-
Friendly reminder: The politics section is a place where a lot of differing opinions are raised. You may not like what you read here but it is someone's opinion. As long as the debate is respectful you are free to debate freely. Also, the views and opinions expressed by forum members may not necessarily reflect those of GBAtemp. Messages that the staff consider offensive or inflammatory may be removed in line with existing forum terms and conditions.
Trump leading in 5 key swing states
- Thread starter x65943
- Start date
- Views 17,580
- Replies 260
- Status
It'd be a shame if you took control of your life, including learning how to find the truth without depending on others. But then again, the left counts on making people dependent on others. Thanks for showing everyone that you are incapable of even the most basic of functions. Does somebody have to hold your hand while you sit down to pee?
Weird MAGA meltdown
BTW, flat earthers will make the same argument, to look it up on the Internet. This is why you get compared to em.
Post automatically merged:
Also because you continue to accuse me of not backing my claims (despite the opposite) it's the blue states always having to bail out the loser MAGA territories:
https://www.moneygeek.com/living/states-most-reliant-federal-government/
Not to that idiot with TDS who believes the election results were fraudulent
"Freedoms" (whatever that's supposed to mean in this context) don't have anything to do with Covid's presence. Yes, Covid is "gone" as in it is no longer a global threat, but Covid still exists today, albeit in much less contagious variants. Equating something as nonexistent simply because it doesn't impact our daily lives is beyond bizarre logic.
According to AllSides, Vox has an extremely heavy bias and should not be considered a reputable source. Nevertheless, as ABC News reports using government data, only about 14% of Americans have gotten the latest Covid shot. The reasoning for this is quite simple: Covid does not present an active threat to daily life, and as such fewer people will prioritize defense against it. If a contagious, deadly flu variant suddenly emerged, then flu vaccinations would likely go up in proportion as well. That's just basic logic.
Saying this indicates a lack of maturity in debate proceedings (e.g. "It's out there; go find it yourself") as well as possible lack of faith in your own argument due to failure to cite specific sources. If you aren't willing to defend your argument appropriately, then you shouldn't be debating.
All of the other person's reasonings were based on logical deduction. If Bill Gates says Windows 12 will be out by January, do you think he means January 2026? The natural thought would be January, 2024, because when people say a time of the year without specifying the year it usually means the closest occurrence of that year. I honestly cannot comprehend how logical reasoning could be considered government brainwashing.
Your comparisons are cute.
That is a perfect argument to stop all taxation. It makes no sense to collect taxes from the state and then turn around and redistribute it back to the states. Yet, you support this and complain about it at the same time. And you want to call me a flat earther?
The cognitive dissonance is strong in this one. Seek help.
Post automatically merged:
You may be too young to remember the most governors locking us in our homes, forcing us to wear ineffective face diapers and in some instances, forcing an experimental jab on us.
Vox and ABC News showed the same statistic. Does that mean ABC News has an extremely heavy bias? Because I would agree with you.
You just shot down my source in the previous paragraph in the same post. LOL! And now you say I have a lack of faith in my argument? I can't predict what are acceptable sources for you people, so why should I waste my time?
sHoW yOuR sOuRcEs!!
nOt ThAt SoUrCe!!
No leftist here is capable of debate. When it's not outright attacks and name calling, they try to change the subject or attacking the source that I spent time to go find. I'm not playing your game anymore.
It was my initial thought too, but then you would have to ignore that almost all restrictions in the US were lifted by Easter weekend 2 years later. Weird coincidence, and I don't believe in coincidences.
Last edited by TraderPatTX,
"Freedom" still isn't relevant. In the case of epidemics, it's the government's responsibility to take necessary measures to protect it's citizens. It is your right to disagree, defy, or protest those restrictions, but doing so in times of danger will likely put you at additional risk. Underlying freedoms still exist in epidemics, which is why they are restored after the time of conflict. This argument sounds like you do not wish for the government to intervene with people's lives in any sort of way. Which, again, is fine, but not an opinion I can understand (respectfully).
Not necessarily. In my case, I should have gone farther back to confirm the data with a government backed website (where the statistics originated). Vox used the statistics from ABC News, which presumably got them from the government. ABC News has a lean bias, but as it's a much smaller one than Vox it's much more likely to use government statistics in good faith. Nevertheless, I did track down the CDC's article, which estimates 17% of the total U.S. population to having received a bivalent booster dose:
https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#vaccinations_vacc-total-admin-rate-total
That may have changed since the article was written as well, or it could be using different data.
I apologize for the ambiguity. When debating, it's important to use sources that are reputable, trustworthy, and specific. Otherwise, holes in your argument will show, and others will be quick to point those out. Vox has a heavy left-leaning bias, which I pointed out, because that bias hinders its reputability. Telling others that sources exist "on the Internet" is a separate argument, but usually indicates laziness, low confidence, or unwillingness to defend one's own argument. Your two points exist independently and shouldn't be seen as one. I'm sorry for any confusion.
I would also like to clarify that I am not a "leftist" as I am not politically motivated or involved. I simply make observations based on data. My goal is not to drive you in circles or make you upset (MY goal--I cannot speak for others), but a key part of debating is recognizing and critiquing sources and their credibility. Especially in the case of Vox, blindly accepting any old Google result as truth is ultimately blind faith if you don't research the source. I'm hoping to foster better-quality debate, not to bring others down.
I'm struggling to follow this line of logic. My initial thoughts are this:
False correlation fallacies are a thing. Coincidences are an observable phenomena, and while I can understand not believing in some, refusing to believe in any is puzzling logic, and will result in correlations where none exist. In this case, there isn't any way for your stance to be wrong, because no matter when Covid restrictions would be lifted, Easter of any given year would always come around not long after--validating Trump's initial claim, which contextually seems to be nothing more than a shot in the dark.
So you have no sources and you just make shit up, gotcha.
If you can’t provide a source, then it’s only a fact that it’s not real
can you narrow it down? i can't post every thing theyve ever said that would take far to long and it isnt worth the effort on common sense logic.
The CDC didn’t say that 90% of Americans aren’t boosted. Even the lowest group is 83% not having been boosted.
that isnt what i said. i was responding to someone who asked something about stopping transmission, which the cdc did say
If you're arguing a stance, it's your responsibility to track down relevant and specific articles that support your argument. Other debatees are not going to do your work for you. If you cite the CDC, then you should be prepared to bring up specific examples. Otherwise, your argument is hollow, and will be called out. In my responses, I've cited specific articles relevant to my position whenever possible. It's an essential practice if you want any traction in your stances.
- Status
Similar threads
-
BigOnYa
-
K3Nv2
-
BakerMan
I rather enjoy a life of taking it easy. I haven't reached that life yet though. -
Xdqwerty
what are you looking at?
-
-
-
@
BakerMan:
today is the 7th anniversary of Captain Underpants, which was actually a surprisingly good movie
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
@
Xdqwerty:
@SylverReZ, sorry
i thought you didnt read the last couple messages before quoting you agin -
-
-
@
BigOnYa:
@Xdqwerty you are not dumb or stupid, you need to stop saying that, you are very smart, even about alot of things I have no clue about. We all love you here, like a big family.
-
@
K3Nv2:
Yeah @BigOnYa love me so much he started yelling at me for having my shoes on in the bed when he caught me with his wife+1
-
@
BigOnYa:
True, I don't want mud crumbs in my bed, and btw you left without paying your tab. Ill add it to next month but getting tired of extending.
-
-
-
-
@
BigOnYa:
Only thing drive me crazy is all these new horror games nowadays is its so dark, all time. I can't even play them.
)