Election 2020 Election 2020: It's (almost) over! (maybe...possibly...ahh who are we kidding, it's 2020!)
- Thread starter Emperor Tippy
- Start date
Lord Sovereign
The resident Britbong
So...wide ranging experience and ability with mathematics, models and electrics? I can see some of those being relevant to his claims. Sorry, mate, my sister did engineering at University so I know how much complicated shit is wrapped up in that field.
I see people talking about Trump running in 2024 if he doesn't pull off 2020.
Here's two people I'd rather run:
Mike Pence. Trump platform without Trump personality. Smart man. Good with words.
Ted Cruz. I used to hate Ted. Then again, he wasn't always rocking that beard! Jokes obviously, but he looks like a normal dude instead of a creep with that beard. The real reason I like him is that he's become an awesome attack dog. He's smart and sharp, and a talented politician that can get a lot done.
I'd vote for either one of them. I'd also consider Rand Paul.
Here's two people I'd rather run:
Mike Pence. Trump platform without Trump personality. Smart man. Good with words.
Ted Cruz. I used to hate Ted. Then again, he wasn't always rocking that beard! Jokes obviously, but he looks like a normal dude instead of a creep with that beard. The real reason I like him is that he's become an awesome attack dog. He's smart and sharp, and a talented politician that can get a lot done.
I'd vote for either one of them. I'd also consider Rand Paul.
Arch Dornan
Oh, lovely. They've sent me a mo-ron.
What does being an anti vaxxer has to do with being wrong in math?
Will it be the same if he follows a religious belief atheists sneer at or if he believes in superstitions?
Will it be the same if he follows a religious belief atheists sneer at or if he believes in superstitions?
Nothing, it's a strawman.
Isn't it a red herring? Maybe ad hominem?
A straw man would be changing his argument so they can argue against something they never argued.
A red herring is meant to distract. He is trying throw you off talking about his math by mentioning he's anti-vaxx.
As hominem is a personal attack used to dismiss the argument.
Guys, if you stop responding to trolls like random boy, they will go away. Stop feeding them.
Ted Cruz needed to lose that primary.
I'm not saying this to be mean but to be honest, before that primary loss he was arrogant, he wasn't a team player and he would do things that fucked people over. The loss taught him humility and taught him how to be a team player, he came out of it a stronger better person I suppose there is a lesson in that.
LOL! Political science is completely irrelevant here. But yeah, tell me more how irrelevant a PhD in Engineering is to math
There's no math involved in electrical engineering!LOL! Political science is completely irrelevant here. But yeah, tell me more how irrelevant a PhD in Engineering is to math
You are absolutely correct.
I've become a fan of Cruz over the summer, watching him grill people over the riots. He's a vicious attack dog, in addition to being extremely articulate.
You mean red herring, or an ad hominem. A strawman is something else entirely.
EDIT: Looks like Roci beat me to it.
...good point. Sorry, the caffeine hasn't kicked in yet.
Arch Dornan
Oh, lovely. They've sent me a mo-ron.
He learned from the best. Whether that holds we shall see. Can't say the same for Jeb. He just vanished.
To expand on this further for the benefit of DarthOne and others that are less in the know about this stuff, here are a couple of illustrative examples:
Person A: I believe illegal immigration is not beneficial to our country and should be dealt with.
Potential responses:
1) Person B: Really? Well, here are 10 reasons why white supremacy is terrible.
That was a strawman. It's a bad argument because person A never said anything about white supremacy. Person B just assumed that person A wants illegal immigration gone because he's a white supremacist, so he attacked him on that point - that he never made. There could be a million reasons for curtailing illegal immigration that even have nothing to do with race at all.
2) Person B: Really, Person A? Aren't you an anti-vaxxer? Clearly you're an idiot, so why should we listen to your opinion on anything?
That was an ad hominem attack. Person B didn't refute person A's point, rather, he attacked his character directly. Regardless of any other correct or incorrect opinions person A has, his argument should stand on its own merit. Other arguments made on other topics at other times do not influence any argument made in the present. Even if person A is genuinely stupid, a broken clock is right twice a day, and calling his character into question is not evidence of anything.
3) Person B: Well, the immigration certainly benefits the lives of those immigrants, so we should let them in.
That was a red herring. It's a bad argument because it has nothing to do with person A's argument, that illegal immigration is not beneficial to the country. It goes on an unrelated tangent entirely, maybe even one that can genuinely be examined later, but that did not do anything to refute person A's point. Even if immigrants do benefit from the immigration, their arrival could still be bad for the country. It's an argument that distracts from person A's point in the hope that he forgets about it, rather than refute it directly.
Hope that helps.
Tyzuris
Primarch to your glory& the glory of him on Earth!
Arch Dornan
Oh, lovely. They've sent me a mo-ron.
Why was Jeb paired with a guacamole?
History Learner
Well-known member
2024 for me would be Kris Kobach, personally.
I don't know much about him (not being American), but I was impressed by the way he confronted Jack Dorsey in that hearing.
I'm an engineering student doesn't give me any qualification to talk about statistics and doesn't give him any.LOL! Political science is completely irrelevant here. But yeah, tell me more how irrelevant a PhD in Engineering is to math