# If a poster is wrong more than half the time, would you take them seriously? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [September 7, 2013, 9:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238 "2013-09-07T09:31:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 13
**Author:** ![MaxTheVool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9fc29f/32.png) [@MaxTheVool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MaxTheVool)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2013, 5:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/241 "2013-09-14T05:40:34Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > The intellectually and morally most-right position is, in fact, most often held by the most thoughtful and broadest-informed. Positions held by the more ignorant and the more hateful are, in fact, most likely to be the most wrong. Agreed? Uhh, sure. Obviously I think that the positions of the left are, in general, more right than the positions of the right. That’s why I subscribe to those positions. I’m certainly NOT saying “well, gee, both sides are just about equally right in general, yada yada yada”. However, as long as you’re not arrogant enough to think that you are right about EVERYTHING then there’s still benefit to having a diversity of opinions being supported by intelligent and well meaning people. Furthermore, the SDMB would just be more FUN if there were more conservatives, because arguments which are 95% vs 5% are just unsatisfying. Arguing with Bricker is WAY more fun that sitting around patting each other on the back because we’re just SO RIGHT about gay marriage. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2013, 6:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/242 "2013-09-14T06:54:58Z")
'Struth. In much the same way, although atheists have a fairly hefty predominance here, it is still very healthy for the boards to have a number of educated, well-spoken, highly intelligent religious people. It’s a meaningful counterbalance to the occasional embarrassing drive-by hit-and-run proselytizers. We can learn something from the former. (And never let it be said that “No one ever changes their minds because of what we debate here.” Sometimes, we do!) ---
**Author:** ![Bridget\_Burke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7cd45c/32.png) [@Bridget\_Burke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bridget_Burke)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2013, 7:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/243 "2013-09-14T07:12:29Z")
> [@MaxTheVool](#): > > Uhh, sure. Obviously I think that the positions of the left are, in general, more right than the positions of the right. That’s why I subscribe to those positions. I’m certainly NOT saying “well, gee, both sides are just about equally right in general, yada yada yada”. However, as long as you’re not arrogant enough to think that you are right about EVERYTHING then there’s still benefit to having a diversity of opinions being supported by intelligent and well meaning people. > > Furthermore, the SDMB would just be more FUN if there were more conservatives, because arguments which are 95% vs 5% are just unsatisfying. Arguing with Bricker is WAY more fun that sitting around patting each other on the back because we’re just SO RIGHT about gay marriage. Well, find those intelligent Conservatives & invite them to participate. While you’re at it, find a dodo & a passenger pigeon. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2013, 7:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/244 "2013-09-14T07:20:33Z")
> [@MaxTheVool](#): > > > [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > > > Or, we can say that the shortage of respectable arguments against us means we’re simply _right_ > > About EVERYTHING? Pretty much, yes. Not because _we’re_ awesome, but because the Right has become so extreme and detached from reality. They are wrong nearly by definition at this point; the Right’s irrationality and willful denial of reality makes it nearly impossible for them to be correct on any issue save by sheer luck. The American Right is a very narrow, very extreme, and very crazy part of the political spectrum; while the so-called “Left” is both mostly saner and constituents pretty much the entirely of the modern political spectrum. In practice, what Americans call “the Left” is the majority of humanity; everyone who doesn’t fit into the extremely narrow cubbyhole of American conservatism. ((The “Left”, _aka_ “Everything Else”)…(Right)) ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2013, 7:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/245 "2013-09-14T07:38:34Z")
Its an aberration of our time, and this too will pass. Some people are just inherently conservative, they mistrust change. I can entirely understand a conservatism that accepts change as necessary and valuable, but only insists on prudence and care. Nothing wrong with that, except for those rare circumstances when what is right is so clearly right. The Republican Party, as it stands today, is not conservative, which is sensible, but reactionary, which is futile and self-destructive. But whether it is the Republican Party or not, conservative people will coalesce into groups, such is the nature. Not even bad shit lasts forever. ---
**Author:** ![Lynn\_Bodoni](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e47c2d/32.png) [@Lynn\_Bodoni](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lynn_Bodoni)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2013, 11:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/246 "2013-09-14T11:51:05Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Where it really gets useful is when someone is wrong 99.9% of the time. You just go with the opposite of what he says, and can have a very high confidence of being right! We really need to find someone like that! Ask him what Wall Street investments are going to lose the most money… If you can find a critic with tastes almost exactly the opposite of your own, this is useful, too. If the critic loves a particular movie, you know to avoid the movie. ---
**Author:** ![Truman\_Burbank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ecc23a/32.png) [@Truman\_Burbank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Truman_Burbank)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2013, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/247 "2013-09-14T16:21:05Z")
Hey, **Adaher,** seen any good movies lately? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2013, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/248 "2013-09-14T16:37:06Z")
He can’t answer, in a sleeping bag in front of Gamestop waiting for GTA V. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2013, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/249 "2013-09-14T21:59:07Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Its an aberration of our time, and this too will pass. Some people are just inherently conservative, they mistrust change. I can entirely understand a conservatism that accepts change as necessary and valuable, but only insists on prudence and care. Recall that we didn’t really get Obamacare: the public option was dropped. What we got was what Romney passed as Governor of Massachusetts: Romneycare. Modern conservatives had no problem with it in 2008 when Romney made his first run for President. They had no problem with it in the early 1990s _when the freaking Heritage Foundation proposed it_. And yet today, the Affordable Care Act -one of the most conceptually sound policy initiates every passed by Congress- has become the enemy of all that is good among the right wingers. They are even eager to put the US into budgetary default if they can’t get their way. This 180 degree turnaround is simply nuts - evidence of a really bizarre psychology. Where are the sane Republicans? ETA1: > [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > Recall that if this board were magically transported to continental Europe or Japan, that I would be on the conservative end of the partisan divide… FTR, this might be a slight exaggeration. I think I would be centrist. I could fully imagine voting for a center right party anywhere in Europe under certain circumstances though. ETA2: Nate the Neo Conservative [Tom the Dancing Bug: Nate - Oil Spill - Boing Boing](http://boingboing.net/2010/05/19/tom-the-dancing-bug-3.html) [TOON: Tom The Dancing Bug - Nate The Neoconservative Hired As Columnist By New York Paper - Democratic Underground](http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2768734) ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/250 "2013-09-15T04:35:21Z")
> [@MaxTheVool](#): > > However, as long as you’re not arrogant enough to think that you are right about EVERYTHING then there’s still benefit to having a diversity of opinions being supported by intelligent and well meaning people. Ok, let’s see what sort of thinkers Republican activists prefer. [ConservativeHome.com](http://ConservativeHome.com) and YouGuv selected 1,152 activists and asked them to choose their top 3 favorite pundits. (Unsurprisingly Nobel Laurettes Krugman, Stiglitz and Gore were not among them). Here are the top 10 crazies: ``` Rush Limbaugh: 41% Glenn Beck: 33% Charles Krauthammer: 29% Bill O'Reilly: 24% Sean Hannity: 21% Newt Gingrich: 16% Michelle Malkin: 16% Mike Huckabee: 13% Ann Coulter: 13% George Will: 13% ``` At the bottom of the list we have climate science denier George Will. At the top of the list we have conspiracy theorist Rush Limbaugh who recently posited that Obama planned the Syrian gas attacks himself. The only interesting name is Iraq War advocate Charles Krauthammer who like most conservative pundits predicted a Romney victory in the face of evidence to the contrary. None of his base holds it against him though: in fact they like being misled. [http://conhomeusa.typepad.com/survey/2010/12/the-republican-grassroots-ten-favorite-pundits.html](http://conhomeusa.typepad.com/survey/2010/12/the-republican-grassroots-ten-favorite-pundits.html) ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 5:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/251 "2013-09-15T05:09:32Z")
When did Charles Krauthammer go wack? I used to read his opinion columns in Time magazine…um…thirty years ago or more…and he seemed sane and sensible. I agreed with several of them. Did he just see the dollar signs behind Rush Limbaugh and decide to cash in? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/252 "2013-09-15T16:42:38Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > When did Charles Krauthammer go wack? I used to read his opinion columns in Time magazine…um…thirty years ago or more…and he seemed sane and sensible. I agreed with several of them. Did he just see the dollar signs behind Rush Limbaugh and decide to cash in? I think it was ever since Kosovo, he predicted that the intervention of Clinton would lead to endless warfare in the region, then he was a cheerleader for the Iraq invasion and predicted a nice US friendly democracy to come in a few months from Iraq just before the invasion. If I was as wrong as that, I would had been fired from my job a long time ago, but pundits are in a different universe it seems. ---
**Author:** ![Wendell\_Wagner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/8491ac/32.png) [@Wendell\_Wagner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wendell_Wagner)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/253 "2013-09-15T16:55:36Z")
There’s a passage in _The Signal and the Noise: Why Most Predictions Fail - but Some Don’t_ by Nate Silver, in which he shows that the record for predictions of TV political pundits is terrible. The real problem is that they aren’t hired for their abilities to predict future events. They’re hired because people like to watch supposed experts who say things that confirm their own opinions, no matter how terrible their predictions are. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/254 "2013-09-15T17:13:49Z")
Yep, I agree, “supposed” experts. Most of the media out there are giving us false equivalency by not mentioning that in an effort to be fair they are not ever reporting what side has the experts and what side has the McExperts. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/255 "2013-09-15T19:08:32Z")
In other words, don’t take seriously anything you see on television. Buy or visit a newspaper or news magazine; read a book. Some _bona fide_ experts blog: read those who are willing to mark their beliefs to market. > [@GIGObuster](#): > > I think it was ever since Kosovo, he predicted that the intervention of Clinton would lead to endless warfare in the region, then he was a cheerleader for the Iraq invasion and predicted a nice US friendly democracy to come in a few months from Iraq just before the invasion. > > If I was as wrong as that, I would had been fired from my job a long time ago, but pundits are in a different universe it seems. Recall that Krauthammer is the sanest person on the list. Since we’re on a new page, I’ll list the top 10 modern conservative pundits again: Rush Limbaugh: 41% Glenn Beck: 33% Charles Krauthammer: 29% Bill O’Reilly: 24% Sean Hannity: 21% Newt Gingrich: 16% Michelle Malkin: 16% Mike Huckabee: 13% Ann Coulter: 13% George Will: 13% Note that the David Brooks and Gergens of the world didn’t make the cut, never mind any actual experts. Note that Glenn Beck is listed as #2. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2013, 5:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/256 "2013-09-17T05:06:31Z")
More evidence of Republican lunacy: Pew polled the public with a fairly loaded question: Should Congress try to make the Affordable Care Act work as well as possible or should they do what they can to make it fail? Now you would think that few respondents would root for failure, and you would think correct: only 23% of Americans want Congress to work hard for failure. But among self identified Tea Party supporters, [a full 64% want Congress to work to make the program fail](http://www.people-press.org/2013/09/16/as-health-care-law-proceeds-opposition-and-uncertainty-persist/). They are all for legislative sabotage. The problem here is that thanks to gerrymandering et al, a majority of Congressional Republicans fear losing their seats during a _primary_ rather than during the general election. And the typical Republican primary voter is nuts. So it’s no wonder that the Republican Congress devotes its main attention to obstructionism, destroying the economy and threats to default on the nation’s bills. Where are the moderate Republicans that will stand up for textbook economics and tough minded deal making? _::crickets::_ h/t [Kevin Drum](http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/09/tea-party-really-really-really-wants-sabotage-obamacare). ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2013, 5:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/257 "2013-09-19T05:15:50Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > [Directed at adaher] Did you ever stop to think that maybe the sources of info you are using is partly why you are wrong all the time? Isn’t there any shame in constantly being made to look like a drooling moron. > > You’ve simply got to develop some semblance of critical thinking skills. There really does exist a modern conservative nut-bubble. The latest comes from a [National Review report on a big Republican House pow-wow](http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/09/today-in-conservative-obamacare-self-delusion.html): they quote Jim Jordan, former Chairman of the Republican Study Group, who thinks the conservatives have momentum on their side and that Warren Buffett has come out against Obamacare. Of course that was baloney, and Buffett said as much to the Omaha World-Herald. Jordan had just picked up the right wing media taking a Buffett quote from 2010, and pretending that his criticism applied to Obamacare 2013, as opposed to the American health care system that existed before it. I swear half of the conservative information purveyors are grifters and the other half are just making up stuff that they know their audience is desperate to hear. Tough minded people don’t read such crap, except for entertainment or anthropological purposes. But talk to a modern conservative and they say that these are the _only_ sorts of media they trust, despite those sources _demonstrable_ unreliability. It’s really remarkable that we’re having conversations like this. I’m a regular reader of Bloomberg, The Economist Magazine, the Financial Times, the New York Times, and Science magazine. These are establishment publications. And yet I am correctly thought to be on the far left of the American political spectrum. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2013, 10:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/258 "2013-09-19T10:38:12Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > There really does exist a modern conservative nut-bubble. The latest comes from a [National Review report on a big Republican House pow-wow](http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/09/today-in-conservative-obamacare-self-delusion.html): they quote Jim Jordan, former Chairman of the Republican Study Group, who thinks the conservatives have momentum on their side and that Warren Buffett has come out against Obamacare. > > Of course that was baloney, and Buffett said as much to the Omaha World-Herald. Jordan had just picked up the right wing media taking a Buffett quote from 2010, and pretending that his criticism applied to Obamacare 2013, as opposed to the American health care system that existed before it. > > I swear half of the conservative information purveyors are grifters and the other half are just making up stuff that they know their audience is desperate to hear. Tough minded people don’t read such crap, except for entertainment or anthropological purposes. But talk to a modern conservative and they say that these are the _only_ sorts of media they trust, despite those sources _demonstrable_ unreliability. > It’s really remarkable that we’re having conversations like this. I’m a regular reader of Bloomberg, The Economist Magazine, the Financial Times, the New York Times, and Science magazine. These are establishment publications. And yet I am correctly thought to be on the far left of the American political spectrum. It is really quite sad that is has become a functional position to assume that whenever a conservative makes an assertion, it is probably factually incorrect, grossly misleading, or simply a lie. From politicians to pundits to individual voters, this is true. A big part of it is that there is no corrective process in their information system, and no concern on any of their parts to get one. Even their think tanks have fundamentally changed such that there is now a clear “wonk gap”. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2013, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/259 "2013-09-19T20:53:18Z")
Right wing hate radio is still demanding a full investigation of Benghazi! These guys do not live in the real world! ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [September 21, 2013, 4:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238/260 "2013-09-21T04:26:32Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > There really does exist a modern conservative nut-bubble. The latest comes from a [National Review report on a big Republican House pow-wow](http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/09/today-in-conservative-obamacare-self-delusion.html): they quote Jim Jordan, former Chairman of the Republican Study Group, who thinks the conservatives have momentum on their side and that Warren Buffett has come out against Obamacare. > > Of course that was baloney, and Buffett said as much to the Omaha World-Herald. Now it’s not difficult to show errors in the mainstream media (eg the New York Times) or the liberal media (eg The Nation). Just check the corrections page. What distinguishes men of insufficient character is their behavior after their errors are pointed out. Sometimes modern conservatives double down: [zombie](http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2011/05/zombie-lie/) [lies](http://www.balloon-juice.com/2009/11/10/zombie-lies/) are one of their specialties after all. But sometimes they just pile on more distortion. [Kevin Drum](http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/09/yet-another-conservative-urban-legend-takes-root): [QUOTE=Kevin Drum] Yesterday I noticed an item reporting that Warren Buffett thought Obamacare should be scrapped. It took about ten seconds of googling to figure out that (a) Buffett’s statement was made three years ago, and (b) he was lobbying for a better bill, not for health care reform to be abandoned. In fact, he specifically said that given a choice between the status quo and the bill wending its way through Congress, he’d take the bill. I considered writing a post about this, but the source seemed to be pretty obscure and nutballish, and anyway, my big toenail needed clipping. So I didn’t bother. That might have been a mistake. It turns out that this is an object lesson in how eager conservatives are to pick up even on things that are so plainly wrong they’d embarrass a five-year-old. [Jon Chait does the honors](http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/09/today-in-conservative-obamacare-self-delusion.html): ``` The quote was picked up by Jeffrey H. Anderson of the Weekly Standard — “You know things are bad for President Obama when even Warren Buffett has soured on Obamacare and says that ‘we need something else’” — and ricocheted around the conservative-news world....In fact, the Buffett quote came from comments he made in 2010, when the health-care law was being cobbled together in Congress. His denunciation of “what we have right now” refers to the pre-Obamacare status quo. ....Anderson hilariously issued an “update” to his completely false item, in which he notes: “It appears that Buffett made his anti-Obamacare comments in 2010, thereby showing that he, like most of the American people, has opposed Obamacare since even before it was passed.” ``` [/QUOTE] Um no Jeff: a routine google shows Buffett is still on board with Obamacare and furthermore he always was. Your correction is laughably misleading. But who is being scammed? His readers? Their personalities are far too weak to handle the facts: otherwise JH Anderson wouldn’t have a job. On this board I’ve defended modern conservatives many times: they are not evil and they are not stupid. They simply lack character. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238.md?page=12) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-a-poster-is-wrong-more-than-half-the-time-would-you-take-them-seriously/668238.md?page=14)