Trump mocks Elizabeth Warren’s heritage AND #metoo

[Dill]

(02-06-2019, 07:03 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: But you'll use the rest of your post to apparently do exactly that.

Not really, but please do explain further.

There are two glaring issues with this point.  One it is a false comparison as this is not a comparison between Trump and Warren.  It's a comparison between Warren and every other person running for the Democratic nomination.  Secondly, double standards cut both ways.  A person who lambastes Trump for lying cannot then defend Warren without engaging in the exact same hypocrisy you're pointing out for a Trump supporter who claims Warren's decades long lie disqualifies her.  You're effectively attempting to argue degree, which is completely subjective.

The focus is on Warren in this thread because that's what the thread's topic is.  If you think the focus is on Warren over Trump in 99% of other locations then you're completely delusional.

Angry scattershot, but I'll risk a brief reply. 

No one argued this or any thread should not focus on Warren.  My point was that lying attributed to candidates for the same office eventually requires a type of comparison of candidates and lies which is neither whataboutism nor bothsidesism nor--I shall now add--"the exact same hypocrisy" or whatever.  And the comparative requirement is not limited to only Warren and those running for Democratic nomination.  It's a "Trump vs Warren" comparison any time a voter wishes to make it so.

My point was also that people claiming to support neither Trump nor Warren can further a double standard in judgment by creating as much fuss about Warren as possible, fodder for bothsidesism--to the point where some can confidently term differences between the candidates (and standards for measuring them) "completely subjective."

If lies can be counted, and if some have demonstrably less basis and more deleterious effects than others, then degree of lying is not "completely subjective." 

(02-06-2019, 07:03 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Yeah, you're not trying to "relativize" Warren's lie at all.  Face it, she flat out lied about her ethnicity to advance her career and then lied about lying about it for decades afterwards.  There is no "if you look at it the right way" here.  You honestly destroy any point you tried to make in this post with this one sentence.

It absolutely is, but, again, you're not trying to "relativize" Warren's lie.  In any event, as I've already explained, it is not a Trump compared to Warren situation until Warren wins the Democratic nomination.  Until that time it's a Warren versus everyone else running for the Dem spot comparison.  

And a question: How do you "look the right way" at this Boston Globe article?

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2018/09/01/did-claiming-native-american-heritage-actually-help-elizabeth-warren-get-ahead-but-complicated/wUZZcrKKEOUv5Spnb7IO0K/story.html

In the most exhaustive review undertaken of Elizabeth Warren’s professional history, the Globe found clear evidence, in documents and interviews, that her claim to Native American ethnicity was never considered by the Harvard Law faculty, which voted resoundingly to hire her, or by those who hired her to four prior positions at other law schools. At every step of her remarkable rise in the legal profession, the people responsible for hiring her saw her as a white woman.