• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

A Republican problem.

Torus34

Torus34

DP Veteran
Joined
May 5, 2019
Messages
9,708
Reaction score
4,682
Location
Staten Island, NY USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
A democratic government -- of the people, by the people and for the people -- is expected to have the respect of the people. If it does not, it may not long survive and will be replaced, perhaps by some form of dictatorship.

The United States of America's federal government is presently headed by President of the United States Donald Trump. He is not given to being truthful* in his statements to the American people. A cottage industry has grown up in debunking his claims. There's also a number of people who routinely go to bat for him, proposing reasons for his statements.

Be that as it is, President Trump is the head of the Republican Party. In the absence of strong condemnation from the members of the party, one is led to believe that continual statements of conspiracy theories and untruths is characteristic of the party and its members.

And yes, politicians lie. This has been true for as long as there have been politicians. It it the level we now see that is different from what has come before. To borrow a phrase from the I Love Lucy show, the Republicans have some 'splainin' to do -- or accept the mantle.

* I've chosen this circumlocution to avoid using the word 'lying'.
 
Torus34 said:
A democratic government -- of the people, by the people and for the people -- is expected to have the respect of the people. If it does not, it may not long survive and will be replaced, perhaps by some form of dictatorship.

The United States of America's federal government is presently headed by President of the United States Donald Trump. He is not given to being truthful* in his statements to the American people. A cottage industry has grown up in debunking his claims. There's also a number of people who routinely go to bat for him, proposing reasons for his statements.

Be that as it is, President Trump is the head of the Republican Party. In the absence of strong condemnation from the members of the party, one is led to believe that continual statements of conspiracy theories and untruths is characteristic of the party and its members.

And yes, politicians lie. This has been true for as long as there have been politicians. It it the level we now see that is different from what has come before. To borrow a phrase from the I Love Lucy show, the Republicans have some 'splainin' to do -- or accept the mantle.

* I've chosen this circumlocution to avoid using the word 'lying'.
Click to expand...

Are you a Republican?
 
Torus34 said:
A democratic government -- of the people, by the people and for the people -- is expected to have the respect of the people. If it does not, it may not long survive and will be replaced, perhaps by some form of dictatorship.

The United States of America's federal government is presently headed by President of the United States Donald Trump. He is not given to being truthful* in his statements to the American people. A cottage industry has grown up in debunking his claims. There's also a number of people who routinely go to bat for him, proposing reasons for his statements.

Be that as it is, President Trump is the head of the Republican Party. In the absence of strong condemnation from the members of the party, one is led to believe that continual statements of conspiracy theories and untruths is characteristic of the party and its members.

And yes, politicians lie. This has been true for as long as there have been politicians. It it the level we now see that is different from what has come before. To borrow a phrase from the I Love Lucy show, the Republicans have some 'splainin' to do -- or accept the mantle.

* I've chosen this circumlocution to avoid using the word 'lying'.
Click to expand...

If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.
If you like your insurance you can keep your insurance.

Its not different at all...
 
Authoritarianism is the natural form of government. Democracy is an aberration based on a historical anomaly. Authoritarianism is on the rise globally. Once it takes hold, it's very hard to replace with democracy. When the most powerful nation abandons its leadership for democracy, and the coming country that will become the world's largest economy is authoritarian, democracy is in great danger.
 
Mycroft said:
Are you a Republican?
Click to expand...

Hi! I'm best defined as a secular humanist. I see the issues du jour through that perspective. On any given issue I may side with one or the other party's position.

Regards.

PS: There's a whiff of the Cretan Paradox in your question, right? ;-)
 
Last edited:
OpportunityCost said:
If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.
If you like your insurance you can keep your insurance.

Its not different at all...
Click to expand...

Hi! I attempted to put this particular form of response to bed in the OP. The difference was pointed out not as one of kind but, rather, one of level.

Regards.
 
OpportunityCost said:
If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.
If you like your insurance you can keep your insurance.

Its not different at all...
Click to expand...

I don't know whether to laugh or cry over this sterling addition to the forum discourse.
 
Torus34 said:
Hi! I'm best defined as a secular humanist. I see the issues du jour through that perspective. On any given issue I may side with one or the party's position.

Regards.

PS: There's a whiff of the Cretan Paradox in your question, right? ;-)
Click to expand...

Actually, I was just asking if you were a Republican Party member. From your evasive answer, I assume you are not.

No, the Cretan Paradox doesn't apply.
 
Mycroft said:
Actually, I was just asking if you were a Republican Party member. From your evasive answer, I assume you are not.

No, the Cretan Paradox doesn't apply.
Click to expand...

I understood the question as one of ideology rather than formal party membership. Evasion was not intended. No, I am not a member of the Republican Party. I am, as I stated, a secular humanist. I must admit to being at a loss on how this would change the meaning of the OP.

Regards.
 
Craig234 said:
Authoritarianism is the natural form of government. Democracy is an aberration based on a historical anomaly.
Click to expand...

No it's not. Democracies are still "authoritarian" in that you can easily be imprisoned for actions which do not harm or even endanger other people. All democracy does is allow you to help choose which authoritarians you wish to be ruled by.
 
aociswundumho said:
No it's not. Democracies are still "authoritarian" in that you can easily be imprisoned for actions which do not harm or even endanger other people. All democracy does is allow you to help choose which authoritarians you wish to be ruled by.
Click to expand...

like smoking weed?
 
OpportunityCost said:
If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.
If you like your insurance you can keep your insurance.

Its not different at all...
Click to expand...

It’s really getting old don’t you think that you have to go back to 2010 for two lies told by Obama. The poster said all politicians lie. But the level of lying by Trump is unprecedented by any other politician and it has changed the face of the Republican Party.
 
jnug said:
I don't know whether to laugh or cry over this sterling addition to the forum discourse.
Click to expand...

Did you read the original remarks? Presidents lying to the people is nothing new. Pretending it is something new is what is new. Every time the President changes hands, the outrage over lying becomes new again.

The OP and this thread is a false argument that is full of holes. The part to laugh or cry about is you taking it seriously.
 
Carleen said:
It’s really getting old don’t you think that you have to go back to 2010 for two lies told by Obama. The poster said all politicians lie. But the level of lying by Trump is unprecedented by any other politician and it has changed the face of the Republican Party.
Click to expand...

Unprecedented? No, I don't think it is. It is precedent and that is my point.
 
Torus34 said:
A democratic government -- of the people, by the people and for the people -- is expected to have the respect of the people.

And yes, politicians lie. This has been true for as long as there have been politicians. It it the level we now see that is different from what has come before. To borrow a phrase from the I Love Lucy show, the Republicans have some 'splainin' to do -- or accept the mantle.
Click to expand...

Actually IMO it is the reporting on the level of lies via the news media we now see that we think is different from what has come before, not the actual lying.

The truism that "all politician's lie" is based on the knowledge that elected officials and their associates knowingly make false statements to the public all the time. IMO a current good public example on the Democrat side would be Representative Adam Schiff.

However, that amorphous group known as "the people" often get their interpretations of such lying via the news media, which historically is also no slouch when it comes to publishing falsehoods.

Yellow journalism, i.e. "the use of lurid features and sensationalized news in newspaper publishing to attract readers and increase circulation,"* is nothing new. With the expansion of media via radio, television, and not the internet, this is occurring with more and more frequency as news media compete for views to sell advertising.

Coming back to Trump and his "lying," we have many examples where the news media have created fictions out of whole cloth via lurid headlines to push the meme of "Trump's 10000 lies." His response is to call such stories and those who purvey them "fake news."

The truth is that both news media and politicians do lie. We ALL do from time to time for all sorts of reasons. Trump is no exception. He is simply the current target of public focus.

Which brings us to the point about "respect of the people." How many people, i.e. what percentage of the total group making up "the people," must fall into the your calculation as meeting basic requirements? 100%, 75%, 51%? Because absent such figures your statement is just hyperbole too.

Recall that Trump was elected by 63 million votes. Hillary got 66 million. 6 million voted third Party. Yet over 90 million people did not vote at all.**

What current percentage of the people don't respect Trump? I guess it depends on current polling of "1060 people" done by various polls on various subjects. But those polls show his approval among those who voted for him has remained basically the same.

Now IMHO if you want to gauge the respect of the people for Trump, one need only examine those "rallies" he has regularly been involved in. Seems to me that despite all reports otherwise, he still has significant "respect" from a sizeable portion of "the people."

Bottom line, Trump often engages in puffery and exaggeration. He also make misstatements based on faulty knowledge. Yes, he also "lies." But respect has more to do with public reporting about him than it does with facts.


* Yellow journalism | Britannica.com

** https://www.washingtonpost.com/
 
Last edited:
Torus34 said:
Hi! I attempted to put this particular form of response to bed in the OP. The difference was pointed out not as one of kind but, rather, one of level.

Regards.
Click to expand...

Don't give a damn, insulating your OP from counter arguments isn't rebutting them its attempting to not answer them. If you want a level of lying---how about destroying documents about running guns on US soil to push for changes to the 2nd amendment or more gun control? That's pretty underhanded and dangerous.

You cant have it both ways, claiming that its without precedent or a level of corruption and not discuss other, previous evidence of corruption. Its not whataboutism, its examining the claims of the OP.
 
Torus34 said:
I understood the question as one of ideology rather than formal party membership. Evasion was not intended. No, I am not a member of the Republican Party. I am, as I stated, a secular humanist.
Click to expand...

Thanks for clearing that up.

I must admit to being at a loss on how this would change the meaning of the OP.

Regards.
Click to expand...

I asked that question because the answer could possibly alter my response to your OP.

If you were a Republican, I could understand your concern for the position you perceive your party taking. I could understand your demand that they either explain themselves to you or accept the mantle you would place on them (whether they actually deserve that mantle or not).

But since you aren't, I have to wonder why you care? The Republican Party will succeed or fail based on their own actions. They don't owe anyone "some 'splainin'". They will do as they will...just as any other Party will do.
 
tacomancer said:
Wait, so you are saying democracies are a problem because of harsh drug laws?
Click to expand...

No, I'm saying democracies are authoritarian because they put human beings in steel cages for behaviors which neither harm nor endanger anyone else.

A government that puts people in prison for what amounts to political crimes is by definition authoritarian.
 
aociswundumho said:
No, I'm saying democracies are authoritarian because they put human beings in steel cages for behaviors which neither harm nor endanger anyone else.

A government that puts people in prison for what amounts to political crimes is by definition authoritarian.
Click to expand...

Ahh, the classic libertarian natural rights position then.

Whelp, we live in the real world and not in a philosophy novel :shrug:
 
tacomancer said:
Ahh, the classic libertarian natural rights position then.

Whelp, we live in the real world and not in a philosophy novel :shrug:
Click to expand...

You don't even need natural rights theory, just look at how you live your own life and compare that to the government laws you approve of.

If something is morally wrong for you personally to do, then it remains morally wrong when you delegate the same action for state agents to do.


we live in the real world
Click to expand...

Yes, which is why you should try to get your views in line with the real world, instead of seeing the world through political fog.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom