Now the GOP trots out dirt on Hunter Biden

[downbeatplumb]

According to whom?  Not the breatharians.  Now if you can specify the objective traits which distinguish outrageous claims from those that are not, and what it means to say a claim is outrageous in terms that can be measured, I might change my mind.  Otherwise this is just you venting your spleen and has no actual impact on the claim and whether it should be accepted.  This is noncognitivism at its finest.  You don't like the claim, so you call it a nasty name.  If you've got something more than your opinion on this matter, to weigh against that of breatharians and their opinions, then produce it.




It's possible to drown in the bathtub.  That doesn't mean we should stop taking baths.  It was possible for the Allies to lose to the Axis powers.  That possibility wasn't a reason to surrender.  You'll have to do better than this.  And as noted, we have evidence from the breatharians that if you do it correctly, you not only won't die, but you will prosper.



I think that's the wrong question.  The question is whether anecdotal evidence is sufficient to resolve a question that is in dispute.  You believe that fuckery is equally represented on both sides.  I've noted that view is common among conservatives, possibly because it gives them an excuse to ignore bad acts by conservatives.  Liberals, on the other hand, feel that the right far outweighs the left in terms of fuckery, and that is based upon their experience and anecdotes.  You don't get to automatically assume that your interpretation of your experience is correct simply because it's yours.  You are at an impasse.  So something more than anecdotes and experience is required to resolve the difference between the two experiences.  If all you have is anecdotes and experience, and the ubiquity of human nature, you may believe fuckery is equivalent on both sides, but that belief rests on an extremely flimsy foundation.  You don't 'know' it to be true.  You believe it to be true, more on faith than anything.  It's nothing more than a baseless talking point.  That's why I reject it if it is only based upon anecdotal evidence.

What ass backwards logic.


So tell me genius - what magic causes all the "good people" to gravitate left and all the "bad people" to go to the right?

Is it the simple magical incantation of putting a ( D ) after your name?

No obfuscation now.

Show us the magic.

Its in the brain.

Recent 

converging studies are showing that liberals tend to have a larger and/or more active anterior cingulate cortex, or ACC — useful in detecting and judging conflict and error — and conservatives are more likely to have an enlarged , where the development and storage of emotional memories takes place.  More than one study has shown these same results, which is why I felt it was worth investigating.

So — for liberals to make a case for an idea or cause, they come armed with data, research studies, and experts. They are convinced of an idea if all the data checks out–basically they assign meaning and value to ideas that fit within the scientific method, because that’s their primary thinking style. Emotion doesn’t play as big of a role in validation. Not to say that liberals are unfeeling, but just more likely to set emotion aside when judging an idea initially, and factor it in later. Checks out scientifically = valuable. Liberals can get just as emotionally attached to an idea, but it’s usually not the primary trigger for acceptance of an idea.

Conservatives would be less likely to assign value primarily using the scientific method. Remember, their thinking style leads primarily with emotion. In order for them to find an idea valuable, it has to be meaningful for them personally. It needs to trigger empathy. Meaning, they need some kind of emotional attachment to it, such as family, or a group of individuals they are close to in some way.

https://www.discovermagazine.com/mind/your-brain-on-politics-the-cognitive-neuroscience-of-liberals-and-conservatives

So there you are the left are just better. And thats supported by the scientific evidence.