2

I've asked this question regarding Presidential record of personal ties with the power of pardon practice but it seems to be off-topic on the Politics SE community.

The question to me seems political and one that is of importance but I'm having a hard time formulating in a way to be correct for the site which is a common thing for me with political questions.

Does this seem like a question appropriate to ask on Skeptics or can anyone give me any advice that I could tweak to make it more appropriate here or even there to be more on topic?

A record of close personal ties seems like a record of what is known, I'm not asking anyone to guess but use common logic that is [obvious] a fact that a former president pardoned a person and indeed had close ties with what those records would indicate as such.

2

With that exact question as written on Politics SE, I'd first be closing as "not notable". You'd need a notable claim. I suspect you aren't asking off the top of your head, so maybe you can easily find a notable claim.

I'd next close as a current event. As you point out in the question, it's still some time before Trump's term expires. On the other hand, maybe that's not fair because if he's already the most pardoning POTUS, then the answer won't change because of his own actions. My rebut would be that it's only a month until he can no longer take the action at all, so it can wait until then, when deep and comprehensive analyses of his presidency is likely to exist and we know the exact numbers of the answer won't change in the near future.

Then there's a possible "user interest" issue, as recently suspected to exist by one of our longtime high contributors. Maybe it's technically on topic and wouldn't be closed, but it might get net downvotes. I personally would be inclined to downvote. I do not find the question interesting and believe the answer trivial, whether 'yes' or 'no'. But I wouldn't close it, since there's no "conflicts with fredsbend's interests" close rule for this site, as much as I might like it ;)

I can't speak for things on Politics SE, but I do interact with some of their regulars a good deal, so if their criticism of the question is how to measure "close to the President", I'm inclined to believe it's honest criticism, not cover up for "Republican wrongdoing". I think you'll get exactly the same criticism here too. We're even more obsessed with measurable and empirical answers. I don't think "Obvious, I know it when I see it" definition will satisfy our regulars.

Now, I don't want to discourage you from asking politics questions on Skeptics SE. Indeed, I like politics as a topic. Unfortunately, I think as a topic on this site it's been too often used as a megaphone for low gravity, politically embarrassing nonsense. I understand "low gravity" is a bit of a subjective judgement, but I'd just point you to about half of our Trump questions over the last five years (it's a lot) and challenge you to prove they aren't much better than "trivial partisan crap slinging". Maybe you think that's cynical. Maybe you haven't read those questions yet. For me, politics questions need some meat in them. If you can reasonably say the answer doesn't really matter a year from now, you probably shouldn't ask it.

1
  • 2
    You sir just gave me the best advice for this ever... Thank you so very much! – The Milk Man Dec 25 '20 at 15:05

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .