Clinton isn’t incompetent with a long list of failures behind her name. I despise her but to think that she wouldn’t have been better at handling the pandemic response than Trump is delusional.
> Clinton isn’t incompetent with a long list of failures behind her name.
This is subjective and necessarily highly speculative.
> I despise her but to think that she wouldn’t have been better at handling the pandemic response than Trump is delusional.
Predicting or thinking (about) that is perfectly fine and reasonable. Mistaking subsequent predictions for conclusive facts is what is actually delusional. There are many examples of such delusional behavior on HN every day: mind reading, future predicting (and stating the results as facts), you name it. I think it is fairly true to say that conspiracy theorists (for example) and "smart" people differ more in degree than in kind, although we do not have the means (or ambition, or epistemic skills) to determine the degree to which this is true.
Most of the time, what we consider to be true, is actually unknown.
Right but you didn’t write anything about this particular situation. Instead you created doubt in the conversation because we don’t have 100% of the facts.
In leadership not making a decision until you have 100% of the facts, and truly know something to be a fact, will kill your ability to be effective.
Trump didn’t make a decision, instead he called the virus a hoax and prevented experts from providing insight to a situation where we didn’t have all the facts.
On the next sentence I’m going to write, no I don’t have 100% of the facts but I can certainly make an informed statement.
Trump fucked this country up and Clinton would’ve had a better response to this pandemic - regardless of who you identify as how could you not accept this.
This is subjective and necessarily highly speculative.
> I despise her but to think that she wouldn’t have been better at handling the pandemic response than Trump is delusional.
Predicting or thinking (about) that is perfectly fine and reasonable. Mistaking subsequent predictions for conclusive facts is what is actually delusional. There are many examples of such delusional behavior on HN every day: mind reading, future predicting (and stating the results as facts), you name it. I think it is fairly true to say that conspiracy theorists (for example) and "smart" people differ more in degree than in kind, although we do not have the means (or ambition, or epistemic skills) to determine the degree to which this is true.
Most of the time, what we consider to be true, is actually unknown.