Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
Difference between justifiable skepticism and cynicism. Who watches this watcher? For instance, when it comes to things like climate change, facts have a liberal bias. And measuring the politics of the readership of climate change articles in the New York Times doesn't measure the ostensible "political bias" in articles on that subject in the New York Times one iota.
One need not go further than his first bullet item, confirmation bias, to see an example of his confirmation bias.
A reluctance towards establishing a common ground is already widespread in America. According to a 2019 survey, 70% of Democrats believed their party’s leaders should “stand up” to President Trump, even if less gets done in Washington. Conversely, 51% of Republicans believed that Trump should “stand up” to Democrats.
While the January 2019 Pew survey did show that, the same page he linked to notes that a November 2018 Pew survey found that "Most Americans said they’d like to see cooperation between Trump and Congress."
By selectively absorbing just one part of what Pew found, he is exhibiting confirmation bias. Americans may be unclear about their interest in bipartisan cooperation, they may be saying that they won't move if the other side doesn't while still desiring more cooperation, or a variety of other things. But to this writer, all he sees is American intransigence.
Comments
By selectively absorbing just one part of what Pew found, he is exhibiting confirmation bias. Americans may be unclear about their interest in bipartisan cooperation, they may be saying that they won't move if the other side doesn't while still desiring more cooperation, or a variety of other things. But to this writer, all he sees is American intransigence.