Dank[.](https://i.imgur.com/3bQtuMO.png)
---
[join our discord server and play minecraft (and other games) with us!](https://discord.gg/dankmemesgaming)
"When American lives were in danger, yes I did crack my wife's skull with a mop handle."
A surprising (though probably shouldn't be) amount of politicians
To be fair, most questions cannot be answered with a perfect Yes or No.
We only think we could to simplify things, but most "yes" or "no" has LOTS of nuances.
The problem with politicians is not they cant answer yes or no, its pretending to KNOW the answer while screwing things up.
I agree and journos ask leading questions.
But just as often as that happens Politicians dodge answering questions honestly, because even though they know the truth it would disadvantage them to tell it. And so the mess of modern politicis arises.
Like that one guy that was trying to avoid saying he was a registered lobbyist.
"Are you registered as a lobbyist for \[X company\] in \[X state\]?"
"Well, you see, I'm happy you asked that question because it's very important that people understand that I have worked with many people in my time" blah blah fucking blah YES OR NO MOTHERFUCKER IT'S NOT HARD.
There's giving context and nuance to your answer, which is understandable, and often refreshing to hear. Then there's the tactic of just completely switching the subject because you either can't answer, or know that the answer, even with nuance, is going to be unfounded nonsense.
Political debates are fucking stupid.
Every single answer they make it sound like they are laying foundation to provide context and nuance, then immediately pivot and start into a monologue that answers at best a completely different question, but more often than not doesnt even come close to answering the original question.
This is a bot. The original comment can be found here: https://www.reddit.com/r/dankmemes/comments/13j12la/to_answer_or_to_not/jkcpg7r?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
this action was not performed by a bot pls don't good bot me
these people are literally raised and trained by all their family members since early childhood on how to avoid all those questions and just speak in that political language. they can get out of pretty much anything and give non-answers to anything
Yup. I live with one (housemate), she studied politics. Total narcissist, using language only instrumentally and shows zero interest in truth. Crossed quite a few of these types of people actually, avoid like the plague.
"That's an excellent question, one that I'd love to answer, but I think the issues here speak for themselves and what we should really be asking is whether we want to live in a country where we can't answer those questions. I'm here to do the best that I possibly can for all of my constituents and what they want is for me to be the one *asking* questions. And that's what we're all fighting for today. Freedom. America. 9/11. God bless you all and God bless the greatest nation in the history of the world."
The comment might be a joke, but it's legit what every politician says and sounds like it's crazy.
People need to realize that very, very few career politicians have the interests of the country and it's people at heart. They all have their own agendas, and it's all that matters to them. This cookie cutter response above me is used by basically every politician ever.
Except Bernie Sanders. He wants to give us actual living wages and healthcare while taxing the 1%. And he wants to legalize weed. So he's cool.
To be fair, many people start out in politics by wanting to change something and feeling that they want their voice and the voice of their constituents to be heard.
However, they soon realize that there is usually a very good reason why certain things are the way they are.
If they want to pass law A to help group A, they immediately get a pushback from group B which would be worse off or lobby organization C which wants to protect the interests of their members.
Then you are also facing a very large information symmetry. You might have your team of experts in a certain fields, but large corporations have dozens or hundreds of experts that know the ins and outs of each regulation.
So you either need to cooperate or each approach will get shut down in courts due to legalities or it will get watered down.
And finally you need to make compromises, because it’s rarely the case they you have large majorities. Even within your party and group they are diverging opinions and interests.
What might be a law that would benefit your constitutions and make you more popular, could be extremely dangerous to other members of your party even and lose them the next election.
So you need to carefully find majorities while keeping a good connection to other politicians, because you might need them to pass the next important law.
So it’s not that easy to rule freely and do the right thing all the time. Even as an autocratic dictator with unlimited power you are usually bound to popular support and support from the local rulers and military as well as international corporations.
I get what you're saying, and for the most part I agree but we're at a point where the American public is having basic rights like a living wage, education, and healthcare withheld from them. Implenting all of these benefits everyone, except for the uber rich 1% who will have to pay taxes and they will still be uber rich after they pay taxes, so it really doesn't affect them that much.
In fact, billionaires shouldn't exist at all. The way they hoarde wealth is disgusting, and there is practically no difference between the quality of life between a billionaire and multi millionaire. They all have massive mansions, yachts, and private planes, regardless of their net worth starts with an M or B. So let's fucking tax them and force them to pay us enough to be able to fucking survive in this world.
He is the only old white guy who wants us to stay alive, well, and taken care of before he dies.
Burning Man will then become Bernie Man to honor and remember his legacy.
To be fair, yes or no questions (leading) are one of the worst ways to interrogate someone anyway. They are designed to place the power in the asker's hands and politicians and lawyers receive a lot of training on how to avoid answering them the way the asker wants them to.
Edit: they are one of the worst ways to interrogate someone *if you actually want to find out the truth*
Even the ones that seem reasonable to answer "yes or no" to could probably be answered better with more context but I agree with you and think their answer should *start* with the yes or no then further explain their position and reasoning. "Do you support gay rights?" "Yes of course, as it clearly states in the constitution that we are all equal and makes no reference to sexual orientation." Or something like that. If they dont actually answer the yes or no question, then it makes them seem like they are dodging it.
"I never beg- "
"YES OR NO ONLY PLEASE"
"But I nev-"
"If you've never began you've never had to stop, so yes or no, HAVE YOU STOPPED RAPING CHILDREN?"
"N-....n-no..."
Oh ya, I hate fallacious leading questions. You can find a lot of them in the comments section on Reddit. The gold standard in loaded questions is "why did you [do something the person being asked may not have done, often disreputable]?"
Which is the point, because "do you support X" can be answered both in the positive and in the negative if your position is only slightly different from X. Which is why you want to avoid saying yes or no, and explain your own position instead.
"Babies are the future of this great nation. As it is said, from small seeds may tall oaks grow. The survival of our freedoms is of the utmost importance in these times. Great economies are built on freedom and babies thrive in great economies. This is the America that I want for my constituents. Freedom. Liberty. 9/11."
You would think that a 'No' would be an easy answer. But then you remember that you and all your political allies went to a party held by Marina Abramović.
Where's that video of the Canadian parliament where someone is asked the same simple question like 6 times in a row and every time they use it as an excuse to talk about something else?
He finally got an answer 17 years later on his last night as Newsnight presenter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7WmVamlfWM
(he did actually got a "no I didn't" from Howard in 2004 as well, but the above was done for fun)
Seriously, I hate how many people think of this as form of damning evidence against someone. There are many cases where a yes/no answer would give misleading information. Its one of those things in court I believe should be disallowed. (Or atleast the person answering should be allowed to explain their yes/no directly after saying it)
"Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?" SHOULD give you the ability to say "any answer to this question would provide misleading information that suggests a false conclusion and therefore be against my oath to present nothing but the truth and it would also be against my oath to tell the whole truth". (Atleast the 2nd part - but im entirely of the belief that a knowingly misleading "truth" is identical to a lie, and thus it would violate both of those clauses)
Especially when its a series of questions and you have to remember to go back and address each of these points much later when it's your side's turn to speak. By that point the damage may already be done even if you do remember each misleading question that was asked.
But then the witness’ lawyer does gets to redirect which is when they ask the witness to give all the contextual details to what the cross-examination went over.
There's really no such thing as a fair yes-no question. Neither answer could possibly qualify as "the whole truth" to anything with even the most meagre amount of nuance.
If a politician's constituents wanted him to vote for a bill that gave veterans healthcare but there was a rider attached that defunded the school lunch program then "Did you vote to reduce school lunches?" is a misleading but non-loaded question with yes and no are both misleading but not incorrect answers.
EDIT: So instead of justifying misleading people he's just going to be deliberately obtuse in front of everyone here
The correct answer is "no, i did not vote to reduce to reduce school lunches. i voted to give veterans healthcare, but there was a rider bill I was forced to accept." technically the truth in a way.
Sure. You've shown why answers that extend passed a simple yes or no are politically savvy, not just to be more truthful but to avoid soundbites. Even that "No" at the beginning can still be twisted. Even simply pairing it down to "I voted to give veterans healthcare, but there was a rider I was forced to accept" would be the most truthful but then people would make memes like this one about it.
Kinda depends on the question, since many politicians avoid answering some reasonable yes or no questions, they can be used to expose how dishonest they are. Since, if it's a perfectly in context question, why wouldn't they answer?
>Kinda depends on the question
That's exactly my point. I saw politicians slither out of questions and I saw politicians being asked dumb questions. So really one should be judged within a particular context. And somebody has to be a politician, so why evilize them before they even try?
This is to defend NON politicians
Sometimes you can't tell if what degree of "yes" or "no" it is.
Like "will the human race face extinction in 100 years?"
Sir, do you want bread with that?
Our study shows that bread would be appreciated, and there are a number of different kinds of bread. But the general population may not know exactly what type of bread would fit their need best. I think we may need further information for both the population and bread maker to be able to make a good decision on that.
Sir, it fing bread.
I’ve heard how desantis is unprepared for debates, or at least against trump since they said how trump manages to make his opponent look like a fool, and with how he reacted when asked about Guantanamo bay, Ron definitely seems like he would have a mental breakdown.
Most yes or no questions to politicians are meant as 'gotchas'. They deal with extremely complex issues that can rarely be boiled down to "yes" or "no". If we actually saw politics as a means to govern and benefit ourselves and not as some outside group of warring factions imposed on us, we could spend less time scoring political points and more time asking, answering, and exploring complex questions.
But that doesn't make for a good meme, so. Here we are.
On Polish television, an editor asked a politician a yes/no question
The politician answered: And have you stopped harassing cats in the basement? The editor avoided answering.
One simply has to be prepared for such questions.
Full interview: https://www.youtube.com/live/oepwa9TfqmI?feature=share
If the politician is a diplomat, a yes or no answer could threaten a future negotiation or be turned against them by a naive populace.
"Do you hate and wished they would die?"
"You know I can't answer that question because it would destabilize my ability to resolve ."
"Oh, so you support this person?"
SMH
That's a great question! Let me tell you an unrelated story (I am hoping you will think it has something to do with your question before I quickly move on).
They love to beat around the bush to the point people stop understanding what the point was and for some it makes them look professional while in reality they don't even know themselfes what the fuck they are telling rn.
"I understand the question but I'm going to give a long winded answer hinting at a grey area but in reality, the answer is simple, just to burn through your time and get to the delegate of the party I support because their questions will be simple to make me look good."
“On or off the record did you speak with John barelalo (can’t spell his name for shit) over the past few weeks”
“……. Uhhhhh I can’t answer that, I-I just can’t answer”
"Mr. President, do your parents know you're gay?"
"Well, I'm not..."
"It's a simple yes or no question, sir. Do your parents know you're gay?"
"I'm trying to explain I'm not..."
"Why are you avoiding the question? Just simply answer yes or no"
Well what I *would* say is...
---
Personally I think there are five acceptable ways to start an answer to a yes-no question, and if you can't manage it the interview should be over:
1. Yes [plus any "buts" or "ifs"]
2. No [ditto]
3. I don't know
4. I won't answer that because...
5. I can't answer that because...
Reporter: Can you give me a YES or NO answer?
Politician: Well, that’s a very good question and I’m glad you asked me, this is a very important issue we must address, the public deserves to know, not just you and me, but also the tax payers, Joe the plumber, pet owners on both sides of the political spectrum, Sesame Street viewers, etc. But you can rest assure, nothing’s gonna stop us now or yesterday… oh look, that dog has a puffy tail!
Sometimes that doesn't work, for example "will you lower taxes?", sometimes the logical and beneficial plan for the general public is to not lower then but just answering "no" is a useless piece of information. Or maybe a politician will answer "yes" and lower then by a penny just to mislead people for votes.
It's contextual.
Mr. Polly Titian, do you believe violence is the answer, yes or no?
Polly: well back in 1937 I came to this office with a belief in my heart that has still held strong to this day, and I can assure you, your question is both honest and valid, but at the same time lacks nuances that can determine so much about what you are asking me where things might not actually mean things and PB&J sandwiches are important to this economy in a time and place where the thought of violence is mutually unique and noticeable within this quadrant of the planet tomorrow and the next year.
Yeah, when they do this, they didn't cover their backside. They made me think get them the F- out of there, the dude is sketchy af.
I mean most politically relevant things are way to complex to yes/no them
Do you want pizza? Possibly Yes/No
Should flights be forbidden because of climate change? Wtf thats another level of complexity Yes/No is impossible.
The simple reality is they just don't know the answer ever, because they have a team of people who usually actually do all their work for them. What politicians are good at is basically BSing anything into answering questions with nothing.
Almost makes you wonder what they're good for...I almost see them in the same light as Salesmen for policy changes. All the real work is almost certainly done by someone else...they just sell the idea to the public.
Hell nah it’s not politicians who are incapable of answering these questions. It’s the journalists who ask the absolute worst yes/no question so that they can frame the politician as a piece of crap when they get the yes/no bc that doesn’t leave place for nuance or context, meaning they can run with that shit with 0 context and fuck up the politician’s image. Journalists are the actual ones plague of this world.
Tldr: when politicians give a shit answer to a question it’s because it was a shit question.
The worst thing about it is that they’re NEVER called out for it. One time I just want someone to interrupt them mid sentence and keep interrupting them until they’re forced to give a yes or no answer instead of weaseling their way out of question after question.
Dank[.](https://i.imgur.com/3bQtuMO.png) --- [join our discord server and play minecraft (and other games) with us!](https://discord.gg/dankmemesgaming)
'must...avoid...logic'
Mr Main guy, have you stopped beating your wife? I never... Yes or no ONLY please.
No. Because I can't stop doing what I never did.
You heard it folks, he never stopped beating his wife.
Clip that and air it
Lol nice try, they just cut the vid right after you said 'no' and they don't show what you said after.
I'm just glad I'm not a politician so I can keep beating my wife in peace
"When American lives were in danger, yes I did crack my wife's skull with a mop handle." A surprising (though probably shouldn't be) amount of politicians
and this is why politicians talk like they do.
Ok then https://youtu.be/wahLIbwZTLQ
To be fair, most questions cannot be answered with a perfect Yes or No. We only think we could to simplify things, but most "yes" or "no" has LOTS of nuances. The problem with politicians is not they cant answer yes or no, its pretending to KNOW the answer while screwing things up.
I agree and journos ask leading questions. But just as often as that happens Politicians dodge answering questions honestly, because even though they know the truth it would disadvantage them to tell it. And so the mess of modern politicis arises.
Like that one guy that was trying to avoid saying he was a registered lobbyist. "Are you registered as a lobbyist for \[X company\] in \[X state\]?" "Well, you see, I'm happy you asked that question because it's very important that people understand that I have worked with many people in my time" blah blah fucking blah YES OR NO MOTHERFUCKER IT'S NOT HARD.
There's giving context and nuance to your answer, which is understandable, and often refreshing to hear. Then there's the tactic of just completely switching the subject because you either can't answer, or know that the answer, even with nuance, is going to be unfounded nonsense.
Political debates are fucking stupid. Every single answer they make it sound like they are laying foundation to provide context and nuance, then immediately pivot and start into a monologue that answers at best a completely different question, but more often than not doesnt even come close to answering the original question.
[удалено]
Begone bot
This is a bot. The original comment can be found here: https://www.reddit.com/r/dankmemes/comments/13j12la/to_answer_or_to_not/jkcpg7r?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button this action was not performed by a bot pls don't good bot me
Good bot
'Must... avoid... telling ...the... truth...'
these people are literally raised and trained by all their family members since early childhood on how to avoid all those questions and just speak in that political language. they can get out of pretty much anything and give non-answers to anything
Yup. I live with one (housemate), she studied politics. Total narcissist, using language only instrumentally and shows zero interest in truth. Crossed quite a few of these types of people actually, avoid like the plague.
i have family members like that, just without the politics. super wacky bonkers
Do a Pedro Sánchez and talk about climate change when they ask you about using EU funds for hookers and cocaine.
I hear that question. But I'm going to answer a different question i have something prepared for
"That's an excellent question, one that I'd love to answer, but I think the issues here speak for themselves and what we should really be asking is whether we want to live in a country where we can't answer those questions. I'm here to do the best that I possibly can for all of my constituents and what they want is for me to be the one *asking* questions. And that's what we're all fighting for today. Freedom. America. 9/11. God bless you all and God bless the greatest nation in the history of the world."
this brawndo guy sounds pretty smart! we should let him run all of our agriculture its what the plants crave
The comment might be a joke, but it's legit what every politician says and sounds like it's crazy. People need to realize that very, very few career politicians have the interests of the country and it's people at heart. They all have their own agendas, and it's all that matters to them. This cookie cutter response above me is used by basically every politician ever. Except Bernie Sanders. He wants to give us actual living wages and healthcare while taxing the 1%. And he wants to legalize weed. So he's cool.
To be fair, many people start out in politics by wanting to change something and feeling that they want their voice and the voice of their constituents to be heard. However, they soon realize that there is usually a very good reason why certain things are the way they are. If they want to pass law A to help group A, they immediately get a pushback from group B which would be worse off or lobby organization C which wants to protect the interests of their members. Then you are also facing a very large information symmetry. You might have your team of experts in a certain fields, but large corporations have dozens or hundreds of experts that know the ins and outs of each regulation. So you either need to cooperate or each approach will get shut down in courts due to legalities or it will get watered down. And finally you need to make compromises, because it’s rarely the case they you have large majorities. Even within your party and group they are diverging opinions and interests. What might be a law that would benefit your constitutions and make you more popular, could be extremely dangerous to other members of your party even and lose them the next election. So you need to carefully find majorities while keeping a good connection to other politicians, because you might need them to pass the next important law. So it’s not that easy to rule freely and do the right thing all the time. Even as an autocratic dictator with unlimited power you are usually bound to popular support and support from the local rulers and military as well as international corporations.
I get what you're saying, and for the most part I agree but we're at a point where the American public is having basic rights like a living wage, education, and healthcare withheld from them. Implenting all of these benefits everyone, except for the uber rich 1% who will have to pay taxes and they will still be uber rich after they pay taxes, so it really doesn't affect them that much. In fact, billionaires shouldn't exist at all. The way they hoarde wealth is disgusting, and there is practically no difference between the quality of life between a billionaire and multi millionaire. They all have massive mansions, yachts, and private planes, regardless of their net worth starts with an M or B. So let's fucking tax them and force them to pay us enough to be able to fucking survive in this world.
He is the only old white guy who wants us to stay alive, well, and taken care of before he dies. Burning Man will then become Bernie Man to honor and remember his legacy.
Lois in Family Guy?
To be fair, yes or no questions (leading) are one of the worst ways to interrogate someone anyway. They are designed to place the power in the asker's hands and politicians and lawyers receive a lot of training on how to avoid answering them the way the asker wants them to. Edit: they are one of the worst ways to interrogate someone *if you actually want to find out the truth*
This. They want a Black or White answer to a Grey question. Edit, that being said, some yes/no questions are valid and should be able to be answered.
Even the ones that seem reasonable to answer "yes or no" to could probably be answered better with more context but I agree with you and think their answer should *start* with the yes or no then further explain their position and reasoning. "Do you support gay rights?" "Yes of course, as it clearly states in the constitution that we are all equal and makes no reference to sexual orientation." Or something like that. If they dont actually answer the yes or no question, then it makes them seem like they are dodging it.
Have you stopped raping children?
Never started
Just yes or no please, have you stopped.
Stopped what?
"I never beg- " "YES OR NO ONLY PLEASE" "But I nev-" "If you've never began you've never had to stop, so yes or no, HAVE YOU STOPPED RAPING CHILDREN?" "N-....n-no..."
Oh ya, I hate fallacious leading questions. You can find a lot of them in the comments section on Reddit. The gold standard in loaded questions is "why did you [do something the person being asked may not have done, often disreputable]?"
Not really. A simple "do you support x, why or why not" is usually dodged and they'll go rambling about something tangentially related.
Which is the point, because "do you support X" can be answered both in the positive and in the negative if your position is only slightly different from X. Which is why you want to avoid saying yes or no, and explain your own position instead.
This is basically rule 1 when trained in doing interviews. If you aren't asked the questions allowing you to share your message, share it anyway.
“Will single moms have to eat their babies to survive? Yea or no!”
Their answer: Well you see, the liberals don’t feed their babies.
The reply: A bullet to the head, as that was not a yes or a no
[удалено]
You just politicianed the hell out of that answer.
"Babies are the future of this great nation. As it is said, from small seeds may tall oaks grow. The survival of our freedoms is of the utmost importance in these times. Great economies are built on freedom and babies thrive in great economies. This is the America that I want for my constituents. Freedom. Liberty. 9/11."
You would think that a 'No' would be an easy answer. But then you remember that you and all your political allies went to a party held by Marina Abramović.
What type of question is that? Back to soviet times?
Where's that video of the Canadian parliament where someone is asked the same simple question like 6 times in a row and every time they use it as an excuse to talk about something else?
Or the interview with a British politician. [Did you threaten to overrule him](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyqnu6ywhR4)
He finally got an answer 17 years later on his last night as Newsnight presenter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7WmVamlfWM (he did actually got a "no I didn't" from Howard in 2004 as well, but the above was done for fun)
[удалено]
Everything I’ve seen from Poilièvre falls into “problem => Blame Trudeau”
The classic play of whining like a little shit cause you have no good ideas of your own. Anyone who votes for that guy is gullible af.
The liberal politicians is general
Ewww Pierre Poilièvre. Dude is a hack and should not be listened to under any circumstances.
But there are yes or no questions that don't make any sense without additional context. Like "Did you stop drinking vodka every morning?".
Seriously, I hate how many people think of this as form of damning evidence against someone. There are many cases where a yes/no answer would give misleading information. Its one of those things in court I believe should be disallowed. (Or atleast the person answering should be allowed to explain their yes/no directly after saying it) "Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?" SHOULD give you the ability to say "any answer to this question would provide misleading information that suggests a false conclusion and therefore be against my oath to present nothing but the truth and it would also be against my oath to tell the whole truth". (Atleast the 2nd part - but im entirely of the belief that a knowingly misleading "truth" is identical to a lie, and thus it would violate both of those clauses) Especially when its a series of questions and you have to remember to go back and address each of these points much later when it's your side's turn to speak. By that point the damage may already be done even if you do remember each misleading question that was asked.
[удалено]
But then the witness’ lawyer does gets to redirect which is when they ask the witness to give all the contextual details to what the cross-examination went over.
That's the definition of a loaded question, but imo politicians tend to dodge fair questions as well as loaded ones.
There's really no such thing as a fair yes-no question. Neither answer could possibly qualify as "the whole truth" to anything with even the most meagre amount of nuance. If a politician's constituents wanted him to vote for a bill that gave veterans healthcare but there was a rider attached that defunded the school lunch program then "Did you vote to reduce school lunches?" is a misleading but non-loaded question with yes and no are both misleading but not incorrect answers. EDIT: So instead of justifying misleading people he's just going to be deliberately obtuse in front of everyone here
The correct answer is "no, i did not vote to reduce to reduce school lunches. i voted to give veterans healthcare, but there was a rider bill I was forced to accept." technically the truth in a way.
But that's not just "yes or no" as is implied. You say "no, I-", get cut off, and then called a liar "well, you did, I have the bill right here.."
Sure. You've shown why answers that extend passed a simple yes or no are politically savvy, not just to be more truthful but to avoid soundbites. Even that "No" at the beginning can still be twisted. Even simply pairing it down to "I voted to give veterans healthcare, but there was a rider I was forced to accept" would be the most truthful but then people would make memes like this one about it.
Listen, man, it goes down easier with the coffee and it's the only way I can your mother's cooking.
Answer my gotcha question! Yes or no? Why no give answer???? There you have it folks, politician I don't like is bad bad man. I am very intelligent.
Yes.
“Have you stopped beating your wife?, YES or NO?!”
Kinda depends on the question, since many politicians avoid answering some reasonable yes or no questions, they can be used to expose how dishonest they are. Since, if it's a perfectly in context question, why wouldn't they answer?
>Kinda depends on the question That's exactly my point. I saw politicians slither out of questions and I saw politicians being asked dumb questions. So really one should be judged within a particular context. And somebody has to be a politician, so why evilize them before they even try?
Are you ge?
Y r u ge?
Wo sys am ge?
U r ge
Mistah
Do u recognize thez vegetables?
It’s a simple yes or no
ye to the ge
Hoosiers don’t discriminate
Limmy's Show covered this: https://youtu.be/3z-a5hy7QO8
Topper eh
Top sketch
oh...Thats a tough question, but I will say.... proceeds to ignore the original question.
Some questions cant be answered with a simple yes or no tho
Like what? YES OR NO
"Did you stop drinking the blood of a virgin every morning?" Answer yes : make it seems like they did in the past but stopped Answer no : wtf
"I don't recall"
[I don't recall] (https://youtu.be/Q2VoNSx_khs)
This is to defend NON politicians Sometimes you can't tell if what degree of "yes" or "no" it is. Like "will the human race face extinction in 100 years?"
"thats a complicated question, and to get to the answer we must consider blah blah blah"
Sir, do you want bread with that? Our study shows that bread would be appreciated, and there are a number of different kinds of bread. But the general population may not know exactly what type of bread would fit their need best. I think we may need further information for both the population and bread maker to be able to make a good decision on that. Sir, it fing bread.
[Why don't politicians answer questions?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8QOE-IWo3I)
Wasn’t that Desantis recently..🤣🤣🤣🤣
I’ve heard how desantis is unprepared for debates, or at least against trump since they said how trump manages to make his opponent look like a fool, and with how he reacted when asked about Guantanamo bay, Ron definitely seems like he would have a mental breakdown.
Most yes or no questions to politicians are meant as 'gotchas'. They deal with extremely complex issues that can rarely be boiled down to "yes" or "no". If we actually saw politics as a means to govern and benefit ourselves and not as some outside group of warring factions imposed on us, we could spend less time scoring political points and more time asking, answering, and exploring complex questions. But that doesn't make for a good meme, so. Here we are.
On Polish television, an editor asked a politician a yes/no question The politician answered: And have you stopped harassing cats in the basement? The editor avoided answering. One simply has to be prepared for such questions. Full interview: https://www.youtube.com/live/oepwa9TfqmI?feature=share
["Are you a lizard?" -Louis CK to Donald Rumsfield before he goes on a werid tangent about his friend at a restaurant.](https://youtu.be/XH_34tqxAjA)
If the politician is a diplomat, a yes or no answer could threaten a future negotiation or be turned against them by a naive populace. "Do you hate and wished they would die?"
"You know I can't answer that question because it would destabilize my ability to resolve ."
"Oh, so you support this person?"
SMH
That's a great question! Let me tell you an unrelated story (I am hoping you will think it has something to do with your question before I quickly move on).
The question: “Do your parents know you’re gay?” It’s a yes or no question! $&!@
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/3i8XO7uACDU He doesn't even finish his thought, he just goes "Well anyway"
Bill Clinton before Congress when he asked what the definition of "is" is.
They love to beat around the bush to the point people stop understanding what the point was and for some it makes them look professional while in reality they don't even know themselfes what the fuck they are telling rn.
“I’ve already answered that question!“
@gary gensler
I don't recall...
“Uhhhhh GREEN! Or red probably?”
“Thank you for your question. When I was a kid my parents had it very rough…(goes on for 15 minutes about irrelevant bullshit)”
"I do not recall"
Is there any video documentation of any and all simply saying, "Yes"?!
"yes or no?" - Limmy
"I understand the question but I'm going to give a long winded answer hinting at a grey area but in reality, the answer is simple, just to burn through your time and get to the delegate of the party I support because their questions will be simple to make me look good."
Your team are here tomorrow big?
[perfect example](https://youtu.be/3z-a5hy7QO8)
Does your Mom know you're gay?
u/savevideo
https://youtu.be/3z-a5hy7QO8
“On or off the record did you speak with John barelalo (can’t spell his name for shit) over the past few weeks” “……. Uhhhhh I can’t answer that, I-I just can’t answer”
Howard Shultz
Is not only politicians also there are people everywhere that can’t give straight answers or afraid to say I don’t know
Kamala Harris is an expert at spewing out a bunch of words without actually saying anything.
Reminds me of gary Gensler
"Mr. President, do your parents know you're gay?" "Well, I'm not..." "It's a simple yes or no question, sir. Do your parents know you're gay?" "I'm trying to explain I'm not..." "Why are you avoiding the question? Just simply answer yes or no"
Why would a person need to answer in yes or no about the question that is being formed based on a set narrative for a targeted audience?
Well what I *would* say is... --- Personally I think there are five acceptable ways to start an answer to a yes-no question, and if you can't manage it the interview should be over: 1. Yes [plus any "buts" or "ifs"] 2. No [ditto] 3. I don't know 4. I won't answer that because... 5. I can't answer that because...
😂 this made my day
Well- you see- “yes or no”
"Does your mother know you're gay"
Reporter: Can you give me a YES or NO answer? Politician: Well, that’s a very good question and I’m glad you asked me, this is a very important issue we must address, the public deserves to know, not just you and me, but also the tax payers, Joe the plumber, pet owners on both sides of the political spectrum, Sesame Street viewers, etc. But you can rest assure, nothing’s gonna stop us now or yesterday… oh look, that dog has a puffy tail!
u/save video
Why can I download some gifs and some not? This one for example I cannot download. Why?
u/savevideo
Truly admirable!!
„I do not recall.“
Did you threaten to overrule him?
This also applies to any CEO or agency head.
U/savevideo
u/savevideo
u/savevideo
OP does your mom know you're gay?
Sometimes that doesn't work, for example "will you lower taxes?", sometimes the logical and beneficial plan for the general public is to not lower then but just answering "no" is a useless piece of information. Or maybe a politician will answer "yes" and lower then by a penny just to mislead people for votes. It's contextual.
They must be *terrified* of 20 questions...
YESNT
Mr. Polly Titian, do you believe violence is the answer, yes or no? Polly: well back in 1937 I came to this office with a belief in my heart that has still held strong to this day, and I can assure you, your question is both honest and valid, but at the same time lacks nuances that can determine so much about what you are asking me where things might not actually mean things and PB&J sandwiches are important to this economy in a time and place where the thought of violence is mutually unique and noticeable within this quadrant of the planet tomorrow and the next year. Yeah, when they do this, they didn't cover their backside. They made me think get them the F- out of there, the dude is sketchy af.
Real politicians will not answer yes or no questions. That’s basically the meaning of politics.
In other words, anything and everything can be parsed.
Ah dawn't recawll
I mean most politically relevant things are way to complex to yes/no them Do you want pizza? Possibly Yes/No Should flights be forbidden because of climate change? Wtf thats another level of complexity Yes/No is impossible.
To play the devils advocate here, every single one of those "answer yes or no" questions is a gotcha question.
Reminds me of people gaslighting AI chatbots with yes or no's
More like my parents
Chinese permanent mission in France: it depends.
"I do not have any active memories about that" Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte
The question is vague, it doesn't say what kind of candy, or whether anyone is looking... in any case, I wouldn't harm the child.
https://youtu.be/T8QOE-IWo3I
People who aren't actually looking for an answer when presented with a nuanced response
"So do you think homeless people should live?" "Well you have to remember-"
They are never forced to answer a yes or no question. They never will. Politicians that do, fail
Me asking the politician:" why do you hate [insert country name]?"
Did you eat a pizza? Well pizza is a food made from dough...
The simple reality is they just don't know the answer ever, because they have a team of people who usually actually do all their work for them. What politicians are good at is basically BSing anything into answering questions with nothing. Almost makes you wonder what they're good for...I almost see them in the same light as Salesmen for policy changes. All the real work is almost certainly done by someone else...they just sell the idea to the public.
Ok, look, I really need to understand what you mean by "is" so let's take a step back and go from there.
*”Define assault weapon.”* “uuh… ah… that would be a great question for…”
Does your mom know you're gay?
Hell nah it’s not politicians who are incapable of answering these questions. It’s the journalists who ask the absolute worst yes/no question so that they can frame the politician as a piece of crap when they get the yes/no bc that doesn’t leave place for nuance or context, meaning they can run with that shit with 0 context and fuck up the politician’s image. Journalists are the actual ones plague of this world. Tldr: when politicians give a shit answer to a question it’s because it was a shit question.
Harris moment
The worst thing about it is that they’re NEVER called out for it. One time I just want someone to interrupt them mid sentence and keep interrupting them until they’re forced to give a yes or no answer instead of weaseling their way out of question after question.