"When Did The GOP Lose Touch With Reality" by David Frum

[Terr]

@BrainGlutton

Terr, in case you haven’t actually been following this thread, if you’re trying to argue that Dems are as out of touch with reality as Pubs, you’re losing, and the goalposts have not moved. (Doesn’t mean you’re wrong, only that you’re losing.)

The goalposts that were moved in the post to which I was responding was the “for profit” motive.

[Terr]

@Euphonious_Polemic

So is the gist of your argument here that David Frum is incorrect on his criticism of the Republican party, because some proportion of the American public (presumably Democrats) hold some whacky beliefs?

Did I say that?

[Terr]

BTW, as a followup to that 2006 poll reference - it also found that MORE than 50% of Democrats were “Truthers” at the time.

More than half of Democrats believed Bush knew

*“How likely is it that people in the federal government either assisted in the 9/11 attacks or took no action to stop the attacks because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East?” the poll asked.

A full 22.6% of Democrats said it was “very likely.” Another 28.2% called it “somewhat likely.”*

---

Are you still going to claim there are more Republican “Birthers” than Democrat “Truthers”?

[PigArcher]

@Terr

BTW, as a followup to that 2006 poll reference - it also found that MORE than 50% of Democrats were “Truthers” at the time.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0411/More_than_half_of_Democrats_believed_Bush_knew.html

*“How likely is it that people in the federal government either assisted in the 9/11 attacks or took no action to stop the attacks because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East?” the poll asked.

A full 22.6% of Democrats said it was “very likely.” Another 28.2% called it “somewhat likely.”*

---

There is a massive difference between thinking something is “somewhat likely” and believing it to be true.

@Terr

Are you still going to claim there are more Republican “Birthers” than Democrat “Truthers”?

Absolutely. And more so, birtherism has no basis in reality, while Bush’s negligence WRT 9/11 is plausible.

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@sh1bu1

Conservatives always lose the war. First they lost the slave thing, then Jim Crow, then forced prayer in school, women’s rights, abortion, gays in the military, etc. Progress marches on and conservatives just try and hold it off as long as they can. It is inevitable that we will have same sex marriage and universal health care in the US, and conservatives will just delay it. Nature abhors a vacuum, and at some point no ones’ skull is thick enough to maintain the empty space within.

Sure Progressives tend to be proven right over the long term (although there are more than a few progressive ideas that are in the dustbin of history). There has to be a long term for things to work out that way.

[Terr]

@kenetic

There is a massive difference between thinking something is “somewhat likely” and believing it to be true.

Give me similar numbers for Republican “birthers” then we’ll talk.

Maybe this 'Birther' Polls: Independents Unaffected, Republicans Remain Divided | HuffPost Latest News will help. - and that’s before the “long form” was released, I think,

[PigArcher]

@Terr

Give me similar numbers for Republican “birthers” then we’ll talk.

Maybe this 'Birther' Polls: Independents Unaffected, Republicans Remain Divided | HuffPost Latest News will help. - and that’s before the “long form” was released, I think,

I suppose stuff like this seems irrelevant to you?

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@Terr

Did I say that?

I guess you’re in the wrong thread. This one started out to be about David Frum’s article about how the GOP had changed (for the worse). You seem to be hijacking it to be about how Democrats are stupid Truthers , so that offsets the Republican stupid Birthers.

Did you read Frum’s article by the way?

[Budget_Player_Cadet]

@Terr

The “belief died” when Wiener came out and said yes, I sent those pictures. I bet you if Obama came out and said he was, in fact, born in Kenya, some “beliefs” would die as well.

This. Is. The. Fucking. POINT.

Look, I’m not just trying to discredit the republican party because they are wrong on occasion. I’m criticizing their complete and utter failure to learn, or to accept facts.

It’s one thing to base your party’s economic policy on a tactic which is not really tested. But to base it on a theory which has failed again and again and again, barely even makes sense in theory, and just expect reality to mold itself to your beliefs (“Trickle-down HAS to work!”) is a good way to bankrupt a nation.

It’s one thing to court the religious as your base. It’s another to disrupt science education because you don’t “believe in” one of the most well-established fields of scientific research.

It’s one thing to claim that you’re a fan of the constitution. It’s another to, despite people repeatedly reminding you that you’re wrong and stupid, demand that the constitution’s 10th amendment ensures that the federal government is completely incapable of doing anything short of national defense.

It’s one thing to claim that tax cuts boost the economy not knowing whether they do or not. It’s another to cut them to their lowest point ever, then claim that they’re still too high when cutting them has done nothing but put money into the pockets of the very richest among us.

It’s one thing to throw doubt on the legitimacy of the president when there are questions open. It’s another to continue to deny that the president is a natural-born citizen after he releases his long-form birth certificate and there was never even good reason to doubt it to begin with!

THIS is my problem with the republican party. The moniker “Party of Ideas” should not exclude facts… but somehow it does.

There are as many Birthers out there as there are lefties who think that 2004 election was stolen from them by Diebold. Or that Bush administration was involved in 9/11 somehow.

Bullshit. Your figures show between 25% and 36% of the democratic party seriously believing that the Bush administration was involved in 9/11 or let it happen.

My figures show (from April of this year; well after he released his long form birth certificate IIRC) 45% of republicans going for it.

While 25 percent of all Americans in this new poll say Mr. Obama was born outside the U.S., 57 percent correctly said he was born in the United States. Another 18 percent said they did not know where he was born. Among Republicans, 33 percent said Mr. Obama was born in the U.S., and 22 percent said they did not know. Thirty-four percent of Tea Party supporters said the president was born in the U.S., while 21 percent said they didn’t know.

Whoops. And again, these aren’t fringe positions. You didn’t have Kerry running on “Bush planned 9/11”. You maybe had one or two politicians in the democratic party who even began to try that tack. Same with the whole 2004 Ohio controversy. Never mind that there was actually reason to investigate that shit in the first place, unlike with the birthers.

Seriously, did you read the segment of the article in question? It’s pretty well-explained what’s going on here.

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@kenetic

I suppose stuff like this seems irrelevant to you?

Not to worry. In the interests of fair play in his continued hijack, I’m sure Terr will be able to find a link to a recent story about elected Democrat state representatives causing a fuss about 9/11 being an inside job.

[Der_Trihs]

@Terr

BTW, as a followup to that 2006 poll reference - it also found that MORE than 50% of Democrats were “Truthers” at the time.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0411/More_than_half_of_Democrats_believed_Bush_knew.html

*“How likely is it that people in the federal government either assisted in the 9/11 attacks or took no action to stop the attacks because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East?” the poll asked.

A full 22.6% of Democrats said it was “very likely.” Another 28.2% called it “somewhat likely.”*

---

Are you still going to claim there are more Republican “Birthers” than Democrat “Truthers”?

Underlining mine. That drastically broadens the definition of “Truther”, which distorts the statistics. Thinking that Bush and friends did nothing in hopes there would be an incident they could capitalize on it is a different and much more rational position than the idea that there was a vast operation to blow up the towers in which no one ever talked and no one was ever caught. Thinking they did nothing fits the observed facts and is something they could reasonably have pulled off; neither of which is true of or Birthers the classic Truther conspiracy theories.

It isn’t even the same accusation; “did nothing” isn’t the same as “planned it all”. It’s the difference between claiming that Reagan didn’t do enough about AIDS, and claiming that his people created and spread it.

[Terr]

@Euphonious_Polemic

I guess you’re in the wrong thread. This one started out to be about David Frum’s article about how the GOP had changed (for the worse). You seem to be hijacking it to be about how Democrats are stupid Truthers , so that offsets the Republican stupid Birthers.

Did you read Frum’s article by the way?

I believe I already answered that question.

[Terr]

@Budget_Player_Cadet

It’s one thing to base your party’s economic policy on a tactic which is not really tested. But to base it on a theory which has failed again and again and again, barely even makes sense in theory, and just expect reality to mold itself to your beliefs (“Trickle-down HAS to work!”) is a good way to bankrupt a nation.

That quoted sentence - do you have a cite for that?

It’s one thing to court the religious as your base. It’s another to disrupt science education because you don’t “believe in” one of the most well-established fields of scientific research.

I presume you mean evolution. Is that the national Republican policy? Can you point to that plank in the Republican platform please?

It’s one thing to claim that you’re a fan of the constitution. It’s another to, despite people repeatedly reminding you that you’re wrong and stupid, demand that the constitution’s 10th amendment ensures that the federal government is completely incapable of doing anything short of national defense.

No, not “short of national defense”. And not “incapable of doing”. But yes, federal government should be limited to the enumerated powers in Article 1, Section 8. Unfortunately, that’s not the Republican policy. But I wish it was.

It’s one thing to claim that tax cuts boost the economy not knowing whether they do or not. It’s another to cut them to their lowest point ever, then claim that they’re still too high when cutting them has done nothing but put money into the pockets of the very richest among us.

I am fundamentally, in principle, against income tax. So, the lower it is, the better.

It’s one thing to throw doubt on the legitimacy of the president when there are questions open. It’s another to continue to deny that the president is a natural-born citizen after he releases his long-form birth certificate and there was never even good reason to doubt it to begin with!

Is that a plank in national Republican policy? Can you give me a cite for that?

THIS is my problem with the republican party. The moniker “Party of Ideas” should not exclude facts… but somehow it does.

Your problem is not with “the republican party”. It’s with the strawman you created and named “the republican party”.

[BrainGlutton]

@Terr

Did I say that?

In this business and around here, it’s better-bred to actually quote yourself, with post-link, if you have a point of that kind to make.

[BrainGlutton]

@Terr

I believe I already answered that question.

See previous post.

[Terr]

@Budget_Player_Cadet

My figures show (from April of this year; well after he released his long form birth certificate IIRC)

You don’t recall correctly. The long form birth certificate was released on April 27th.

[Terr]

@Der_Trihs

Underlining mine. That drastically broadens the definition of “Truther”, which distorts the statistics. Thinking that Bush and friends did nothing in hopes there would be an incident they could capitalize on it is a different and much more rational position than the idea that there was a vast operation to blow up the towers in which no one ever talked and no one was ever caught. Thinking they did nothing fits the observed facts and is something they could reasonably have pulled off; neither of which is true of or Birthers the classic Truther conspiracy theories.

Thank you for demonstrating the Truther branch of Democrat party is alive and well.

[Terr]

@BrainGlutton

In this business and around here, it’s better-bred to actually quote yourself, with post-link, if you have a point of that kind to make.

When someone posts something where he assigns to me ideas that I didn’t express I could, I guess, post a link to the list of every one of my posts in response. But it’s easier to just ask the question.

[BrainGlutton]

@Terr

Thank you for demonstrating the Truther branch of Democrat party is alive and well.

1. There is no Democrat Party.

2. There is no Truther “branch” of the Democratic Party any more than there is a Birther “branch” of the GOP (and in either case the group in question includes independents, many and unmistakable).

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@Terr

I believe I already answered that question.

So what do you think of Frum’s premise, that the Republican Party is currently on the wrong course, that there are far too many in the party who embrace an “alternate reality” that does not have a factual basis?

He gives by way of example, not just the “birthers” within the party (which include not just the fringe, but actual elected representatives of the party, and not just in the past, but THIS MONTH), but also other problematic themes that the party is currently embracing. Is he off base with all of these problems with the party that he identifies?

ETA: What do you think of this Frum quote:

Rather than workable solutions, my party is offering low taxes for the currently rich and high spending for the currently old, to be followed by who-knows-what and who-the-hell-cares. This isn’t conservatism; it’s a going-out-of-business sale for the baby-boom generation.