Republicans living in an evidence free world is just not true

[Person Man]

Sawant is far worse than Trump


She got an expansion Amazon planned in the city stopped cause of her idiotic socialist policies. She wants to nationalize banks and so many other industries. She also is a full on socialist instead of a Scandinavian Type which means she is anti-intellectual as well

The problem with Republican thinking in the modern day is encapsulated by the title of this thread. That people on the other side are crazy too does NOT make you not crazy. But because the depths of rightist rejection of fact is so deep, this is the only argument that can be made - consider the constant deflection to Hillary on right media. Consider that to defend your party you are comparing the President of the United States to someone sitting on a city council. Even if you win that debate, that does nothing to exonerate your party of the total disregard for objective fact is has developed in the last two decades.

"He who smelled it, dealt it!"

[Person Man]

Yes a tax she proposed got Amazon to stop expanding in Seattle.

You say that as if Amazon continuing to expand in Seattle is A. Necessarily a good thing and B. the most important thing.

A. It is
B. It is important

75% of republicans live in an evidence-free world. So do 40% of democrats.

Because bigger multinational corporations are the meaning of life .

She also supports Nationalizing Banks

And thats somehow "evidence free" because why?

Because it's objectively bad economic policy that makes everybody worse off.

Says the literal neoliberal.

Pretending that neoliberal is a slur doesn't make it wrong.

Could it be that the facts are the facts but they still don't matter because we have no interest in the benefits of committing to fact-based policy but want to pursue different objectives instead?

I could buy the argument in that there is no "war on facts", certain people hold some subjective things with more value than what could be considered by the students of the subjects the objective good.

How much is 100000 coal workers' livelihood worth against a 6 foot rise in sea level and say a 200% increase in weather-based losses and say a 10% increase in crop yields?

How much is an endangered animal worth compared to hundreds of millions of dollars in timber revenue?

What is even having fewer abortions through liberal measures compared to a new wave of mass incarceration and no fewer abortions but the sentiment of having your identity enshrined by the powers that be?

I imagine "I just don't care" is a more common and honest explanation of why you oppose good government or support bad government instead of "fake news". Sure, it's more callous but it also shifts the conversation to the real issues.

[Person Man]

Yes a tax she proposed got Amazon to stop expanding in Seattle.

You say that as if Amazon continuing to expand in Seattle is A. Necessarily a good thing and B. the most important thing.

A. It is
B. It is important

75% of republicans live in an evidence-free world. So do 40% of democrats.

Because bigger multinational corporations are the meaning of life .

She also supports Nationalizing Banks

And thats somehow "evidence free" because why?

Because it's objectively bad economic policy that makes everybody worse off.

Says the literal neoliberal.

I'm a Neoliberal, and proud of it. Neoliberalism has created the greatest and wealthiest society the world has ever seen, and we need more of it, not less.

For the rich people, yes it has. For the poor and working classes? Not at all.

Or at least for a while it did. Now it has the same inefficiencies caused by rent seeking behavior that social democracy has with unions except In neoliberalism, inefficiency is caused by the rent seeking of very large estates, not democratic institutions.