Truths in conflict. Dueling truths. They cannot both be right. True?.
Hello Rosie:
Right wingers believe that if somebody is hungry, it's their own damn fault, and they should STAY hungry... Libs, on the other hand, just feed him. I dunno what's RIGHT, but I know what I DO.
excon
As in most things, the truth lies somewhere in the middle as the old saying goes.I have to think that folks who are hardcore left or right, really aren't paying attention. Yes, there are compassionate conservatives and yes there are practical and realistic liberal minded people. (Do you know how hard it was to type that??) Yes, pick a side, choose a position, campaign for someone, but understand that the world does have some gray in between the black and white. Our problem today is that we are more divided and polarized than at any time since the American Civil War. People who lived through the sixties and experienced all that occurred then, can draw a comparison and know that we're in a bigger mess now than then.
Once again you've posted a "which came first the chicken or the egg" question !
Both are right in certain things and both are wrong in certain things."Truth" is, the bottom line here is whats best for the United States as a whole and not what's best for the conservative or liberal individual or what's best for the person running for office. I haven't seen what's best for the United States as a whole in years. The political circus has been in town for quite some time and we have two clowns running for President to prove it.
No, because many "truths" can be simultaneously valid.
A "strong national defense" may be essential for sovereignty and to deter aggression...but it can also result in the excesses of imperial hegemony (you're welcome, Nuka) and the corrosive effects of the Military-Industrial Complex.
A "strong border policy" may be positive for social order (immigrants tend to be poor and poor people tend to commit more crimes than rich people) and a labor market where citizens can find decent paying jobs....but enforcing a "strong border policy" may also drive up consumer prices (because producers are forced to pay higher wages/benefits) and produce abuses of civil liberties many find deplorable.
The examples are legion.
Unfortunately, political rhetoric is not well-suited to addressing such complexities.
The "right winger" would feed the hungry person from their own larder. The "lib" would take the food from the "right winger's larder, by force, if necessary, and keep 50% (or more) for their "troubles" to do so. THAT'S the difference between the two.
Trump is a racist. Trump is not a racist. Can both be true simultaneously OS? How? Mahalo for your reply.
I think you somewhat misinterpreted my answer.
Your question about Trump, in the abstract, is whether A and NOT A can simultaneously be true.
My answer is that A, B, C, D, etc. can all simultaneously be true, and assertions that A being true (e.g. that a nation-state needs a "strong defense") necessarily trumps (pun!) B being true (a "strong defense" can also lead to imperialism, cronyism, and oppression of the weak) are fallacious.
Whether A and NOT A can simultaneously be true is a much tricker kettle of fish.
Nice excon. Very nice. Instead of ranting and criticizing and chastising why not cut to chase and solve the problem? 
Thank you for your reply m'dear! :)
Shroedinger's cat? Quantum physics? Is the cat dead/not dead simultaneously? What do you think and why?
Yes. This is the biggest mess I have ever experienced in my 78 years on the planet. Courtesy of
Donald J. Trump and those who made his candidacy possible. I shall never forgive them. Thank you for your reply Polk.
Thank you for your reply m2c.
I think that "conservative" and "liberal" are not really representative titles. I'm not american so I don't know any detail, but it's likely that both parties have mixed good and bad policies.
