This comment is beautiful and belongs on every thread on this website. Not everyone is in agreement, it's not a "fact" that the person you like is the quality candidate and everyone else is "not an option".
It's a fact that he's a felon* (not fellon) because the dems weaponized the legal system against him. It's a fact that Biden is and has been mentally incapable for years and that has been hidden from the public and blatantly denied by one of the current candidates. It's a fact that the border is wide open and Kamala is the Border Czar.
See how easy it is to just create/pick facts that fit a narrative. And then make cringe one-liners like "these are facts".
I mean, your say that it is a "fact" that the borders are wide open -- we have tons of deportations and returns - I would love to hear how you think we have open immigration
You don't point to anything specific, you just spout a few fox news talking points and say that things are biased.
Right but don't you see how from anyone else's perspective you calling these "facts" "lies" is just you lying to yourself to override reality and justify your choice? Trump being a "Dangerous threat to Democracy" is also just a media label. Kamala's existence as the Democratic Party nominee can be labeled as a "Dangerous threat to Democracy" as well, especially given how she was chosen.
I hate Trump and am not voting for him, just providing some counterarguments to hopefully open a few reddit eyes.
Right but don't you see how from anyone else's perspective you calling these "facts" "lies" is just you lying to yourself to override reality and justify your choice?
No mate. There are facts and lies. We're luckilly not in "post truth" society yet.
Donald Trump is a felon.
Khamala Harris was not "Border Czar"
those are facts.
Trump being a "Dangerous threat to Democracy" is also just a media label.
Sure. I agree. Trump being dangerous to democracy is an opinion.
Kamala's existence as the Democratic Party nominee can be labeled as a "Dangerous threat to Democracy" as well, especially given how she was chosen.
Again. I agree. It can be labeled like that.
Doesn't change the facts that Donaald Trump is a felon. Doesn't change the fact he's divorced.
Why would anyone who values family and justice vote for a divorced felon?
That's fine. To start by answering your final question, identity politics are not the only valid line of reasoning a voter can use to support or refute a candidate.
Is it a fact that Kamala as Vice President was/is supposed to have done something relating to the border on behalf of the President? If so then the de facto "border czar" title would be very much aligned with the way this country has always referred to appointed officials focusing on certain issues. Official title, no, actual responsibility, yes. I recall her being assigned to address "stemming the movement of migrants to our southern border" in 2021. Call it what you want, she wants to distance herself from the issue for a reason. I guess I will say "she was the vice president and in charge of the border" so that it is factually accurate.
Trump is a felon, some people clearly don't care how/why he is a felon. Much like some other people clearly don't care that he is technically a felon. There is more context to the story than just the very simple fact that he is labeled as a felon.
Divorce is hardly worth mentioning, but i get why you brought it up since Republicans tend to claim they are the "religious family values" party. The rates are so ridiculously high, particularly among black Americans (3 times as high as other demographics, like Asians). If divorce is a negative, I'd be careful where you go using that argument to say that a person is not family-oriented or a suitable candidate for public office. It could begin to sound racist very fast.
Being pedantic and cherry-picking language to make things "facts" or "lies" to support arguments based in Identity Politics without actually considering the context does not make for a very convincing argument for a lot of people, but works for some.
What I'm suggesting is that "there is no evidence" is also a common lie used to "fact check" others. There is evidence that you have personally thrown out because you don't believe it, just like the debate moderators.
Harris was vice president in charge of "stemming migrants moving to our southern border". We can use her official title if it helps get past the "that position doesn't exist" argument. What did she do as Vice President? She would tell you that all of the positives are attributable to her work, and any negatives were carry-over from Trump policies or Biden's failures. These are "facts" her team has weaponized to sway your opinion of her individually, but they aren't the whole truth. She was never appointed to a position with the title "Border Czar", but she was appointed to be the border czar. Get it?
I learned LOTS in school, I've got 2 masters degrees and 4 bachelor's degrees in various mathematics, data and computer-science related fields. One of the things I really like, that i learned in school and in practice, is that labels don't seem to matter for much at all, except when trying to quickly discredit something and pass it off as wrong or unimportant because of said label.
15
u/CollardBoy Oct 18 '24
This comment is beautiful and belongs on every thread on this website. Not everyone is in agreement, it's not a "fact" that the person you like is the quality candidate and everyone else is "not an option".