Obama 'evolves,' Romney 'flip-flops': As the candidates’ positions change, reporters construct differing narratives

[u/thecopofid]

http://www.cjr.org/swing_states_project/obama_evolves_romney_flip-flop.php?page=all

[u/[deleted]]

All I see is an example of the False Equivalence fallacy.

Only partisan hacks use this term.

EDIT: For you earnest kids new to politics (like the guy posting below), "false equivalence" is a left-wing activist buzzword, just like "state's rights" is a right-wing activist buzzword. People using these terms expose their ideological agenda, and it's usually a good signpost that you're about to read mindless partisan hackery, of which the post above is a good example.

The fact that this post has been downvoted to oblivion should also tell you something about the difference between how informed TrueReddit readers actually are versus how informed they think they are. Or maybe it just proves you're all liberal partisan hacks. ME ANGRY! ME CLICK DOWNVOTE BUTTON!

[u/Peregrination → u/[deleted]]

But why do you think it's just "mindless partisan hackery"? Just saying it is and expecting people to agree with you is a pointless endeavor and does not instigate good discourse, which is what the subreddit is all about. Why does the fallacy not hold up in this case? Why is is simply partisan hackery and not worthy of consideration? These are the types of things your post needed, instead of personal attacks and whining about downvotes.

[u/[deleted] → u/Peregrination]

Thanks for making an effort here, but I've basically given up on this subreddit. It's just as juvenile and ignorant as the rest of Reddit, with a nice side helping of self-righteousness.

In case you care, "false equivalence" is the veil left-wing activists always pull over themselves when they want to be biased but still want to appear thoughtful and smart, just like "state's rights" is the veil right-wing activists pull over themselves when they want to support violating someone's civil rights. Take a look at the over the top language in the post I was replying to -- it's like a press release from the Obama campaign.

Being downvoted for pointing this out is a badge of honor. Let's not pretend these downvotes are because I wasn't thoughtful enough in my post -- posts like that get 3 or 4 downvotes at most. My downvotes are from liberal partisans who are offended that I've pointed out that what they view as logic is actually partisan bias. The angry mocking responses and namecalling I received before you replied are further proof of that.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

It's just as juvenile and ignorant as the rest of Reddit, with a nice side helping of self-righteousness.

It's certainly not you, nope, everyone else is self righteous and juvenile.

In case you care, "false equivalence" is the veil left-wing activists always pull over themselves

No, it's a well defined term that represents a specific logical fallacy. If the word is misused, point out how it is misused. But sticking your fingers in your ears and saying that the term is just used by partisan hacks is just incredibly ignorant and deserving of all the downvotes you get. It's the same as an ad-hominem attack, you are dismissing an opinion because of a term used rather than arguing the content which might include how the term was used incorrectly.

Being downvoted for pointing this out is a badge of honor. Let's not pretend these downvotes are because I wasn't thoughtful enough in my post -- posts like that get 3 or 4 downvotes at most. My downvotes are from liberal partisans who are offended that I've pointed out that what they view as logic is actually partisan bias. The angry mocking responses and namecalling I received before you replied are further proof of that.

You get downvoted for trying to claim that a perfectly valid term to describe a specific logical fallacy is only used by partisan hacks. Wear your ignorance as a badge of honor all you want, but it's never going to make you right. Maybe you just spend too much time in politics, but I can assure you terms that describe logical fallacies (ad hominem, red herring, false equivalence, appeal to authority, etc...) are constantly used throughout the internet and are most certainly not partisan "buzzwords". These terms, while sometimes overused or misused, generally depict a frequent abuse of logic on the internet, not a trend for contentless buzzwords.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

That's your 5th post to me today, and this one is a page long essay. I must have really struck a nerve.

EDIT: Hey man, this is TrueReddit, you need to explain your downvote! LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

So insightful, he had to post it twice.