The reason that comment was voted down is very likely its rather unnecessarily adversarial tone. It takes very little effort to have the same content and be polite while expressing it.
If you want to provide evidence of a surplus of rational evidence-based policy in national and economic policy and international relations in the last hundred years or so, I'm sure you can prove my point is bullshit.
But so far all you've done is call me names, which isn't evidence as most people understand it.
Maybe not so ironically, it's a fine example of the kind of angry rhetoric I was talking about.
I never referred to you. Never even linked to your comment directly. Was talking about HN in general.
I also never asked you for any data. I would suggest learning to read before you try and form arguments. Like learning to crawl before trying to sprint.
