President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

How about we just stipulate they are both wrong?

 

Of the two, only one is lecturing the other one about experts.

 

Poor use of language by me. Should say "Trump's defenses in the Mueller investigation."

 

There is a lot of confusion about what does and does not constitute proper deference to expertise.

Trump hiring people without science degrees for science positions is stupid because it is highly unlikely that the non-degree holders know as much as educated experts in the hard sciences.

However, if Trump Appointee A wants to debate Stephen Hawking and Trump Appointee A challenges the merits of Hawking's position on the space-time continuum, the proper response is not, "I'm right because this is my job."

If Stephen Hawking is right, Stephen Hawking is right because he's right, not because he's Stephen Hawking.

 

I don't care. The whataboutism isn't a defense for YF, just as his use of whataboutism isn't a valid defense of President Trump.

But please, continue pissing all over the thread with your hatred of typefitter. It really advances the discussion.

 

I don't "hate" typefitter.

I think he's a complete clown show, though.

 

Suddenly, the Russians have more people to help look for Hillary's emails. I don't think we have a winter games topic yet.

 

This is very, very debatable. One could easily make the case that the "non-degree holders" bring differing (and invaluable) perspectives to matters that aren't nearly as science-y as is generally thought.

 

Strange of the IOC to come down on such a swell source of bribes.

 

But you get my gist.

If the Twitterer is right and the Pulitzer Prize winner is wrong, I don't understand how being a Pulitzer Prize winner makes the Pulitzer Prize winner right, nonetheless.

 

Yes, we're on the same wavelength here ...

 

Wow. That's a fairly significant development.*

*Understatement.