Fuckin low energy concern trolls man <| sep |> If any of the states deny Stein standing because she can ' t win , does Hillary add her name to recountaudit request ? <| sep |> I use SanDisk Extreme pro ' s 128 gb 95 MBs . I have a cheaper Transcend card but after a few write errors I don ' t use it as much . <| sep |> Had mine last month , but Happy Thanksgiving to you ! <| sep |> Glad to help . So far as your other question , I think you ' re on the right track Lately I ' ve felt that I suck at arguing and it ' s not necessarily the logic or reasoning but perhaps the whole process . When your copy of Aristotle ' s Rhetoric arrives , look up the term endoxa or doxa in the index and notice how A uses it . You ' ll see it ' s what distinguishes the nature of rhetoric from other types of thinking according to Aristotle and that perhaps it helps explain the uncomfortable feeling you experience with arguing over public issues these days . As you point out , the problem goes beyond basic reasoning alone . Instead , people often disagree about unstated common sense assumptions that provide the basis for their arguments , what Aristotle calls endoxa , and what in more recent times gets discussed through the concept of ideology . While ideology has been studied by many academic disciplines , for help with argument and persuasion one book I ' ve found particularly useful has been Donald Lazere ' s Reading and Writing for Civic Literacy The Critical Citizen ' s Guide to Argumentative Rhetoric either edition works . You ' ll find Lazere provides an accessible explanation of the contemporary politicalideological spectrum in the U . S . what values and priorities get associated with conservatism , liberalism , and other political positions these days as well as the language and rhetorical appeals that go along with each . Chances are , that ' s where you ' re feeling bogged down . You can follow the reasoning of those with whom you disagree , but because you likely hold different ideological assumptions , their arguments don ' t make sense to you and vice versa . In my view it ' s likely the biggest challenge for the theory and practice of rhetoric today . If Lazere ' s approach seems interesting , you might go on to look at a more conceptual study , Making Sense of Political Ideology The Power of Language in Democracy 2005 by Bernard Brock , Mark Huglen , James F . Klumpp , Sharon Howell , all rhetoricians in the field of communication studies . Although not as much a textbook , the discussion of historical changes around how politicians use ideological appeals in their rhetoric can help with thinking about your own arguments . Especially interesting to me , given the outcome of the Presidential election , was the take that Brock , et al . , had on the Clintons over a decade ago . Essentially , they chastised Bill and Hillary for lacking a strong ideological base to their policy proposals , with the result that they often came across as unpersuasive Hillary Clinton ' s failed healthcare reform efforts in the 1990 s in particular . Fast forward to 2016 , and you can find the same vulnerability when HRC ran up against a much more ideologicallybased opponent in Bernie Sanders . Similarly , this weakness also appeared against Donald Trump , someone without clear policy proposals , let alone a coherent ideology in traditional terms . Despite that apparent advantage , HRC also struggled to present an appealing ideological frame for her campaign , with the result that , to many voters , she came across as in it for herself rather than any larger values . Needless to say , we live in challenging times for the practice and theory of rhetoric . It ' s great you ' re willing to step up . Hopefully , more citizens will choose to do the same .