Comments on: Did the Oz/Fetterman debate change any minds?

By: biteme

biteme — Fri, 28 Oct 2022 06:24:03 +0000

Half of PA’s ballots were already cast prior to the debate.

Early voting.

Its an abomination.

By: Banned Lizard

Banned Lizard — Thu, 27 Oct 2022 23:50:44 +0000

Will any of Pennsylvania’s dead (including the honored ones) switch their votes?
Not a chance!

By: Art Deco

Art Deco — Thu, 27 Oct 2022 16:06:52 +0000

Distinction without much difference.

Lindsay Graham has a starboard voting record, has no interest in participating in the Democratic Party’s ludicrous and vicious publicity stunts, but is wrong on certain issues. Susan Collins disagrees on a lot of policy questions, but disagrees with the opposition as well; she isn’t vain or exhibitionistic, isn’t trying to sabotage other Republicans, and generally does not give succor to the Democrats’ worst instincts (her vote on the 2d shampeachment excepted).

Lisa Murkowski is almost as much a problem for party whips as Collins, but adds some unsightly frills, such as her recent efforts to promote the election of a Democrat to the House and her hostility to Judge Kavanaugh. Unlike Susan Collins, there are ready alternatives to this woman in Alaska.

There are ready alternatives to Romney and McConnell as well. Romney does as much damage as he can manage. McConnell is a distillation of all that is wrong with the Republican Party on Capitol Hill.

There is no point in attacking Graham or Collins. Unloading Romney and Murkowski will be beneficial. Unloading McConnell tres beneficial.

By: BrooklynBoy

BrooklynBoy — Thu, 27 Oct 2022 15:59:29 +0000

I think loyal Democrats will pull the lever for Fetterman because it is a win/win situation for them. If he wins, Fetterman will vote exactly as his wife tells him (like Biden is controlled by Dr. Jill) and if he can no longer function he can resign and the Democratic Governor will appoint another Democrat.

By: Leland

Leland — Thu, 27 Oct 2022 11:06:40 +0000

Huxley, it likely didn’t flip votes. +1 to -1, but it likely moved votes like +1 to 0 or 0 to -1. I think many people are focused on flipping, which I agree isn’t that many. But decided or moved votes, I think there is many more. I see the error in the previous post was putting some of the +1 to 0 in the not as many. +1 being for Fetterman, since it the discussion is mostly about him.

It is sort of like the rainy Election Day discussions, which party’s voters will stay home because of weather. Weather doesn’t flip votes, but it will affect outcome.

By: Richard Aubrey

Richard Aubrey — Thu, 27 Oct 2022 10:49:11 +0000

Few of us know all we need to know, or should know, about every candidate we’ll see on the ballot.
But a person running as, say, a democrat can be presumed to be okay with the democrats’ world view, objectives, and tactics. If the voter likes those, he may well vote for the candidate as having been, in a sense, vetted. He’s okay. He believes all the stuff the voter believes, by virtue of being a democrat.
A republican may choose to vote against based on the same argument; the guy likes the democrats’ …..stuff. Can’t hardly vote for that.

May we presume any politician has to hold his nose about some things, which ever party he’s in? Just that it would be worse with the other.

Is that a proper way to choose one’s vote in the absence of anything else?

By: Skip

Skip — Thu, 27 Oct 2022 09:41:55 +0000

Aggie I agree with you, only proof will be Fetterman wins its the Democrat machine voters or fraud wins out

By: Barry Meislin

Barry Meislin — Thu, 27 Oct 2022 07:57:53 +0000

“That could be enough to cause Democrats not to get out and vote for him.”—
Or precisely the opposite.
+ (Related) bonus!
“Democrat blows whistle on alleged ballot harvesting scheme, Florida opens criminal probe;
“Former candidate for Orange County commissioner describes widespread vote trafficking operation in Orlando area, authorities see enough evidence to warrant criminal probe.”—
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/florida-opens-criminal-probe-democrat-whistleblowers-evidence-ballot
File under: Hmmm.

Meanwhile (in the “Hey! Let’s Irritate Merrick Garland Just a Bit More—It’ll Surely Work This Time” sweepstakes):
Grassley, Johnson share Hunter Biden’s China-linked bank records with US attorney leading criminal probe
Republican Sens. Chuck Grassley and Ron Johnson are probing Hunter Biden’s ties to Chinese businesses
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hunter-biden-grassley-johnson-give-us-attorney-hundreds-of-bank-records-belonging-to-presidents-son

By: huxley

huxley — Thu, 27 Oct 2022 02:13:14 +0000

“Did the Oz-Fetterman debate change any minds” is a classic “Motte-and-Bailey” fallacy:
__________________________

The motte-and-bailey fallacy (named after the motte-and-bailey castle) is a form of argument and an informal fallacy where an arguer conflates two positions that share similarities, one modest and easy to defend (the “motte”) and one much more controversial and harder to defend (the “bailey”).[1] The arguer advances the controversial position, but when challenged, they insist that they are only advancing the more modest position.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motte-and-bailey_fallacy
__________________________

Althouse argues the controversial position — “the debate didn’t change any minds” — but conflates it with the easy position — “the debate doesn’t guarantee Fetterman will lose.”

These days much political discussion works this way.

By: huxley

huxley — Thu, 27 Oct 2022 01:44:26 +0000

Leland:

Strange.

Your conclusion is the debate really didn’t change minds, then you list several ways the debate likely changed minds.