Occam’s Razor: Both Parties Are Massively Corrupt | Soshal Network, Social Circle Connection

Occam’s Razor: Both Parties Are Massively Corrupt

0

Enjoyed the video ladies check these swimsuits out

Dylan Ratigan discusses exactly how the most likely factors for any given politician's behavior is usually right before our faces. Jimmy Dore, Malcolm Fleschner, Graham Elwood and Jordan Chariton review on the most recent episode of Aggressive Progressives. See the complete Hostile Progressives episode below:

Follow Jimmy Dore on Twitter:

Adhere to Graham Elwood on Twitter:

Follow Jordan Chariton on Twitter:

Comply with Malcolm Fleschner on Twitter:

Jimmy Dore, Malcolm Fleschner, and Graham Elwood for this week's Aggressive Progressive. Jordan Chariton skypes in. The trio review Roger Aisles, Wikileaks, and also even more to enrage any rational Progressive.

Share Your Comments

54 comments

  1. Posted by I Apophis, at Reply

    this is why I subscribe to TYT. they hit both sides for their corruption. I appreciate that.

    • Posted by Landrew0, at Reply

      Occam’s Razor does not cut between truth and falsehood.
      It explicitly says the simpler one is “usually” correct. Loose guideline at best.

      Irrelevant in this case; the choice is between “massively corrupt and mildly competent,” or “mildly corrupt and massively incompetent.”

      Sounds like a devil’s choice to me.

    • Posted by Gene Starwind, at Reply

      Jimmy Dore hits both sides. Most of TYT can only follow one narrative at a time.

    • Posted by Bullion Forever, at Reply

      The only reason I’m subbed to Tyt is Jimmy.

  2. Posted by Hillary Raped Me, at Reply

    TYT raped me!

    • Posted by Landrew0, at Reply

      Think up something better.

  3. Posted by John W, at Reply

    Jimmy Dore is the only person worth listening too on the TYT and this is coming from a white nationalist. He generally examines both sides objectively as one should. Chunk Uygur and ANArexic are incredibly biased.

    • Posted by wittlestar, at Reply

      this jimmy guy bought into seth rich crap and smeared hillary with parkinson crap. if you like that sort of alternative fact and alternative integrity, try alex jones nd all the breitbart channels. knock yourself out with the hating.

    • Posted by John W, at Reply

      @Bob Sagert (((Bob Sagert)))

    • Posted by Praxis, at Reply

      John W that’s nice. just move to Maine and leave the rest of us alone. you can have your white utopia up there, no questions asked.

  4. Posted by Vishank Jain-Sharma, at Reply

    Anyone claiming dems and reps are equally bad, remember ZERO democrats voted for Trumpcare, while 217 Republicans DID. There’s an undeniable clear difference between the two, especially now that Bernie’s movement has a gun to their head in townhalls and primaries

    • Posted by jim bob, at Reply

      The difference boils down to one party’s leaders having no morality at all, out to destroy the country in many ways and the whole world via climate change denial, and the other having profit over normal morality in many cases.
      Have to get money out of politics, in every way imaginable.

  5. Posted by Jason Roos, at Reply

    Way to completely abuse Occum’s Razor. Occum’s Razor doesn’t state that the simplest explanation is always the correct one. It states only that, between two otherwise equally convincing explanations, the simplest is more likely correct. And “more likely correct” doesn’t mean “correct,” either. I’m more likely to lose a hand of blackjack than win, but that doesn’t mean I always lose.

    • Posted by coldflame, at Reply

      That IS what they said/paraphrased, but whoops it wasn’t with your exact wording. Puh-leeezzzz, get over yourself…..

  6. Posted by No Way, at Reply

    All true, but the problem with equating Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama with the Republicans is that if they’re all the same, there’s nothing to do. The right loves it when their conspiracy theories are repeated. Clinton was not going to do anything significant regarding climate, for example. She would have made noise and done something inoffensive to the fossil fuel industry. This is heinous. The thing she wouldn’t have done is put a former Exxon CEO in her cabinet, and that’s valuable distinction. I’m not sure how Jimmy sees attacking the Democrats leading to a liberal take over. The Republicans you can paint with a broad brush. They’re all crazy, denying climate change, anti-science, theocratic fascists. The Dems aren’t nearly as bad. I see Obama on health care to be more accommodationist than right-wing corporatist shill-Nazi. You get rid of the crazies on the right and someone like President Obama or Hillary Clinton become the reasonable conservatives in a healthy system.

    • Posted by Gene Starwind, at Reply

      Honestly… 4 years of the status quo, or slight worse, which is what Trump would have given us, isn’t much worse than 8 years of HRC’s status quo. Hell, it’s probably better, just because it will end 4 years sooner.

      As Bernie Sanders said, we need to treat this as a WW2 level threat.

  7. Posted by Hákon Sigurðsson, at Reply

    Occam’s Razor isn’t “the most obvious explanation is most likely correct,” the narrative of Occam’s Razor is that the explanation which requires the fewest assumptions is the most likely to be true.” A simple example is 9/11 conspiracy theories:
    Explanation 1: Structural damage and high temperatures causing the steal beams to bend and collapse the sides is what caused the towers to fall.
    Explanation 2: A special form of nanothermite was planted in the towers at George Bush’s orders and the administration, engineers, and scientists are all paid off so they hide the truth that they are literal demons who put chemicals in the water to turn the friggin frogs gay.

    Which explanation has the fewest assumptions? The answer is explanation 1. Sorry but the guy in the video doesn’t understand what Occam’s Razor is.

    • Posted by Stephen Cody, at Reply

      Watch A blacksmithing video.

    • Posted by Plutot Crever, at Reply

      Yes. Exactly.
      So, was the DNC leaked by an insider or hacked by an advanced Tom Clancy-ish ultra secret covert KGB counter-Intel international conspiracy?

    • Posted by WikeddTung, at Reply

      Actually, he’s right. Its called paraphrasing. And it’s actually a really god way to know when you’re dealing with someone who understands a concept as opposed to someone just parroting something they read.

      Now, if you’d like us all to believe you’re a smarty who knows what Occam’s Razor is, then PARAPHRASE it yourself to demonstrate you understand it. We’ll wait.

    • Posted by Plutot Crever, at Reply

      Complementary question: Did you hear anybody claiming that Russia hacked the CIA when the Vault 7 documents appeared online?
      And why nobody claimed that?

  8. Posted by Peter Cornejo, at Reply

    Cenk made a great decision when he hired Jimmy

    • Posted by Jonathon Humm, at Reply

      Cenk has a failing “news” network that exclusively runs propoganda

  9. Posted by TheSenate09, at Reply

    I agree with the point this video is trying to get across but this is not an accurate use of Occam’s razor

    • Posted by jeff kennedy, at Reply

      TheSenate09 what’s the accurate use? shaving Occam’s pubes?

    • Posted by nevermindshort3, at Reply

      I don’t see how it is wrong. Occams Razor says that the theory with the least amount of variables is favored over theories with more variables, and the analogy can be made to that the simplest explanation is often the best one.

  10. Posted by Jennifer W, at Reply

    Another thing. If you are upset that the Russia hacked the DNC to tilt the election for Trump, then you should also be upset that the DNC was revealed to tilt the primaries for Hilary.

    • Posted by DirtFlyer, at Reply

      That works both ways.

    • Posted by Gene Starwind, at Reply

      Except there is ZERO evidence that Russia hacked the DNC servers. It’s infinitely more likely that information was leaked.

  11. Posted by Sopho Cles, at Reply

    Argument is way too simplistic – Obama had a clear ideology rooted in social democracy, which has centuries of philosophical and intellectual grounding, even if the execution was flawed … Trump only cares about his self enrichment and aggrandisement and he is completely authoritarian and unapologetic about that. Trump is an utter moron and to compare the two is disingenuous.

    • Posted by Sopho Cles, at Reply

      G Washington yep we know that the orange buffoon does not get out of bed for less than a billion – we thank him for his public service. BTW social democracy is working fine in Canada, Australia, Germany, Denmark, UK, France, Italy but I guess the Trumptards look to Russia, N Korea and Saudi Arabia for their rules of governance. I know where I would rather live.

    • Posted by Virtuous Sheep, at Reply

      Hahaha Democrats are so silly, still think we sheep could hear rational arguments! We don’t want smelly Dems Sherpherds! Yucks! We just want 100% virgin grass or we will go run with the Russian wolves! Suicide is so romantic!

  12. Posted by uutuber431, at Reply

    Saying the words “Occam’s Razor” does not make the every political scandal for each party equal. We know the Clinton Foundation has taken foreign money because they have disclosed all their donors, not because their is a hidden “obvious explanation” for the foundation’s existence. And here’s a pro-tip for you: the United States military industrial complex doesn’t depend on the Clinton family in order to function. We’re going to sell missiles to third world dictators whether or not Bill and Hillary send tents to Haiti.

    • Posted by ToBe Fair, at Reply

      there are no hillbots here.. feel free to accuse me of being a dems bot… though technically i’m more a dembot… as in democracy bot.. u have to be blind to not see the republican party is sold to the devil..
      and jimmy is a jillbot and jill stein works for putin. stop your clinton obsession.. and occam, not occum.. your russian is showing..

  13. Posted by marlonious76, at Reply

    Dylan puts the full court press on sell outs 24/7. Hes been telling people about the rampant corruption in government. Hes a great addition to TYT.

    • Posted by Pengu, at Reply

      yep, he’s very smart

  14. Posted by Brian Chivis, at Reply

    Both parties are corrupt, absolutely.

    • Posted by Jonathon Humm, at Reply

      But the Democrats are disgusting globalists who are against the Constitution

  15. Posted by Adam Kondic, at Reply

    Its a lovely system. The banks want capitalism until they’re in trouble then they run back to the Gov and ask for Socialism, which they get. Thats not how capitalism works! The U.S gov should have let them fail then buy them for a song and start lending to fuel the economy.
    And why did your pathetic leaders allow so many people to lose their houses which are now decrepit and nearly worthless. The houses could have been written down to a realistic value and nearly every one wins. Your gov is screwing your country to feather their own nest. Sick.

    • Posted by DWokquail, at Reply

      maybe because they want to be able to forclose and sell the land to foreign investors, Jordan Chariton was suggesting that is why they are putting tax liens on peoples houses in flint who don’t pay their water bills even though that water is lead contaminated. America was founded on stealing land from people I wouldn’t be surprised if they are still at it

    • Posted by nevermindshort3, at Reply

      They want capitalism for everyone else than them selves. That goes for every corporation.

  16. Posted by Dj Tzonev, at Reply

    Two sides of the same coin, that is obvious. Question is, what do we do about it?

    • Posted by MusicByJC, at Reply

      The next question is how do you break up the two party system. I think most people regardless of party understand that those with money have a great amount of influence in the political system. It is one of those things that most people agree on. So, why isn’t there any significant effort to change it? Maybe it is because these legal bribes are institutionalized and those in power want to stay in power. Same goes with the parties. They are power structures which facilitate this institutionalized behavior.

      Even if a President is elected that wants to change things, they are only one slice in the pie. I am not saying that things will never change, but I think things are going to have to get worse before they get better. I know with Trump as President, you may ask, how much worse can it get. My reply would be, much worse.

    • Posted by Joel Schneider, at Reply

      Instant-runoff voting would help other parties gain a foothold. However, the two dominant parties generally oppose that.

  17. Posted by Lodurr, at Reply

    Quick question, if you have two suspected criminals can you only arrest one of them? Do you have to let the other one go? Or do you have to let them both go? Can’t you arrest them BOTH? The biggest joke in our politics right now are people that interrupt criticisms of Trump in order to give us a PSA that there are other corrupt people too. Wow, thanks, but let’s just move the investigation forward and get ALL the criminals.

  18. Posted by Edward Maxwell, at Reply

    When people start defaulting on their loans, there is no more bailout. The golden goose is being choked as we speak, and she can’t lay any more eggs.

    Great Depression 2.0 is a long time coming, all thanks to Democrats and Republicans.

    • Posted by kefkapalazzo1, at Reply

      you mean the answer isn’t keeping wages stagnant whole college costs perpetually increase and then punishing students?

    • Posted by farsensor operant, at Reply

      The ‘banking crisis’ was caused by…the BANKS!

    • Posted by Edward Maxwell, at Reply

      And who enabled the banks by repealing regulation, and then bailing out the banks when they fail? The two-party system has got to go! Everybody is corrupt.

      PS: Still waiting for that swamp to be drained…

  19. Posted by Thad Stevens, at Reply

    Sure, both parties have been corrupted. But one of those parties is the source of the corruption, is literally int heir campaign platforms to be corrupt. Wasn’t it a big enough tip off that their solution to every problem (most of which are created by them) is tax cuts for the rich? I don’t even have to name them for you to know.

    • Posted by Dan Lennon, at Reply

      The source of the corruption is not a party, it is the natural inclination we all have to be self-serving. Honesty in politics is an oxymoron only if politicians are not held accountable by the electorate and by the separation of powers. Accountability is never perfect so corruption is a perennial problem, but since the 1960s when high marginal tax rates for the wealthy began to be reduced, big money has so compromised both parties that our level of corruption is now like that of a banana republic (not the first time that comparison has been made). The only difference is that we are a wealthy banana republic so our streets are paved and we drive cars, but the political mechanics are about the same. The Republicans are a disaster, but the Democrats are not the solution.

    • Posted by Thad Stevens, at Reply

      “The source of the corruption is not a party, it is the natural inclination we all have to be self-serving”

      And one party has totally embraced this “self-serving” inclination, to the point where its in their campaign platform. But hey, lets just pettifog the issue and call them both corrupt in an easy, sweeping gesture of false equivalence.

    • Posted by V0xX Hub, at Reply

      YUSS! TY Thad, I came to this video myself to mention the grand phrase of ‘false-equivalency’. It’s whatever, we’re being hosed down a slippery slope, like dirt clinging to a rich person’s driveway.

    • Posted by david crago, at Reply

      Thad Stevens..I guess we can get into a pissing contest on what party screw’s the average people the most but in today’s world the difference is pretty small overall. Both parties serve the rich..Banking..Wall St…Military Complex. W.Bush started the Iraq war and Obama expanded it into more countries. Bush gave out tax cuts for the rich and Obama kept them in place as well as the big bonuses for the looters on Wall St. nobody paid a price.Dan Lennon said it well in his comment..the Republicans are a disaster but the Democrats are not the solution. I agree the Republicans might have been the first off the starting line but the Democrats have caught up in this race for corruption.The first big step to get in the right direction is to get the corporate money out of politics.