re: #220 Anymouse

We’ll just have to leave it here. As I noted before, if I am willing to throw all my values under the bus (progressive voting for someone who holds opposite views such as Rand Paul, evangelical voting for someone shown to be clueless about religious values such as Donald Trump), then I did not hold those values strongly to begin with.

If I did not hold those values, I was never part of the group in the first place, so saying so is not a No True Scotsman fallacy. (The other example I gave was Baptists claiming Catholics are not Christians.)

As for Mr. Goodman, I confess I never heard of him until this conversation, so either I have been under a rock (or a tumbleweed), or he really hasn’t made much of a journalistic impression.

You’re hanging your True Scotsman fallacy on a strawman argument to boot (“throw all my values under the bus”).

As I have written above, not everyone has the same policy priorities as you do. For some progressives Clinton’s alleged foreign policy hawkishness trumps other, more local considerations. It’s not throwing out all one’s values. It’s sacrificing some of them for the others, which one deems more important. That Clinton is not at all hawkish and that Trump does not seem to be an isolationist makes these progressives deluded, not “not progressive”. They are attacking Clinton from the left, not from the right. And they think Clinton’s FP is more right-wing than Trump’s and Paul’s. They say as much, too.