Woah! You're never going to believe this, but my opponents' beliefs are also unfounded, arising from their inability to perceive self-serving biases, and in general, their ignorance.

I wonder what else we have in common?

▲

datsci_est_2015 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

What’s the implication here? Trump actually isn’t corrupt? Or Biden was actually secretly as corrupt as Trump is?

Or more generally, the current state of affairs is somehow justifiable?

▲

ozozozd 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

As long as Biden <or insert new candidate> isn’t squeaky clean, no one on the other side can be blamed with any degree of corruption.

In other words: “I don’t have to do the right thing until everyone else does the right thing.”

do - it’s ok for me to be corrupt - because there is at least one person that’s also corrupt while(len(corrupt) != 0)

In short, they are ok with corruption.

▲

paisawalla an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

The implication is that even if I might agree with you, we ought not be subjecting each other to incoherent rants in lieu of substantive arguments. Just don't say anything, if the only thing you have to say is They Watch Fox News.

Even if you're inclined to believe the conclusions, this should recognizably be a silly rant and I don't want to live in a world where we justify sloppy arguments if we agree with the conclusions. If it triggers your defenses to the point where you can't see that this is a poor rant, it could be instructive to copy/paste it into an LLM and ask for an analysis or some counterarguments.

> Trump actually isn’t corrupt? Or Biden was actually secretly as corrupt as Trump is?

Incredible to me that you could think this is anywhere implied. Maybe you understand something better than I do, but I submit that it's brainrot to think my comment was somehow "Trump is not corrupt and/or Biden is equally corrupt".

However, the question of whose corruption rises to the level where a person is morally suspect if they don't speak out, is one that certainly cuts conveniently, isn't it?

	▲	bluefirebrand 10 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> Maybe you understand something better than I do, but I submit that it's brainrot to think my comment was somehow "Trump is not corrupt and/or Biden is equally corrupt". I don't really think you realize how that initial post comes across, because I'm re-reading your previous and struggling to come up with any other interpretation besides "both sides are bad". If you are intending to say something different than that, maybe try stating it directly rather than sarcastically

▲

vannevar 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

>I wonder what else we have in common?

Well, obviously not an appreciation for the distinction between evidence and opinion. The fact is that there is clear, uncontroverted evidence that Donald Trump has profited directly from his presidency, and no clear evidence that Joe Biden did. Not everything is symmetrical in politics, and it's not always "both sides."

▲

lesuorac 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Aren't the beliefs founded though?

There are immigrants who commit crimes. Sure, it's not _every_ Mexican is a rapist and we're probably talking about basis points of basis points here. But it's a foundation.

Hunter Biden did get money from people who wanted access to Joe Biden. Sure, Joe didn't actually help them out. But it's a foundation.

The problem isn't the unfoundedness it's that it's extrapolated beyond what the foundation supports.