In every US election cycle, conservatives accuse liberals of not being sufficiently pro-America.
Unresolvable The public record could not settle it.
Factual: Statements about the present or the past, checked against the record: did they hold up?
Reasoning
A sweeping 'every cycle' generalization about rhetoric is too vague to test.
Cite this claim
Scott Alexander, “In every US election cycle, conservatives accuse liberals of not being sufficiently pro-America.” (said 30 September 2014). Verdict: unresolvable. Reliability API, claim c_9e301db7c3fb, method 0.1.0+8bea457b, dataset release v1.1.2. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_9e301db7c3fb
This claim is in dataset release v1.1.2, with the same verdict.
Reply to this claim
More factual claims by Scott Alexander
-
Mostly true
“There’s this thing where through history, people have been really reluctant to admit an AI is truly intelligent.”
Through history, people have been reluctant to admit an AI is truly intelligent.
-
Mostly true
“Since most of the benefits of prison come from incapacitation rather than deterrence, we should expect this to have limited effect”
Most of the benefits of prison come from incapacitation rather than deterrence.
-
Resolved true
“I do think solitary might be more expensive”
Solitary confinement for prisoners might be more expensive than standard imprisonment.
-
Resolved true
“I (following Roodman) gave two conclusions in my cost-benefit analysis - one that counted the suffering by prisoners themselves, and one that didn’t.”
-
Mostly true
“I started this essay by pointing out that, despite what geographical and cultural distance would suggest, the Nazis’ outgroup was not the vastly different Japanese, but the almost-identical German…”
Verdicts are made automatically; how verdicts are made.