• 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!

Snopes agrees that Trump reduced debt

atheist4thecaus said:
No, you're operating under the false assumption that opinions can't be right or wrong.
Click to expand...

By regular definitions, opinions can neither be correct or factual. A fact is true by definition. An opinion is more subjective.
 
Soopairik said:
By regular definitions, opinions can neither be correct or factual. A fact is true by definition. An opinion is more subjective.
Click to expand...

So if I say that I believe it's moral to torture little babies to death then my opinion can neither be right or wrong? I disagree with you. Torturing little babies to death is immoral. That's my opinion, but it's the right opinion.
 
atheist4thecaus said:
So if I say that I believe it's moral to torture little babies to death then my opinion can neither be right or wrong? I disagree with you. Torturing little babies to death is immoral. That's my opinion, but it's the right opinion.
Click to expand...

Yes, that would be correct. I agree with your statement, but your statement is neither correct nor incorrect. Morality is subjective.
 
Soopairik said:
Yes, that would be correct. I agree with your statement, but your statement is neither correct nor incorrect. Morality is subjective.
Click to expand...

Why do you agree with me if the opinion is neither correct nor incorrect? The point I'm trying to get you to realize is that facts are always subject to interpretation, and interpretation is always subjective opinion. So effectively, you can't think anything is ever right or wrong, because you can't realize facts without interpreting them.
 
atheist4thecaus said:
Why do you agree with me if the opinion is neither correct nor incorrect? The point I'm trying to get you to realize is that facts are always subject to interpretation, and interpretation is always subjective opinion. So effectively, you can't think anything is ever right or wrong, because you can't realize facts without interpreting them.
Click to expand...

So am I not entitled to my own opinion? And yes, I do understand where you're coming from, but to say Snopes is a heavily biased towards the left is still nonetheless an opinion, and only a right opinion in your mind. In other people's minds, their opinions are the right one.
 
Soopairik said:
So am I not entitled to my own opinion? And yes, I do understand where you're coming from, but to say Snopes is a heavily biased towards the left is still nonetheless an opinion, and only a right opinion in your mind. In other people's minds, their opinions are the right one.
Click to expand...

You are entitled to your own opinion, but what is the basis for agreeing with my opinion, which by your definition, can't be right or wrong? To say Snopes is heavily biased towards the Left is my opinion based on my interpretation of facts. All opinions are based on interpretation of facts. Some people will disagree with me, but not all opinions are equal.
 
atheist4thecaus said:
You are entitled to your own opinion, but what is the basis for agreeing with my opinion, which by your definition, can't be right or wrong? To say Snopes is heavily biased towards the Left is my opinion based on my interpretation of facts. All opinions are based on interpretation of facts. Some people will disagree with me, but not all opinions are equal.
Click to expand...

Thanks for clearing that up. And not all opinions are equal, but in their eyes your opinion may be the inferior one.
 
atheist4thecaus said:
But one of us is actually closer to reality with our opinion. You are pretending like all opinions are equal. They aren't.
Click to expand...

Of course. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. That does not make it right. Fact checking makes it right. If there were no watchdogs on the truth then there would be none. Prove to me that snopes lies.
 
Sampson Simpson said:
And he just gave it all away and then some to pay himself and his rich buddies



So no rebuttal or argument? So you are admitting Trump had nothing to do with it?
Click to expand...


I can't find the link anymore but at one time some of the Quantitative Easing money was returned to the Treasury as was the plan. It sat in the banks until they got their assets up (through earnings) and when they were where they were supposed to be it went back to Treasury as "A loan paid back".

Cooler heads are seeing QE as a positive way to avoid a depression, especially if the QE funds are retired from the economy. The US had examples of other countries using it, so they were not pioneering. BTW, AFAIK, there is somewhere around 4 trillion still sitting around that will eventually be returned. I suspect that was part of the deal back in '08 when it was done.

OK. You can go back to Trump bashing now.
 
Carleen said:
Of course. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. That does not make it right. Fact checking makes it right. If there were no watchdogs on the truth then there would be none. Prove to me that snopes lies.
Click to expand...

"Fact-checking" is based on opinion of interpretation.
 
American said:
Let's see a businessman gets elected vs an ACORN agitator who hates big business. Who will businesses trust most? DUHHHHH :doh
Click to expand...
Meanwhile, that "businessman" is running the government like his businesses -- by racking up huge debt (the theme of this thread, by the way). A New York Times report added this week that annual budget deficits "are creeping up to $1 trillion and the national debt has topped $20 trillion." The Treasury Department "will need to borrow $441 billion in privately held debt this quarter," which is the largest sum in eight years.
 
MTAtech said:
Meanwhile, that "businessman" is running the government like his businesses -- by racking up huge debt (the theme of this thread, by the way). A New York Times report added this week that annual budget deficits "are creeping up to $1 trillion and the national debt has topped $20 trillion." The Treasury Department "will need to borrow $441 billion in privately held debt this quarter," which is the largest sum in eight years.
Click to expand...

Obama added $10T to the $10T Bush ended with. Nuff said.

us-federal-debt-by-president-political-party.jpg


2012%20US%20Deficit%20by%20president%202.preview.jpg


These two graphs demonstrate that you are at least wrong and at most making **** up.
 
I have no idea what Snopes is talking about, There is NO WAy Trump is reducing the US Debt. For that to happen there has to be a surplus and the deficit this year is going to be about a TRILLION.

The bulk of any serious DEficit reduction has to to come on the spending side. There is only so far you can go with raining taxes before it starts to inflict growth inhibiting damage to the economy.

The GOP sure isn't serious about reducing spending and we know the Democrats only want to increase it.
 
KLATTU said:
I have no idea what Snopes is talking about, There is NO WAy Trump is reducing the US Debt. For that to happen there has to be a surplus and the deficit this year is going to be about a TRILLION.

The bulk of any serious DEficit reduction has to to come on the spending side. There is only so far you can go with raining taxes before it starts to inflict growth inhibiting damage to the economy.

The GOP sure isn't serious about reducing spending and we know the Democrats only want to increase it.
Click to expand...

Neither does the OP, because they agreed ONLY that the debt decreased while his butt was in the chair, NOT that he had any hand in making it happen.
 
atheist4thecaus said:
"Fact-checking" is based on opinion of interpretation.
Click to expand...

That's not necessarily so; sometimes facts are facts and can be verified. :roll:

As for Snopes, I'd say the more familiar you are with the San Fernando Valley Folklore Society and the Mikkelsons, particularly legendary/infamous old-days Internet troll David Mikkelson, the more likely your opinion is to be informed.

I miss the good old "Heard It Through the Grapevine" days of Snopes.
 
nota bene said:
That's not necessarily so; sometimes facts are facts and can be verified. :roll:

As for Snopes, I'd say the more familiar you are with the San Fernando Valley Folklore Society and the Mikkelsons, particularly legendary/infamous old-days Internet troll David Mikkelson, the more likely your opinion is to be informed.

I miss the good old "Heard It Through the Grapevine" days of Snopes.
Click to expand...

Every fact is subject to interpretation. You cannot possibly judge a fact without interpreting it. You can roll your eyes at me all you want, but you should be rolling them at the people saying, "That's just your opinion."
 
atheist4thecaus said:
If you don't think Snopes is very leftist then you are far on the left.

UPDATE: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevl...fact-checking-the-fact-checkers/#5e506c9b227f
Click to expand...

You really need your articles before posting. The article talks about the inherent human bias that goes into fact checking as it is done today. Nothing within identifies Snopes with "leaning left", much less declaring it "far left" as you do.

This combined with your OP which you claim that Snopes agreed that Trump lowered the debt, when that is not what they said at all, are back-to-back fails. I always appreciate people that source their claims (good job), but please don't read into the statements of your sources, as that could result in (bad job).
 
upsideguy said:
You really need your articles before posting. The article talks about the inherent human bias that goes into fact checking as it is done today. Nothing within identifies Snopes with "leaning left", much less declaring it "far left" as you do.

This combined with your OP which you claim that Snopes agreed that Trump lowered the debt, when that is not what they said at all, are back-to-back fails. I always appreciate people that source their claims (good job), but please don't read into the statements of your sources, as that could result in (bad job).
Click to expand...

It talks about much more than that, but human bias is what results in the website leaning-left. Instead of telling me to read articles I read, you should think about issues on a deeper level so you stop coming to such shallow conclusions.
 
That the article was able to extrapolate "...at least one Snopes employee has actually run for political office..." into "...the hiring of strongly partisan fact checkers..." makes the entire article's premise suspect.

I personally hold a "political office". Ermhahgerd!! I must be "strongly partisan"!! Even though my "political office" is a seat on the City Council of a town of 6,000 people, and not affiliated with any political party.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom