Is honest discussion possible or not.

[Nicholas_1982]

I have been scrolling through forum posts and I see a recurring theme.

Someone will lodge a complaint such as "trump has bad idea X" or "Hilary has lied about X"

Instead of having an honest conversation about that specific issue people just start deflecting. If you make a legitimate complaint about a candidate someone else will always respond "oh yeah well that other candidate is stupid too so lets not talk about anything important, lets just insult everyone"

Why does every argument go that direction?

I made a list of about 8 different ways in which Obama (who I voted for in 2008) is not a progressive and no one wanted to refute the separate points I made, people just wanted to sling mud in 12 different directions.

is their any value in that type of conversation?

 

[Correll]

SOmetimes, if the discussion is a comparison of alternatives.

Indeed, to often attacks try to claim to be only a discussion of a reasonable complaint about a candidate or an issue...

BUT THE person making the "discussion" only makes "discussions" that put one side in a bad light.

And dismisses context. Or mitigating factors. Or possible reasons. Or anything that isn't MY GOD WHAT A TERRIBLE PERSON/ISSUE!

 

[Indeependent]

It will take a week before you know who to take seriously, who to laugh at or with and who to ignore.

 

[Avatar4321]

Yes. But if you are going to lie outright you likely won't have honest people responding

 

[LoneLaugher]

Sure. What would you like to discuss?

 

[TheOldSchool]

I have been scrolling through forum posts and I see a recurring theme.

Someone will lodge a complaint such as "trump has bad idea X" or "Hilary has lied about X"

Instead of having an honest conversation about that specific issue people just start deflecting. If you make a legitimate complaint about a candidate someone else will always respond "oh yeah well that other candidate is stupid too so lets not talk about anything important, lets just insult everyone"

Why does every argument go that direction?

I made a list of about 8 different ways in which Obama (who I voted for in 2008) is not a progressive and no one wanted to refute the separate points I made, people just wanted to sling mud in 12 different directions.

is their any value in that type of conversation?

Try the clean debate zone.

 

[Nicholas_1982]

SOmetimes, if the discussion is a comparison of alternatives.

Indeed, to often attacks try to claim to be only a discussion of a reasonable complaint about a candidate or an issue...

BUT THE person making the "discussion" only makes "discussions" that put one side in a bad light.

And dismisses context. Or mitigating factors. Or possible reasons. Or anything that isn't MY GOD WHAT A TERRIBLE PERSON/ISSUE!

That's called bias towards fairness.

We can discuss 1 issue at a time. We can discuss the fallacies of one candidates policy proposals without referencing another candidate.

 

[Nicholas_1982]

Here is a good discussion for tonight. Republicans talk about a flat tax, Democrats talk about marginal tax rate increases.

The question here is that loopholes and deductions are the biggest problem, and each loophole and deduction has a lobbying group you have to fight.

So are they all blowing smoke just for the dumb voters who don't understand taxes

 

[Dekster]

I have been scrolling through forum posts and I see a recurring theme.

Someone will lodge a complaint such as "trump has bad idea X" or "Hilary has lied about X"

Instead of having an honest conversation about that specific issue people just start deflecting. If you make a legitimate complaint about a candidate someone else will always respond "oh yeah well that other candidate is stupid too so lets not talk about anything important, lets just insult everyone"

Why does every argument go that direction?

I made a list of about 8 different ways in which Obama (who I voted for in 2008) is not a progressive and no one wanted to refute the separate points I made, people just wanted to sling mud in 12 different directions.

is their any value in that type of conversation?

This site seems to have its fair share of trolly/jerky posters. They get a different value than you do in their posting I suppose. You can always try to keep it in the clean debate zone which probably will be as close as you can get to what you want, though certainly not foolproof.

 

[leftwinger]

It will take a week before you know who to take seriously, who to laugh at or with and who to ignore.

Take another look Indy, joined date is 2015. got ya! my work here is done.

 

[Two Thumbs]

put on your big boy pants to post here.

if you don't like someone reply, move onto the next.

we have a kiddie zone called the cdz. It's mostly flame threads wooses start there so they can't get smacked in return.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Try the Clean Debate Zone.

 

[Indeependent]

It will take a week before you know who to take seriously, who to laugh at or with and who to ignore.

Take another look Indy, joined date is 2015. got ya! my work here is done.

I was replying to Nicholas_1982.
Why did you think I was addressing you?

 

[g5000]

Honest discussion is only possible when both parties are willing to face uncomfortable truths and discuss real facts instead of parroting half truths and manufactured bullshit.

A very rare occurrence these days,

 

[Indeependent]

It will take a week before you know who to take seriously, who to laugh at or with and who to ignore.

Take another look Indy, joined date is 2015. got ya! my work here is done.

I was replying to Nicholas_1982.
Why did you think I was addressing you?

My Post #3 on my computer doesn't show me replying to you.

 

[Correll]

SOmetimes, if the discussion is a comparison of alternatives.

Indeed, to often attacks try to claim to be only a discussion of a reasonable complaint about a candidate or an issue...

BUT THE person making the "discussion" only makes "discussions" that put one side in a bad light.

And dismisses context. Or mitigating factors. Or possible reasons. Or anything that isn't MY GOD WHAT A TERRIBLE PERSON/ISSUE!

That's called bias towards fairness.

We can discuss 1 issue at a time. We can discuss the fallacies of one candidates policy proposals without referencing another candidate.

If every issue you happen to raise in one the GOP is weak on, or if you always try to use as a premise that assume the worst about the GOP, then

NO, it is not bias towards fairness, it's bullshit.