Trump appointee: Science is a Democrat thing

[PC2]

It's cool, Democrats can prioritize science policy while Republicans prioritize economics/business policy. Science is good but it's not the most influential sector.

[Orbitus]

It's cool, Democrats can prioritize science policy while Republicans prioritize economics/business policy. Science is good but it's not the most influential sector.

But they aren't. As history has shown since Reagan, Republicans literally destroy the economy, Democrats come in and fix it.

[PC2]

But they aren't. As history has shown since Reagan, Republicans literally destroy the economy, Democrats come in and fix it.

I mean if Dems say "everything is our thing" that really dilutes the claim.

[Orbitus]

I mean if Dems say "everything is our thing" that really dilutes the claim.

No, that is historical evidence. Reagan and Bush destroyed the economy, Clinton fixed it. Bush 2.0 destroyed the economy, Obama fixed it. Trump is destroying the economy and the economists are warning of a downturn at any moment, and the Democrats will fix it like always.

[PC2]

No, that is historical evidence. Reagan and Bush destroyed the economy, Clinton fixed it. Bush 2.0 destroyed the economy, Obama fixed it. Trump is destroying the economy and the economists are warning of a downturn at any moment, and the Democrats will fix it like always.

Haha if you really believe that then vote Democrat, they'll fix everything and society arrives at utopia.

[Powerogue]

This quote was intended to be a joke.

Our administration is a joke.

[Orbitus]

Haha if you really believe that then vote Democrat, they'll fix everything and society arrives at utopia.

It isn't me that believes it, it is history. Look at the states currently right now. The worst states for the economy, are literally ALL RED. Then look at the states with the best economies, almost all of them are blue.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/201...not-even-close
Long read but they have everything sourced. Try to ignore that if you can.

[Powerogue]

I recommend everyone watch "Idiocracy" again. Then look at Trump's administration. Then think about the movie again. It's uncanny.

Someone recently pointed out to me a big difference: President Mountain Dew in that movie was willing to defer to the experts. He saw that the main character was clearly vastly more intelligent than anyone else and thus immediately hired him.

[PC2]

It isn't me that believes it, it is history. Look at the states currently right now. The worst states for the economy, are literally ALL RED. Then look at the states with the best economies, almost all of them are blue.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/201...not-even-close
Long read but they have everything sourced. Try to ignore that if you can.

Correlation isn't causation. Economic centers become blue after they become economic centers. Which is why states like California and cities like New York City are the most blue, they became the richest then they could afford more social programs, in that order. Just like Europe is more socialist than Africa, they got rich and then could afford more socialism than Africa.

[Dontrike]

It's cool, Democrats can prioritize science policy while Republicans prioritize economics/business policy. Science is good but it's not the most influential sector.

Just because Republicans focus on the economy it doesn't automatically mean they do it well. We've seen this current Republican president absolutely fuck up every single time he tries to do anything with it, or anything else for that matter.

[Mormolyce]

About 53% of Republicans favor nuclear power, about 34% of Democrats do. The Republican number is depressingly low as well, but the fact that two thirds of Democrats are opposed to nuclear power makes me very skeptical of their inclination towards doing things that actually work to replace fossil fuels.

The reality is that there's essentially no split between Democrats and Republicans on basic science literacy per the most recent Pew test on the matter. What they did find is that science is more of a white guy thing though.

Also 75% of Republicans favour net neutrality. And the majority of them support Medicare For All. So why do you think the Republican Party so consistently fails to represent its own demographics?

I just linked you the evidence on knowledge. It's not what you think it is. The reactions in this thread are a lot of Dunning-Kruger writ large. You don't have the baseline knowledge required to offer meaningful commentary on scientific literacy.

I have a BSc in maths, stats and astrophysics. First class Honours in pure maths. Also did three years of a PhD in same but never submitted.

Please issue me with Spectral's opinion permission slip.

P.S. What field is your degree in anyway?

- - - Updated - - -

I mean if Dems say "everything is our thing" that really dilutes the claim.

Also Republicans say it. Well one does.

Trump replied: "I've been around a long time. And it just seems the economy does better under the Democrats than under Republicans."

https://theweek.com/speedreads/56105...nder-democrats

Haha if you really believe that then vote Democrat, they'll fix everything and society arrives at utopia.

When you have no actual arguments, resort to false dichotomy.

[Draco-Onis]

Correlation isn't causation. Economic centers become blue after they become economic centers. Which is why states like California and cities like New York City are the most blue, they became the richest then they could afford more social programs, in that order. Just like Europe is more socialist than Africa, they got rich and then could afford more socialism than Africa.

But if your theory is correct wouldn't it be the opposite republicans using their economic and business prowess to make red states eclipse blue ones?

[Spectral]

Also 75% of Republicans favour net neutrality. And the majority of them support Medicare For All. So why do you think the Republican Party so consistently fails to represent its own demographics?

Republicans are against various forms of national health care plans per the latest polling from Kaiser. I'm not sure where you're going with this.

I have a BSc in maths, stats and astrophysics. First class Honours in pure maths. Also did three years of a PhD in same but never submitted.

Please issue me with Spectral's opinion permission slip.

P.S. What field is your degree in anyway?

BS in molecular genetics, PhD in immunology. If my comment doesn't apply to you (and it doesn't), then it just flatly doesn't apply. To other people in this thread though? The amount of smug self assurance people get simply from holding certain political views is just pathetic. It's identity as a replacement for competence.

[Mormolyce]

Republicans are against various forms of national health care plans per the latest polling from Kaiser. I'm not sure where you're going with this.

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/...e-for-all.html
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/...e-for-all.html
https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-amer...e-for-all-poll

I mean, it's the top hits when you google it.

BS in molecular genetics, PhD in immunology. If my comment doesn't apply to you (and it doesn't), then it just flatly doesn't apply. To other people in this thread though? The amount of smug self assurance people get simply from holding certain political views is just pathetic. It's identity as a replacement for competence.

No offence buddy but you've kind of cornered the market on smug self-assurance. I'm not opposed to the idea that you should do some actual study or research on a topic to be an authority on it. But you just swanned into a thread about an actual quote from a Trump official, tried to gaslight everyone into believing this isn't a specifically Republican attitude, and when nobody went for it you started throwing around Dunning-Kruger.

Frankly I think that a lot of the time you're being intellectually lazy and committing an argumentum ad temperantiam because it's an easy contrarian opinion. You can do better.

[Hilhen7]

Supernatural being in the sky = real
Science = fake / Tool of the devil

Haven't the conservatives always felt this way? Heck not even republicans I mean conservatives dating back thousands of years.

[Mormolyce]

Yeah I swear they used to be better liars.

[Moralgy]

I expect the youtube rationals to jump on this really fast... right?

[Dead Moose Fandango]

Ive a close family member with dementia and I recognize similar stares, body language and behaviour between them and Trump.

And I hope or at least think that isnt just my bias against the orange manbaby.

Oh no. I've had several family members with it. He definitely shows signs of dementia.

[Kraenen]

Supernatural being in the sky = real
Science = fake / Tool of the devil

Haven't the conservatives always felt this way? Heck not even republicans I mean conservatives dating back thousands of years.

The difference between the social-conservative and 'philosophical'-conservative goes back thousands of years as well. The former was interested in protecting the theological/cultural status quo, the latter cared more for epistemological skepticism.

There's also a split I've noticed between the pro-business technical types and the hippy-environmental types. I used to see the former take on science because it was logical, cold, rational, and 'hard', while the latter was skeptical of science because we needed to appreciate things like native/pagan mysticism. There's a real connection between some individuals you'd place somewhere on the left and a belief in the mystical. It's just it tends to take form in disorganized spirituality whereas the conservative version seems to take form in organized religion.

[Spectral]

No offence buddy but you've kind of cornered the market on smug self-assurance. I'm not opposed to the idea that you should do some actual study or research on a topic to be an authority on it. But you just swanned into a thread about an actual quote from a Trump official, tried to gaslight everyone into believing this isn't a specifically Republican attitude, and when nobody went for it you started throwing around Dunning-Kruger.

Frankly I think that a lot of the time you're being intellectually lazy and committing an argumentum ad temperantiam because it's an easy contrarian opinion. You can do better.

Fair enough and I apologize for the derail. There's a specific sort of confident "I love science and so does my tribe!" from people that don't actually know much of anything about science or care about it that I find intensely grating and that's what I was responding to. But yeah, you're right, it's not a great look to basically just call people stupid with fancier verbiage.

Returning to the actual topic, is there any evidence that Davis actually said that? Rereading the quoted section from Salon, it looks like that's based on the word of Lowenthal. Even giving him the benefit of the doubt that he got the spirit of the comment right, I'm not really that inclined to trust the memory of someone about what their opponent said to them. People have a tendency of shading their memory of how discussions went.