DiscussMormonism.com

Is fact-checking anti-Republican and should it be allowed? It threatens the very concept of continual lying!!!

If the facts do not support the Republican perspective, then raising them must be anti-Republican. Of course, if you have to rely on fantasies and lies to get into power, you don't have much of a worthwhile political perspective to begin with.

Yes it is. As things are today, it is, at least so far as the culture war goes. I think there's a reason why, in addition to the obvious.

Contrarianism to really be contrarian can't just take opposite positions, but should be epistemological. If Binger were here to argue against global warming (should he do so, because me saying that he might could mean he'd be for it; he does have EVs in addition to his diesel Lambos so you just don't know), then it wouldn't come down to so-called facts, but what three angry truckers with a long haul ahead of them say, and they say it's BS.

Vance complained during the debate that the mods weren't supposed to fact-check him. Did anyone hear that and not think, "He just complained they weren't letting him lie?"

Fact checking is anti-Republican because the truth is anti-Republican.

Some Schmo wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 03, 2024 1:14 pm

Vance complained during the debate that the mods weren't supposed to fact-check him. Did anyone hear that and not think, "He just complained they weren't letting him lie?"

Fact checking is anti-Republican because the truth is anti-Republican.

I agree.

It is sad because it does not need to be the case. It really shouldn't be the case.

Yes, Vance and the entire GOP apparatus can only function if dishonesty and rule-breaking are allowed. Trump is only a free man because so-called conservatives have shielded him from what should have been the consequences of his negligence and malfeasance.

Kishkumen wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 03, 2024 6:40 pm

It is sad because it does not need to be the case. It really shouldn't be the case.

Exactly. If one of the two major parties ran on actual conservative policies (as opposed to the stupid crap the GOP currently pretends is conservative), I'd register with that party. We need a viable conservative party. Right now, that's the Democrats.

Kishkumen wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 03, 2024 6:40 pm

Yes, Vance and the entire GOP apparatus can only function if dishonesty and rule-breaking are allowed.

And the reason for that is that GOP policies are deeply unpopular, and they know they can't win by telling everyone what they really want to do. They don't want to compete, because they can't compete. It's way easier to just damned lie about everything (if you're a depraved asshole with no conscience, i. e. a GOP pol) and pretend they're still the party of Reagan.

And since the GOP base doesn't investigate anything and would rather parrot the talking points of the liars they adore, we're stuck with a party that is a cancerous tumor killing our democracy.

Moksha wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 03, 2024 6:30 am

Is fact-checking anti-Republican and should it be allowed? It threatens the very concept of continual lying!!!

I don't know if fact-checking is anti-Republican, but it's definitely anti-Mormon and it will get you excommunicated. Just ask Nemo.

Some Schmo wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 03, 2024 6:51 pm

And the reason for that is that GOP policies are deeply unpopular, and they know they can't win by telling everyone what they really want to do. They don't want to compete, because they can't compete. It's way easier to just damned lie about everything (if you're a depraved asshole with no conscience, i. e. a GOP pol) and pretend they're still the party of Reagan.

And since the GOP base doesn't investigate anything and would rather parrot the talking points of the liars they adore, we're stuck with a party that is a cancerous tumor killing our democracy.

Project 2025 really says it all. Deeply unpopular and so Trump lies about it.

The dean of BYU's law school contributed to Project 2025. He asked that his named by removed.

BYU law school dean contributed to Project 2025 — and then later had his name removed Salt Lake Tribune

The dean of Brigham Young University’s law school, David Moore, was listed as a contributor on Project 2025 until earlier this summer, when Moore asked to have his name removed from the controversial blueprint created in the event former President Donald Trump is elected to a second term.

Dwight wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 03, 2024 7:18 pm

The dean of BYU's law school contributed to Project 2025. He asked that his named by removed.

BYU law school dean contributed to Project 2025 — and then later had his name removed Salt Lake Tribune

The dean of Brigham Young University’s law school, David Moore, was listed as a contributor on Project 2025 until earlier this summer, when Moore asked to have his name removed from the controversial blueprint created in the event former President Donald Trump is elected to a second term.

Dear God. What a weasel.