with the Trump coverage. It seems delusional to think Trump is some nobleman who can save the country from itself. He won't. It is sad to see Stef white-knighting for Trump. Trump is a total authoritarian who would leave the Executive Branch with way too much power if he ever got elected. He is in no way a limited government candidate. His economic plans make absolutely no sense. He'll say people will get "taken care of" with his health plan then his economic plan is "dynamic". The guy gives no answers. It is so disappointing to see the constant defense of him from very legitimate criticisms. Tearing down every candidate except Trump goes counter to what this show is all about: Truth Does anyone really believe someone on their third marriage, with multiple affairs, no real ideas about how to pay for things, who engages in name-calling and pettiness is going to "Make America Great Again"? 2 7
WasatchMan Posted March 31, 2016 Posted March 31, 2016 I never heard Stef say that Trump was a nobleman who can save the country. The argument I have heard was that Trump's personality, K selection, and backbone is essential right now to give the population their balls back and stop letting the leftists verbally abuse them. Critical feedback is not a strawman argument. 2
Matthew Ed Moran Posted March 31, 2016 Posted March 31, 2016 It is so disappointing to see the constant defense of him from very legitimate criticisms. So says a guy who considers "muh feels" a legitimate criticism. 1
Spartacus521 Posted March 31, 2016 Author Posted March 31, 2016 As expected - no arguments. Boring projection. You must have missed my arguments, let me help you: Trump is a total authoritarian who would leave the Executive Branch with way too much power if he ever got elected. He is in no way a limited government candidate. - Please explain why anyone should support someone who is an authoritarian candidate. With Stef's implicit support and constant rationalizations of his policies, Stef is backtracking on his own ideals. His economic plans make absolutely no sense. - Trump doesn't even have a Economic section on his website. Just a section about China and tax. There's not a single mention about how the US is living well beyond its means and the need to shut down parts of the government. No talk about shrinking government. Oh yeah, he wants to increase military spending and has no plans to cut into our deficits. I'm curious why Stef skips past all of this... Does anyone really believe someone on their third marriage with multiple affairs is believable? - Is Stef going to conveniently ignore his total lack of honesty and ethics? That is the single most important characteristic someone should have. I'm surprised Stef hasn't mentioned this since he gleefully points out shortcomings in other candidates. I love the show but Stef is contradicting himself by constantly defending Trump instead of analyzing him critically and truthfully. The shows lately fly in the face of the earlier ones where Stef goes into detail about how voting is futile. There's nothing wrong with admitting his faults instead of being myopic. I never heard Stef say that Trump was a nobleman who can save the country. The argument I have heard was that Trump's personality, K selection, and backbone is essential right now to give the population their balls back and stop letting the leftists verbally abuse them. You don't "get your balls back" by voting for an authoritarian. 1 1
vahleeb Posted March 31, 2016 Posted March 31, 2016 You must have missed my arguments, let me help you: Trump is a total authoritarian who would leave the Executive Branch with way too much power if he ever got elected. He is in no way a limited government candidate. How do you know? The difference between an assertion and an argument is that the argument tells me how you know. Also since you put forward the concept of a limited government candidate, who is that candidate? And how do you know that THIS candidate you will single out will in fact be a limited government president, considering no limited government candidate has successfully converted into a limited government president? His economic plans make absolutely no sense. - Trump doesn't even have a Economic section on his website. I don't plan on making this a monotone repetition but how do you know? If there isn't even an economic section on his website, how do you know his plans make no sense? Did you ever hear these "economic plans" in their entirety? How do you know that you did? has no plans to cut into our deficits How do you know? Has he said: "I will not cut into the deficit!"? And even if he had (which he hasn't), how do you know that's "the plan"? [Ethics] That is the single most important characteristic someone should have. Absolutely. What is the likelihood that a career politician have that? Or let me put it in terms more applicable here: who is more likely to have "some" ethics? A successful business man or a successful politician? You don't "get your balls back" by voting for an authoritarian. No, but then again you misinterpret the causality. You "get your balls back" by standing up to the verbal abuse of leftists which makes people stand beside/behind Trump. You have an emotional reaction to Trump. Which means you have an emotional reaction to Stefan's defence of Trump. But there is no emotion in the "defence" it's just truth statements. I am not a Trump supporter, I'm not even an American citizen, still I wrote an article of what could constitute 12 reasons why Trump should win. You can find a link to it in this very same current events category. It's called 12 Reasons Why I Think Trump Should Win The Presidency. 1
Innocent Bystander Posted March 31, 2016 Posted March 31, 2016 The way I see it Stefan is just using Trump as a prop in his ongoing efforts to expose media bias and the associated irrationality that has been unleashed thanks to his Presidential bid, Trump is excellent subject material in this regard. 1
powder Posted April 4, 2016 Posted April 4, 2016 Assertions are not arguments. Don't even get me started on this "support" nonsense which has been addressed 686327475 times. I must have missed this, can someone point to me where the explanation of the meaning of 'support' has been addressed directly? 1 1
Recommended Posts