Trump's SCOTUS

[Martin Hash]

Vision & sound are inscrutable things, which lead to illusions in images & words; I’m here to clarify misleading interpretations.

Morals are subjective; you can compromise.
Principles are objective; you must enforce them.

We can fudge the morals but your principles better match my principles.

In that case, my initial argument that we should view being principled as a strength rather than a weakness to be abandoned cynically was, as far as I can tell, right in line with your definitions.

Trump certainly shares my principles, which by syllogism, shares yours.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

Vision & sound are inscrutable things, which lead to illusions in images & words; I’m here to clarify misleading interpretations.

Morals are subjective; you can compromise.
Principles are objective; you must enforce them.

We can fudge the morals but your principles better match my principles.

In that case, my initial argument that we should view being principled as a strength rather than a weakness to be abandoned cynically was, as far as I can tell, right in line with your definitions.

Only if the principles are enforced, which they aren't.

I think an example will be useful.

If I remember correctly, it was Schumer that decided, when the Dems had power, that destroying the filibuster so he could use raw force to get lower circuit judges approved was a good idea, and a strong move.

How's that working out?

Cynicism and reliance on brute strength carry an opportunity cost just as surely as principles do. Just ask Chuck.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

Vision & sound are inscrutable things, which lead to illusions in images & words; I’m here to clarify misleading interpretations.

Morals are subjective; you can compromise.
Principles are objective; you must enforce them.

We can fudge the morals but your principles better match my principles.

In that case, my initial argument that we should view being principled as a strength rather than a weakness to be abandoned cynically was, as far as I can tell, right in line with your definitions.

Trump certainly shares my principles, which by syllogism, shares yours.

I'm sure you think he does.

[Martin Hash]

I'm sure you think he does.

Dude, you just watched me derive it logically from your words.

You don't appear to like Trump's morals though.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

I'm sure you think he does.

Dude, you just watched me derive it logically from your words.

You don't appear to like Trump's morals though.

I watched you jump from a shared definition of principles to an assumption about Trump that doesn't track, even if we both prize liberty, and I accept your freedom and opportunity definition of liberty.

[Martin Hash]

I'm sure you think he does.

Dude, you just watched me derive it logically from your words.

You don't appear to like Trump's morals though.

I watched you jump from a shared definition of principles to an assumption about Trump that doesn't track, even if we both prize liberty, and I accept your freedom and opportunity definition of liberty.

Do you have some special insight or source of news I'm unaware of? Peace in the Middle East; highest Black support; outlaw Critical Race Theory; Conservative SCOTUS; no new wars; etc. I'm not sure how you compare any contender's "principles" to that but you can try? I'm listening...

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

Dude, you just watched me derive it logically from your words.

You don't appear to like Trump's morals though.

I watched you jump from a shared definition of principles to an assumption about Trump that doesn't track, even if we both prize liberty, and I accept your freedom and opportunity definition of liberty.

Do you have some special insight or source of news I'm unaware of? Peace in the Middle East; highest Black support; outlaw Critical Race Theory; Conservative SCOTUS; no new wars; etc. I'm not sure how you compare any contender's "principles" to that but you can try? I'm listening...

I'll (mostly) stick just to the 'opportunity' part of liberty.

Trump inherited about 7 years of steady growth but, instead of using his first 3 years to build economic runway, he directed the fed to keep everything as hot as possible since his approval was tied to economic growth. This was short sighted and put his political needs above our economic health, forcing us to play with untested and potentially destructive tools like negative interest rates and what amounts to a debt funded UBI since we haven't got the runway we need to use less extreme measures.

Add to that the fact that he didn't bother to build any credibility with a broader segment of the American populace, so he was unable to convince anyone that COVID was less a threat than other sources were suggesting. Because of his notorious tendency to exaggerate, few listened to him, and business started slowing down before any of the more restrictive lock down measures were put in place.

This has created a precarious situation that could potentially damage opportunity, and thus liberty. It might work out, and I hope it does, but it won't have much to do with Trump's principles.

I am sure there is a way to frame all of this as someone else's fault, as Trump always does, but I am not exactly thrilled with his constant buck-passing either, since duty and accepting responsibility are also principles I value that Trump doesn't seem to.

[Martin Hash]

Dude, that's a lot of mind-reading & predicting the future. I stated actual facts that have occurred that are liberty-centric. So, once again: peace in the Middle East, highest Black support, no wars, SCOTUS, Critical Race theory... My god, man, that may be the most successful First term for liberty of all time. Who ya got to compete with that?

You don't like the guy's morals, I get it. I don't have any nor believe in any, so it's nothing to me.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

Dude, that's a lot of mind-reading & predicting the future. I stated actual facts that have occurred that are liberty-centric. So, once again: peace in the Middle East, highest Black support, no wars, SCOTUS, Critical Race theory... My god, man, that may be the most successful First term for liberty of all time. Who ya got to compete with that?

You don't like the guy's morals, I get it. I don't have any nor believe in any, so it's nothing to me.

I described actual things that actually happened, and are currently happening, and propose that they represent a real danger to liberty.

Most of the things you referenced have only a tenuous connection to liberty, at best.

[Martin Hash]

Dude, that's a lot of mind-reading & predicting the future. I stated actual facts that have occurred that are liberty-centric. So, once again: peace in the Middle East, highest Black support, no wars, SCOTUS, Critical Race theory... My god, man, that may be the most successful First term for liberty of all time. Who ya got to compete with that?

You don't like the guy's morals, I get it. I don't have any nor believe in any, so it's nothing to me.

I described actual things that actually happened, and are currently happening, and propose that they represent a real danger to liberty.

Most of the things you referenced have only a tenuous connection to liberty, at best.

How I can I debate a guy who thinks SCOTUS is not the ultimate in liberty gamesmanship? Or somebody who doesn't think Blacks are intelligent enough to know who's going to give them the liberty to solve their own problems? Or doesn't see the EXTREME danger of Critical Race Theory? Or thinks forever wars are fine? Dude, really, we're done here.