Opinion: The Case for Trump
(https://photos.smugmug.com/Other/Presidential-Election-2016/i-F3pVmfh/0/X2/donald_trump_gop-X2.jpg)
Read More: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2016-jul-opinion-the-case-for-trump
You kinda touched on this but I think it needs more attention, and that's Trump's linguistic abilities. Many times people will just read headlines or little snippets of something he said & then form an opinion based on that. This is a mistake.
For one, because its usually missing context (which is always a mistake). And two, because people aren't realizing exactly what he's trying to accomplish. It seems obvious to me that what he's doing is setting the bar super high (like with any negotiations), then eventually coming down to a reality which he thinks can actually be done & where he wants to be.
I mean, he wrote an entire book on this from a business perspective & he's applying that to politics now. All he's doing is priming the pump, getting the disenfranchised on board first (which is a huge number), then shifting to the middle to pick up the rest. It seems to be working. So much so that he ended up getting more primary votes than any Rep in history, and utterly destroyed many prominent candidates in the process. So much so that they're still butthurt over it, while not even bothering to show up at the Convention, claiming it was because of some principled moral high ground. Bullshit. They're mad because they played the game so long, thought they were owed something, got complacent & then got steamrolled by an outsider. Plus, he's leading in almost every poll now against Hillary (this will obviously be up & down).
Anyways, that's why I always laugh at the knee jerk reactions of "Omg, he's a racist bigot sexist monster!" They're completely missing the point & what he's doing. Its also funny since he was never called these things throughout his entire career until he decided to run for President, even though he's been in the public spotlight for decades, been all over the world & knows literally thousands of people. So I may not like it, but I at least understand what's happening. One thing about him, he knows how to win. How this plays out during an actual Trump presidency is anyone's guess though.
Anyways, here's more of Trump's linguistic skills: https://youtu.be/55NxKENplG4 And keep in mind this video was done all the way back in October.
Quote from: peestandingup on July 26, 2016, 05:26:18 AM
I mean, he wrote an entire book on this from a business perspective & he's applying that to politics now.
You mean this one? http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/07/25/donald-trumps-ghostwriter-tells-all
He is successful. It's not smoke and mirrors. Whether he conned his way to the top or not...hes at the top.
QuoteI mean, he wrote an entire book on this from a business perspective & he's applying that to politics now. All he's doing is priming the pump, getting the disenfranchised on board first (which is a huge number), then shifting to the middle to pick up the rest. It seems to be working. So much so that he ended up getting more primary votes than any Rep in history, and utterly destroyed many prominent candidates in the process. So much so that they're still butthurt over it, while not even bothering to show up at the Convention, claiming it was because of some principled moral high ground. Bullshit. They're mad because they played the game so long, thought they were owed something, got complacent & then got steamrolled by an outsider. Plus, he's leading in almost every poll now against Hillary (this will obviously be up & down).
Yeah, I'm sure you would have the same thinking if a non-white person running for office used the same kind of hateful racial language to get his nomination. Can you imagine the outcry if any political nominee said anything even kinda explicit against non-minority Americans? What I've seen repeatedly amongst the repubs in my circles is a willingness to let the racism slide because "it's a political tactic. He's not really racist." That's lame and shows a total lack of principal.
Quote from: Murder_me_Rachel on July 26, 2016, 10:35:19 AM
The whole idea that you run a country like a business is one of the single fucking dumbest things to have developed in politics over the past generation. Thanks for that, W.
+1.
Honestly, can't think of a SINGLE reason to vote for Trump. Not one.
And 'not liking Hillary' is not enough for me.
Quote from: TheCat on July 26, 2016, 10:18:42 AM
What I've seen repeatedly amongst the repubs in my circles is a willingness to let the racism slide because "it's a political tactic. He's not really racist." That's lame and shows a total lack of principal.
Can you quote any actual racist things Trump has said? Just curious.
Quote from: peestandingup on July 26, 2016, 05:26:18 AM
Anyways, that's why I always laugh at the knee jerk reactions of "Omg, he's a racist bigot sexist monster!" They're completely missing the point & what he's doing.
Actually, I am not so sure he's a bigot. But the point I seem to have to keep making is that anyone who is willing to do and say the things he does simply to garner votes is just as bad (if not worse) than someone who says and does things because he believes it.
Its less than he's an actual racist, and more than he's exploring preexisting racist tendencies of many voters. It's opportunism, which may be worse in this case.
Pee, I'm not going to get into a debate with you about what is a racist statement and what isn't.
If you would like to splice his words, tweets (and retweets) and his overall campaign strategy to demonstrate how he's not pandering to a certain segment of the American population by exploiting racists sentiments, go for it. I'm all eyes.
Well written Spuwho. And you were able to do it without any, 'because Hillary'....
I agree with many points made, especially regarding the political chip game. I find that to be more true than not and Trump expressed that exact comment when debating the rest of the GOP. And to PSU's comment regarding context, of course it's left out. It's tough to sensationalize things that are grounded in common sense, it's also much easier to sensationalize topics when you leave out key modifiers such as 'illegal' when referring to immigrants and 'radical' when referring to Muslims.
And I, like many others, prefer the off the cuff responses rather than a delayed, well-crafted response because that's how our brain works. We all have an immediate response to stimuli and then as that initial reaction passes and we have time to process, our response changes as well usually not to far from the immediate, but typically tempered. But I appreciate the lack of a filter and then the realization or needed moderation because I can relate to that.
So while my personal feelings about a Trump presidency are based around my preference of more 'anything but Hillary' rather than any actual facts, I have been doing some research on the RNC Platform and have to say that I'm not exactly impressed. They are in agreement with the Obama administration regarding how corporate tax is structured, even citing the commission report from 2010. But many of the social policies that I've hit on so far have been more tea-partyi-esque and less centered than I would prefer. There is a serious divide in the approach I'd like to see regarding mass transit (more options for everyone) and how their platform feels about it, essentially that the Fed has no business getting involved in mass transit and that it should all be handled at the state/local level.
And that is just after the first 14 pages of a 66 page document, so there's plenty more work to go on my end until I feel better about my current decision.
Thanks for the well thought out piece, spuwho. You make a good point that striking compromises with congress is going to be a requirement for a successful presidency this term, regardless of who's elected. That was one reason I never cared for Bernie Sanders and Ted Cruz; they are people who'd rather stick to their guns and lose than compromise their beliefs. It's an admirable trait in some respects, but it's not going to make a very effective president.
Spuwho, nice job. I think you did the best anyone can do.
That being said, I am completely sick of Donald Trump. I have not seen one coherent piece of serious journalism that begins to sway my vote in his direction. Nothing really changes this simple fact:
Donald Trump has spent every day of his professional life enriching his own person. And his self proclaimed number one qualification for office, his personal wealth, is pretty dubious considering he will not release his tax returns. No person ever elected President of the US has refused to do this, and Trump will not be the first.
His "I alone can solve this mess" mantra is frightening considering he has never attempted anything like this in his life before. His statements: "Everyone in Washington is a loser, dumb and weak" should be a warning bell to all.
Please remember what the last Republican President promised us: "The Irag War will be cheap, easy, quick. We will be greeted as Liberators. We will be repayed with oil revenue." This promise was the cornerstone of a foreign policy debacle that has haunted us ever since, and will continue to well into the future.
Trump has done the same, promise "I can fix everything, quickly, easily, and get others to pay for it."
Most importantly, Trump has never said that progress on the big issues requires compromise, diligence, and sacrifice.
Vote for this idiot at your own peril.
Quote from: Tacachale on July 26, 2016, 11:52:49 AM
Thanks for the well thought out piece, spuwho. You make a good point that striking compromises with congress is going to be a requirement for a successful presidency this term, regardless of who's elected. That was one reason I never cared for Bernie Sanders and Ted Cruz; they are people who'd rather stick to their guns and lose than compromise their beliefs. It's an admirable trait in some respects, but it's not going to make a very effective president.
Obama compromised with Republicans often during his first term, and often to liberals' dismay. As the GOP became more intractable though, that willingness to negotiate waned. House Republicans in particular have thrown a wrench in the president's agenda, blocking votes on popular bills that already cleared the Senate with bipartisan support.
The divide only widened after 2012, with Tea Party–aligned GOPers hijacking the party and pushing it further away from the center. In the resulting chaos, Republicans on multiple occasions couldn't even agree among themselves about what they wanted to achieve. I don't see any reasons why this would change.
Quote from: Adam White on July 26, 2016, 11:14:21 AM
Actually, I am not so sure he's a bigot. But the point I seem to have to keep making is that anyone who is willing to do and say the things he does simply to garner votes is just as bad (if not worse) than someone who says and does things because he believes it.
Soooo, pretty much like every candidate in history then?? Tell me how the left doesn't try to use scare tactics regarding social issues, poverty & welfare, etc & I'll buy you dinner.
Quote from: TheCat on July 26, 2016, 11:36:55 AM
Pee, I'm not going to get into a debate with you about what is a racist statement and what isn't.
If you would like to splice his words, tweets (and retweets) and his overall campaign strategy to demonstrate how he's not pandering to a certain segment of the American population by exploiting racists sentiments, go for it. I'm all eyes.
Nah, bro. I just think if you're gonna accuse someone of something as serious as being a racist, then you should probably have something to back it up. I'm silly like that I guess.
Quote from: peestandingup on July 26, 2016, 12:30:59 PM
Quote from: Adam White on July 26, 2016, 11:14:21 AM
Actually, I am not so sure he's a bigot. But the point I seem to have to keep making is that anyone who is willing to do and say the things he does simply to garner votes is just as bad (if not worse) than someone who says and does things because he believes it.
Soooo, pretty much like every candidate in history then?? Tell me how the left doesn't try to use scare tactics regarding social issues, poverty & welfare, etc & I'll buy you dinner
Scare tactics? I'm talking about deliberately inflammatory language. I don't recall Sanders engaging in dog whistle politics (or worse).
Quote from: Adam White on July 26, 2016, 12:41:30 PM
I don't recall Sanders engaging in dog whistle politics (or worse).
Sure he did. An old socialist hippie leftover of the 60s convinced a large group of people that they're entitled to all kinds of crazy & expensive free stuff (that could never be paid for) just for existing. And if they don't get it, then cry about it & keep fighting until they do.
You may have selective memory regarding this, but many of his supporters seemed to twist this around & think it was totally OK to invade other rallies that they didn't agree with & start actual fights, block ambulances, throw eggs & spit on people.
It wouldn't shock me if we see something at the DNC before it's over with.
Quote from: peestandingup on July 26, 2016, 02:27:25 PM
Quote from: Adam White on July 26, 2016, 12:41:30 PM
I don't recall Sanders engaging in dog whistle politics (or worse).
Sure he did. An old socialist hippie leftover of the 60s convinced a large group of people that they're entitled to all kinds of crazy & expensive free stuff (that could never be paid for) just for existing. And if they don't get it, then cry about it & keep fighting until they do.
You may have selective memory regarding this, but many of his supporters seemed to twist this around & think it was totally OK to invade other rallies that they didn't agree with & start actual fights, block ambulances, throw eggs & spit on people.
It wouldn't shock me if we see something at the DNC before it's over with.
I am not saying that's true, but if it is, it's not dog whistle politics.
I was (and still am) referring to inflammatory rhetoric involving race and religion. Trump has done that. Sanders (for example) has not. Trump has stoked the fires of bigotry to gain votes. And I am specifically referring to bigotry against racial, ethnic and religious groups.
That was my original point - sorry I wasn't more explicit. I assumed it was clear.
I have often wondered if the people that think is is so outrageous to fund college tuition with public funds have ever considered that the average college graduate earns a lot more money (typically double or more) than a high school graduate, and in doing so will more than pay back the cost in the additional income taxes they will pay over their lifetime. Most students graduating HS today without further education, would not even make enough to pay federal income taxes at all. They will also have more money to spend in the general economy as well. Education is an investment in human capital, capital that doesn't leave the country as easily as currency can in a global economy.
Quote from: vicupstate on July 26, 2016, 02:44:18 PM
I have often wondered if the people that think is is so outrageous to fund college tuition with public funds have ever considered that the average college graduate earns a lot more money (typically double or more) than a high school graduate, and in doing so will more than pay back the cost in the additional income taxes they will pay over their lifetime. Most students graduating HS today without further education, would not even make enough to pay federal income taxes at all. They will also have more money to spend in the general economy as well. Education is an investment in human capital, capital that doesn't leave the country as easily as currency can in a global economy.
And healthy people can work and contribute to the economy. There are some basic rights that all governments should ensure the governed (IMO): food, shelter, education and healthcare. There are others, of course (things like freedom of speech, freedom of movement, freedom of association, privacy, etc).
Quote from: peestandingup on July 26, 2016, 02:27:25 PM
Quote from: Adam White on July 26, 2016, 12:41:30 PM
I don't recall Sanders engaging in dog whistle politics (or worse).
Sure he did. An old socialist hippie leftover of the 60s convinced a large group of people that they're entitled to all kinds of crazy & expensive free stuff (that could never be paid for) just for existing. And if they don't get it, then cry about it & keep fighting until they do.
You may have selective memory regarding this, but many of his supporters seemed to twist this around & think it was totally OK to invade other rallies that they didn't agree with & start actual fights, block ambulances, throw eggs & spit on people.
It wouldn't shock me if we see something at the DNC before it's over with.
What exactly is your point? What does this have to do with the fact Trump would be a TERRIBLE fucking leader.
Quote from: peestandingup on July 26, 2016, 05:26:18 AM
I mean, he wrote an entire book on this from a business perspective & he's applying that to politics now.
Except he didn't actually write the book and the guy who did says it's a work of mostly fiction.
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/07/25/donald-trumps-ghostwriter-tells-all
QuoteWhen Schwartz began writing "The Art of the Deal," he realized that he needed to put an acceptable face on Trump's loose relationship with the truth. So he concocted an artful euphemism. Writing in Trump's voice, he explained to the reader, "I play to people's fantasies. . . . People want to believe that something is the biggest and the greatest and the most spectacular. I call it truthful hyperbole. It's an innocent form of exaggeration—and it's a very effective form of promotion." Schwartz now disavows the passage. "Deceit," he told me, is never "innocent." He added, " 'Truthful hyperbole' is a contradiction in terms. It's a way of saying, 'It's a lie, but who cares?' " Trump, he said, loved the phrase.
Quote from: stephendare on July 26, 2016, 02:30:59 PM
Crazy and expensive free stuff? thats ridiculous.
And you might have a selective memory but that is the history of every public demonstration since the 1730s.
You didn't seem to mind this when the Tea Party idiots were crashing anything with the word government on it. Why the change of heart?
And no, universal health care is not an unpayable expense under the single payer system.
What a bizarre claim in the sand to stake, PSU
Stephen, it was WAY more than universal healthcare ("free" college, childcare, $15 minimum wage, etc) & we all know this. Taxing wall street fat cats & raising taxes on the 1% was his answer to solving everything & it wouldn't even be close to paying for even one of those proposals. So yeah, he was filling impressionable young voter's heads with nonsense that didn't have a clue on how the world actually works & things that were actually obtainable.
And when did I ever follow the Tea Party?? That's a new one to me. I don't know if you just don't remember any of our conversations, but I called them out almost instantly after they latched onto Ron Paul's movement (someone I did like).
Quote from: Adam White on July 26, 2016, 02:39:33 PM
I am not saying that's true, but if it is, it's not dog whistle politics.
I was (and still am) referring to inflammatory rhetoric involving race and religion. Trump has done that. Sanders (for example) has not. Trump has stoked the fires of bigotry to gain votes. And I am specifically referring to bigotry against racial, ethnic and religious groups.
Well, I personally think he used plenty of messaging & phrasing that would be categorized as such, but its debatable so I'm not gonna argue that point. If you don't think so, then no big deal. But it doesn't have to involve race & religion.
Talking about illegal aliens, Muslim extremists, etc isn't bigotry. At least not in the sense people are making it out to be (sheer intolerance for no reason). Are you saying we should all have tolerance for such groups of people?? Many countries in Europe thought so & look how well that's working out for them.
Quote from: ben says on July 26, 2016, 06:34:24 PM
What exactly is your point? What does this have to do with the fact Trump would be a TERRIBLE fucking leader.
I made several points, what's yours? Can you make a rational case for your argument besides shouting in caps??
QuoteI don't recall Sanders engaging in dog whistle politics (or worse).
Of course, Bern lives in Fantasyland where everything a young person needs will be free and provided by the Federal Government using candyland dollars. The only ones who listen are the same who believe that this fantasy will come true.
QuoteSanders (for example) has not. Trump has stoked the fires of bigotry to gain votes. And I am specifically referring to bigotry against racial, ethnic and religious groups.
Its election season, you stoke fires and get people excited, you build your base and then set them loose in the fall to the election. It happens every voting season. You lean to the Left or Right and govern in the middle. Happens every cycle.
QuoteTaxing wall street fat cats & raising taxes on the 1% was his answer to solving everything & it wouldn't even be close to paying for even one of those proposals. So yeah, he was filling impressionable young voter's heads with nonsense that didn't have a clue on how the world actually works & things that were actually obtainable.
+1 , oh and taxing everyone to pay for young voters dreams will only add dynamite to the fire with the middle class who has seen real wage growth below 5% for the last decade. They will be so super happy to pay for young people's education! Ask your parents if they want to be taxed more and step back from the slap!
Quote from: mtraininjax on July 27, 2016, 04:26:54 AM
QuoteI don't recall Sanders engaging in dog whistle politics (or worse).
Of course, Bern lives in Fantasyland where everything a young person needs will be free and provided by the Federal Government using candyland dollars. The only ones who listen are the same who believe that this fantasy will come true.
QuoteSanders (for example) has not. Trump has stoked the fires of bigotry to gain votes. And I am specifically referring to bigotry against racial, ethnic and religious groups.
Its election season, you stoke fires and get people excited, you build your base and then set them loose in the fall to the election. It happens every voting season. You lean to the Left or Right and govern in the middle. Happens every cycle.
As I said, Sanders (as an example) has not employed racism and bigotry (whether implied or stated outright) to get votes. Trump has. That what I was referring to, so I don't see how your 'fantasyland' comment about 'candyland dollars' has anything to do with the point I was making.
As far as your second comment is concerned, you seem to say that it's okay to appeal to racism in order to 'get people excited'. This, to me, means you're no better than a racist or a bigot - which was the point I was making about Trump. It matters not if Trump isn't an actual racist - the fact remains that he has used racist language (coded or blatant) to get people to vote for him. Anyone who would do that is no better than a person who IS a racist. I certainly think it disqualifies him for the Presidency.
QuoteAs far as your second comment is concerned, you seem to say that it's okay to appeal to racism in order to 'get people excited'. This, to me, means you're no better than a racist or a bigot
So you are calling me a racist or a bigot? Who are you to call people names?
QuoteI certainly think it disqualifies him for the Presidency
I think Sanders crazy ideas disqualify him for the Presidency. He has no plans or programs or solutions on how to pay for anything. He lives in fantasyland and uses FREE as a word to build his political base. Feel FREE to disagree..........
in a respectful manner.
Clinton deserves to be in jail for her emails. If a regular person took information that was supposed to be private and take it to their house and share it from there, the FBI would put a person in jail. Her handling of the DNC with Wasserman-Schultz, hiring the same person that helped get her elected from within the DNC is an absolute joke. Sanders should have been more livid that WS and other high ranking DNC helped steal the election from him.
Trump is no saint, but he offers a change from lying, career politicians who are not in touch with reality and who come from Washington and are part of the establishment of doing nothing.
Do vote Trump, don't vote Trump, I do not care what you do, but when you vote for Clinton, you are voting for the same Washington elitism that people dislike and want to see reformed.
Quote from: mtraininjax on July 27, 2016, 05:50:55 AM
QuoteAs far as your second comment is concerned, you seem to say that it's okay to appeal to racism in order to 'get people excited'. This, to me, means you're no better than a racist or a bigot
So you are calling me a racist?
I don't know if you are a racist. What I am saying is that your comment seems to excuse or rationalise the use of racist language to garner votes. If you honestly believe that, then you are no different than Trump and you (and Trump) are no better than a racist.
Did you seriously not understand what I typed?
QuoteAs far as your second comment is concerned, you seem to say that it's okay to appeal to racism in order to 'get people excited'. This, to me, means you're no better than a racist or a bigot - which was the point I was making about Trump. It matters not if Trump isn't an actual racist - the fact remains that he has used racist language (coded or blatant) to get people to vote for him. Anyone who would do that is no better than a person who IS a racist. I certainly think it disqualifies him for the Presidency.
Quote from: mtraininjax on July 27, 2016, 05:50:55 AM
Do vote Trump, don't vote Trump, I do not care what you do, but when you vote for Clinton, you are voting for the same Washington elitism that people dislike and want to see reformed.
Call me crazy but I'd rather the status quo/same old than the terror that is Trump...
(This is coming from someone so leftist whereby i thought even Sanders was too moderate)
Quote from: Murder_me_Rachel on July 27, 2016, 08:22:07 AM
This is what I don't get-- Trump is the 1%. What do people expect from him? I know he talks a good game, but do you really think he's going to put the interests of the poors in front of his ilk? No damn way.
And if people readily admit that he says things he may not necessarily believe in order to get votes, how can they trust him to do other things that he says? What's to say a President Trump would be just another elitist Washington insider? Everyone has to start somewhere.
Quote from: mtraininjax on July 27, 2016, 05:50:55 AM
He has no plans or programs or solutions on how to pay for anything. He lives in fantasyland...
And this doesn't describe Trump? The extent of his platform is "we're going to do something really yuge" but never says how.
Quote from: peestandingup on July 26, 2016, 12:30:59 PM
Quote from: Adam White on July 26, 2016, 11:14:21 AM
Actually, I am not so sure he's a bigot. But the point I seem to have to keep making is that anyone who is willing to do and say the things he does simply to garner votes is just as bad (if not worse) than someone who says and does things because he believes it.
Soooo, pretty much like every candidate in history then?? Tell me how the left doesn't try to use scare tactics regarding social issues, poverty & welfare, etc & I'll buy you dinner.
Quote from: TheCat on July 26, 2016, 11:36:55 AM
Pee, I'm not going to get into a debate with you about what is a racist statement and what isn't.
If you would like to splice his words, tweets (and retweets) and his overall campaign strategy to demonstrate how he's not pandering to a certain segment of the American population by exploiting racists sentiments, go for it. I'm all eyes.
Nah, bro. I just think if you're gonna accuse someone of something as serious as being a racist, then you should probably have something to back it up. I'm silly like that I guess.
Yeah, you are silly like that, I guess...or, just playing dumb...which you are not.
At least you realize it's a serious accusation.
Quote from: Murder_me_Rachel on July 26, 2016, 10:35:19 AM
The whole idea that you run a country like a business is one of the single fucking dumbest things to have developed in politics over the past generation. Thanks for that, W.
Why, exactly, is this a bad idea?
Quote from: stephendare on July 27, 2016, 11:35:53 AM
Quote from: Gonzo on July 27, 2016, 11:32:19 AM
Quote from: Murder_me_Rachel on July 26, 2016, 10:35:19 AM
The whole idea that you run a country like a business is one of the single fucking dumbest things to have developed in politics over the past generation. Thanks for that, W.
Why, exactly, is this a bad idea?
Because a business is based around a single thing: making a profit.
The Government is there to do the unprofitable things. Like building and maintaining roads, or a military.
Those things are not profit makers. They are simply necessary expenses.
And W didn't pioneer that idea, actually, the Chicago School of Economics did.
Exactly.
Quote from: Gonzo on July 27, 2016, 11:32:19 AM
Quote from: Murder_me_Rachel on July 26, 2016, 10:35:19 AM
The whole idea that you run a country like a business is one of the single fucking dumbest things to have developed in politics over the past generation. Thanks for that, W.
Why, exactly, is this a bad idea?
Fair enough, but what if it was run not necessarily to make a profit but to break even or not take a loss? What if government was run to stay within a budget and to only fund projects that fit within that budget? I think that is a good start to a better government... Just my thoughts, though.
Quote from: Gonzo on July 27, 2016, 11:53:21 AM
Quote from: Gonzo on July 27, 2016, 11:32:19 AM
Quote from: Murder_me_Rachel on July 26, 2016, 10:35:19 AM
The whole idea that you run a country like a business is one of the single fucking dumbest things to have developed in politics over the past generation. Thanks for that, W.
Why, exactly, is this a bad idea?
Fair enough, but what if it was run not necessarily to make a profit but to break even or not take a loss? What if government was run to stay within a budget and to only fund projects that fit within that budget? I think that is a good start to a better government... Just my thoughts, though.
Citizens are citizens, not simple consumers. The role of politics is not just to hold government accountable or even to inform the public. It is also to engage the public. How our leaders relate to citizens affects how the citizens understand their relationship to government and, ultimately, their role in democracy. Political participation should be viewed as rights and responsibilities rather than costs and benefits.
Quote from: stephendare on July 27, 2016, 12:23:37 PM
By the way, here is another idiotic quote from the same idiot with the bathwater remarks:
"An armed people are a free people. If our forefathers were not armed before the American Revolution we would all be speaking English today."
Grover Norquist via Twitter, 02 Jan 2016, 23:12 UTC
The quote had close to a hundred thousand 'likes' by his followers.
Yup, that's an idiotic thing to say.
Thank you for the information on bureaucracy. As always, you are a well of information. While I do not always agree with your stance, I do enjoy reading -- and sometimes learning from -- your posts.
So, how do we get back to said bureaucracy?
^The "speaking English" tweet is very obviously a joke.
Quote from: Tacachale on July 27, 2016, 02:53:27 PM
^The "speaking English" tweet is very obviously a joke.
Did you see a smiley or winkey emoticon or an 'lol'?
Me either.
Quote from: Tacachale on July 27, 2016, 02:53:27 PM
^The "speaking English" tweet is very obviously a joke.
Of course it is!
Bottom line is there is no case for Trump.
Stephen, if I were take the time to write one would you publish an editorial in favor of Gary Johnson?
Spuwho, thank you for writing this piece. It's written well and provides perspective. I remain unconvinced but I'd rather have you describe Trump's benefits than have Trump describe Trump.
So, what will it take for you to abandon Trump?
Quote from: FSBA on July 28, 2016, 12:26:36 AM
Stephen, if I were take the time to write one would you publish an editorial in favor of Gary Johnson?
I would love to read it. I'm leaning towards him. My biggest complaint would be his ultra isolationist views.
Quote from: TheCat on July 28, 2016, 10:05:57 AM
So, what will it take for you to abandon Trump?
that's my question as well.
easily the least qualified candidate in our history.
an absolute disaster if he is to win.
we NEED to change Spuwho's mind!
Quote from: ben says on July 29, 2016, 08:57:04 AM
Quote from: TheCat on July 28, 2016, 10:05:57 AM
So, what will it take for you to abandon Trump?
that's my question as well.
easily the least qualified candidate in our history.
an absolute disaster if he is to win.
we NEED to change Spuwho's mind!
Re: An Op-Ed for Trump?
« Reply #2 on: July 18, 2016, 09:10:23 AM »I am undecided at this point, but I am more than happy to write one.
Trump on Vladimir Putin at the recent Commander in Chief Discussion:
"He's been a leader far more than our President has been a leader."
Since many readers seem to support Trump I hope you will read this link. There's so much evidence out there that Trump just literally "talks out of his ass" in order to give red meat to the Repub base. Here are some startling facts about Trumps leadership mentor, Vladimir Putin.
One can only assume Trump has not actually examined the results of Putin's "leadership."
http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/opinion-these-4-charts-show-why-trump-is-an-idiot-about-putin/ar-AAiP8Sh
I think Trump is performing as expected. It's nice that he's already talking about a nuclear holocaust like no other.
Quote from: Murder_me_Rachel on February 17, 2017, 12:19:24 PM
"When I hear that a grown man calls himself Jimbo, it's like when someone tells me he supports Trump: I automatically know he's a fucking idiot,"-- my boss, who is very conservative and wealthy and a veteran, on Trump and Jimbo Fisher.
"Assuming that all people who vote for certain candidates are "fucking idiots" is a sure way to ensure they'll never listen to your message and vote your way" -- someone who isn't interested in losing elections.
If you've got the time, it's worth watching yesterday's press conference just to bear witness to the wholesale destruction of what we used to call the dignity of the office.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/16/us/politics/donald-trump-press-conference-transcript.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/16/us/politics/donald-trump-press-conference-transcript.html)
Quote from: Murder_me_Rachel on February 17, 2017, 01:53:10 PM
Quote from: finehoe on February 17, 2017, 01:12:38 PM
If you've got the time, it's worth watching yesterday's press conference just to bear witness to the wholesale destruction of what we used to call the dignity of the office.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/16/us/politics/donald-trump-press-conference-transcript.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/16/us/politics/donald-trump-press-conference-transcript.html)
Or if you just want an excuse to feel suicidal because seriously what in the fucking hell is going on. Take away the disgusting, wrong-headed policies and that presser alone is evidence that this dipshit shouldn't be anywhere near the levers of power. I honestly think he is demented or early Alzheimer. Either that or his ego is just so unbelievably huge that it has literally caused him to make no sense when he speaks.
nah, he's just an a-hole
Man baby Trump explained here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-calling-everything-unfair-shows-just-how-profoundly_us_589c8a1ce4b02bbb1816c3a3
He isn't stupid. He knows exactly what he's doing.
Quote from: MusicMan on February 17, 2017, 05:18:34 PM
Man baby Trump explained here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-calling-everything-unfair-shows-just-how-profoundly_us_589c8a1ce4b02bbb1816c3a3
Quoting huffington is worse than quoting CNN
Quote from: bill on February 18, 2017, 12:48:15 AM
Quote from: MusicMan on February 17, 2017, 05:18:34 PM
Man baby Trump explained here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-calling-everything-unfair-shows-just-how-profoundly_us_589c8a1ce4b02bbb1816c3a3
Quoting huffington is worse than quoting CNN
So now not only do we have to worry about "fake news" but "fake opinions"??
I'm confused...
Quote from: bill on February 18, 2017, 12:48:15 AM
Quote from: MusicMan on February 17, 2017, 05:18:34 PM
Man baby Trump explained here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-calling-everything-unfair-shows-just-how-profoundly_us_589c8a1ce4b02bbb1816c3a3
Quoting huffington is worse than quoting CNN
Based on your track record, I figured you'd take issue if any source was quoted.
Quote from: bill on February 18, 2017, 12:48:15 AM
Quote from: MusicMan on February 17, 2017, 05:18:34 PM
Man baby Trump explained here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-calling-everything-unfair-shows-just-how-profoundly_us_589c8a1ce4b02bbb1816c3a3
Quoting huffington is worse than quoting CNN
You do realize Huffington Post is just an aggregator...and the article quoted is an editorial/opinion piece...
Not sure how you could make the mental gymnastics between quoting a news article and quoting an editorial [as if editorial opinions could possible be fake?!]
It's hard enough to take someone seriously who says things like you said, but c'mon...let's at least try to pretend we have a few brain cells floating around up there.
Really ben? "Just" an aggregator? Sooooo... you just see plain ol news and opinion on huffpo? Cmon bro.... its the Fox news of the left for gods sake...rofl
The "commentary" is dead on accurate. He's is a whiny spoiled rich kid who is also evidently a victim of everyone else's failures and shortcomings, never his own.
Just admit it and move on. Hell, even Shep Smith of Faux News is getting it.
I have no issues with the commentary... my comment was regarding huffpo as a source of anything...
Donald Trump says (via Twitter):
"The FAKE NEWS media (failing @nytimes, @NBCNews, @ABC, @CBS, @CNN) is not my enemy, it is the enemy of the American People!" he wrote."
The extraordinary irony here is that the American Media gave Trump his 'bona fides" as a TV Personality via "THE APPRENTICE" and also gave him roughly half a billion dollars in free publicity over the 16 months prior to the 2016 Election.
So in this case , I agree with him 100%. He is President largely because of the shortcomings of the for profit America media machine.
The liberal mainstream media makes Fox News (liberals constant mentioned nemesis) look like centrist. Im so glad that the mainstream media is being called out on it's BS. Even Bernie joked the other day that CNN is fake news.
Quote from: I-10east on February 21, 2017, 05:12:31 AM
The liberal mainstream media makes Fox News (liberals constant mentioned nemesis) look like centrist. Im so glad that the mainstream media is being called out on it's BS. Even Bernie joked the other day that CNN is fake news.
There's a difference between biased reporting and fake news. Fake news is stuff that is made up with the intent to deceive. Being reckless and running a story based on information that hasn't been properly vetted is poor journalism, but it's not fake news. And Donald Trump calls anything fake news if it is critical of him or casts him in a bad light.
Bernie Sanders made a joke - but the joke was not that CNN was 'fake news' but that Trump seems to think it is. Trump was the butt of that joke, not CNN.
Wha??!! Biased reporting? I feel faint...
Quote from: I-10east on February 21, 2017, 05:12:31 AM
The liberal mainstream media makes Fox News (liberals constant mentioned nemesis) look like centrist. Im so glad that the mainstream media is being called out on it's BS. Even Bernie joked the other day that CNN is fake news.
FOX is a non-stop propaganda machine for the GOP posing as journalism. Right wing radio is even worse. There is no left-leaning outlet that even comes close to that. You are deluding yourself.
Fox donated money to an arm of the Republican party, which violates every tenant of journalism objectivity, so how in the hell do they have ANY credibility is beyond me.
Quote from: MusicMan on February 18, 2017, 09:07:39 AM
Donald Trump says (via Twitter):
"The FAKE NEWS media (failing @nytimes, @NBCNews, @ABC, @CBS, @CNN) is not my enemy, it is the enemy of the American People!" he wrote."
The extraordinary irony here is that the American Media gave Trump his 'bona fides" as a TV Personality via "THE APPRENTICE" and also gave him roughly half a billion dollars in free publicity over the 16 months prior to the 2016 Election.
So in this case , I agree with him 100%. He is President largely because of the shortcomings of the for profit America media machine.
well if you notice, he didn't tweet @NBC, he only tweeted at the news division. He knows where the checks come from.
Quote from: vicupstate on February 21, 2017, 08:26:04 AM
Quote from: I-10east on February 21, 2017, 05:12:31 AM
The liberal mainstream media makes Fox News (liberals constant mentioned nemesis) look like centrist. Im so glad that the mainstream media is being called out on it's BS. Even Bernie joked the other day that CNN is fake news.
FOX is a non-stop propaganda machine for the GOP posing as journalism. Right wing radio is even worse. There is no left-leaning outlet that even comes close to that. You are deluding yourself.
Fox donated money to an arm of the Republican party, which violates every tenant of journalism objectivity, so how in the hell do they have ANY credibility is beyond me.
They all suck to some degree and its not just Fox News that donates.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/17/journalists-overwhelmingly-donate-clinton-trump/
Quote from: fsquid on February 21, 2017, 10:35:33 AM
Quote from: vicupstate on February 21, 2017, 08:26:04 AM
Quote from: I-10east on February 21, 2017, 05:12:31 AM
The liberal mainstream media makes Fox News (liberals constant mentioned nemesis) look like centrist. Im so glad that the mainstream media is being called out on it's BS. Even Bernie joked the other day that CNN is fake news.
FOX is a non-stop propaganda machine for the GOP posing as journalism. Right wing radio is even worse. There is no left-leaning outlet that even comes close to that. You are deluding yourself.
Fox donated money to an arm of the Republican party, which violates every tenant of journalism objectivity, so how in the hell do they have ANY credibility is beyond me.
They all suck to some degree and its not just Fox News that donates.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/17/journalists-overwhelmingly-donate-clinton-trump/
From a Journalism ethics standpoint, there is a big difference between a individual journalist making a personal donation and a journalism outlet making a corporate campaign contribution. Within an organization there are multiple people that do the job of reporting the news, each of whom brings their own political beliefs and preferences with them. However, they should all strive to eliminate their personal beliefs in their reporting. The organization is expected to put a wall of separation between it's revenue functions and personnel vs. its reporting functions and personnel. Likewise, they are expected to adhere to non-partisanship in political concerns.
I can provide video after video of all of the fake news spouted for mainstream media (CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, MSNBC, HLN and others). The leftist news sources are extremely powerful; Although the Fox News Channel can obviously be biased and is large, comparing Fox to the others on the left is like comparing one city to a megalopolis. The liberal media use to tactically hide behind bias, now they dont give a damn. This outspoken and slanted way of 'reporting' spilled over to social media, entertainment like MTV and even sports. There's no secret that the liberal media is faltering in ratings, while alternative media online is surging.
Bingo
Quote from: I-10east on February 22, 2017, 09:47:21 PM
I can provide video after video of all of the fake news spouted for mainstream media (CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, MSNBC, HLN and others). The leftist news sources are extremely powerful; Although the Fox News Channel can obviously be biased and is large, comparing Fox to the others on the left is like comparing one city to a megalopolis. The liberal media use to tactically hide behind bias, now they dont give a damn. This outspoken and slanted way of 'reporting' spilled over to social media, entertainment like MTV and even sports. There's no secret that the liberal media is faltering in ratings, while alternative media online is surging.
I'd argue that social media is influencing traditional media, not the other way around. I think it has led to a decline in quality and journalistic standards - traditional media outlets are competing against Twitter, et al and the desire not to be beaten to a story ("scooped" as it were) has resulted in a lot of incorrect information being disseminated.
"I can provide video after video of all of the fake news spouted for mainstream media (CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, MSNBC, HLN and others). The leftist news sources are extremely powerful; Although the Fox News Channel can obviously be biased and is large, comparing Fox to the others on the left is like comparing one city to a megalopolis. The liberal media use to tactically hide behind bias, now they dont give a damn. This outspoken and slanted way of 'reporting' spilled over to social media, entertainment like MTV and even sports. There's no secret that the liberal media is faltering in ratings, while alternative media online is surging."
I would dispute every single thing you say in this quote. Every detail, every assumption. Your just wrong. And that's OK. I assume you are a Trump supporter, or at least a conservative. And that's ok too. Trump had his people come out and say his inauguration was the most watched in person, ever. That was a blatant lie. Trump has said "global warming is a hoax perpetuated by the Chinese." Another lie.
Trump claimed his electoral college victory was one of the largest ever. Not sure why he says things like this, it just makes him (and his supporters) look stupid. BUT THESE ARE VERY TYPICAL OF HOW TRUMP OPERATES. When you run a campaign and your Presidency on half truths and horse shit, you wind up knee deep (or deeper) in it. Time will prove this to be true. Just watch.
Trump's tactic is to repeat his lies and half truths until many people start to believe them. And for the most part the "liberal media" regurgitates it. That's a shame but the truth. It's like the myth of the liberal media. This myth was created and perpetuated by right wing conservatives who got sick of news that did not support their line of thinking, or political view. One of my favorite Trump moments in the last few years was the birther movement. He claimed at the time, "I've got people in Hawaii, you won't believe what they are discovering."
Well, they never discovered anything,there was never a follow up press conference where he revealed all the "things" they found . Because it was all a lie. Another sham he pulled over on all the people who wanted to believe it was true, or possible. It's a popular conservative and liberal technique. State something which you want people to believe, over and over again, like "there is a liberal left wing media bias out there", or "the planet is always warming, it's not human activity which is accelerating it", even though no facts actually back it up, but keep on repeating it, because many people who want to believe will accept it as truth.
So while there is no left wing liberal media bias out there, you can go on believing it. Have a nice day.
Quote from: vicupstate on February 21, 2017, 10:54:19 AM
Quote from: fsquid on February 21, 2017, 10:35:33 AM
Quote from: vicupstate on February 21, 2017, 08:26:04 AM
Quote from: I-10east on February 21, 2017, 05:12:31 AM
The liberal mainstream media makes Fox News (liberals constant mentioned nemesis) look like centrist. Im so glad that the mainstream media is being called out on it's BS. Even Bernie joked the other day that CNN is fake news.
FOX is a non-stop propaganda machine for the GOP posing as journalism. Right wing radio is even worse. There is no left-leaning outlet that even comes close to that. You are deluding yourself.
Fox donated money to an arm of the Republican party, which violates every tenant of journalism objectivity, so how in the hell do they have ANY credibility is beyond me.
They all suck to some degree and its not just Fox News that donates.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/17/journalists-overwhelmingly-donate-clinton-trump/
From a Journalism ethics standpoint, there is a big difference between a individual journalist making a personal donation and a journalism outlet making a corporate campaign contribution. Within an organization there are multiple people that do the job of reporting the news, each of whom brings their own political beliefs and preferences with them. However, they should all strive to eliminate their personal beliefs in their reporting. The organization is expected to put a wall of separation between it's revenue functions and personnel vs. its reporting functions and personnel. Likewise, they are expected to adhere to non-partisanship in political concerns.
I'm sure you can. From a common sense, this shit stinks perspective, I think its just another tick against the media on all channels.
Quote from: Adam White on February 23, 2017, 03:47:17 AM
Quote from: I-10east on February 22, 2017, 09:47:21 PM
I can provide video after video of all of the fake news spouted for mainstream media (CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, MSNBC, HLN and others). The leftist news sources are extremely powerful; Although the Fox News Channel can obviously be biased and is large, comparing Fox to the others on the left is like comparing one city to a megalopolis. The liberal media use to tactically hide behind bias, now they dont give a damn. This outspoken and slanted way of 'reporting' spilled over to social media, entertainment like MTV and even sports. There's no secret that the liberal media is faltering in ratings, while alternative media online is surging.
I'd argue that social media is influencing traditional media, not the other way around. I think it has led to a decline in quality and journalistic standards - traditional media outlets are competing against Twitter, et al and the desire not to be beaten to a story ("scooped" as it were) has resulted in a lot of incorrect information being disseminated.
I completely agree.
QuoteSo while there is no left wing liberal media bias out there, you can go on believing it. Have a nice day.
Of course there is and there is right wing media bias out there too. Hence why people have to get out of their echo chamber and read a few different perspectives and make their own damn decision.
Not surprisingly... there is more than enough biased news for anyone and everyone. Please pick your poison... 8)
https://www.axios.com/politics/
QuoteSara Fischer Shannon Vavra 6 hrs ago
FEATURED
The recent explosion of right-wing news sites
Axios mapped the launch date of 89 news websites over the past quarter century. The data shows there has been an explosion of right-leaning news sites, coinciding with the rise of the Tea Party and alt-right movements beginning in 2010. Many of these sites, in turn, were instrumental in spreading pro-Trump news during the 2016 elections.
QuoteDigital outlet foundings by ideology, 1993-2015 BLUE = Left Leaning Beige = Mainstream Orange = Right Leaning
(https://graphics.axios.com/2017-02-14-website-foundings/2017-02-14-website-foundings-Desktop.png)
Data: Staff research; Chart: Lazaro Gamio / Axios
The data also shows a similar rise in left-leaning news sites during the Bush Administration and the launch of the Iraq war in 2003. Overall, while there has been a large increase in the number of new news sites over the past 20 years, almost all of them have a partisan angle.
Why it matters: According to experts, digital technology has made it easier to exploit the political divisions that have always existed. Sarah Sobieraj, associate professor of Sociology at Tufts University, told CNN there has been an increase in political polarization in the U.S., but not nearly enough to account for this development. "The technological, regulatory, and media space has shifted into one in which this is profitable, and profit is the driving force."
How they profit: Google and Facebook's algorithmically-driven news distribution platforms have created an environment in which:
a) partisan news sites can easily reach fringe audiences, and
b) news sites are financially incentivized to tilt one way or another.
Facebook, in particular, algorithmically favors content that appeals to user bias and interest. According to comScore Vice President Andrew Lipsman, to elicit high engagement and repeat visitation, "sites must usually speak to a very specific audience." Although this limits the appeal to a broader readership, it creates a sustained and engaged audience that appeals to advertisers.
The Bush burst: The launch of some left-leaning news sites during the Bush Administration captured audiences opposed to the administration's policies, primarily the Iraq War. John Amato, founder and publisher of the liberal, progressive news blog Crooks and Liars, tells Axios he started the site in September of 2004 because he thought that mainstream media wasn't critical enough of the Bush Administration, and he felt motivated to speak out.
The Obama opposition: According to Greg Mueller, president of CRC Public Relations, which has been representing conservative-leaning clients for decades, the rise of right-wing sites around the rise of the Tea Party movement came from the notion that the mainstream media was not fairly covering the scandals in the Obama Administration, like Fast-and-Furious and Benghazi. Vince Coglianese, editor-in-chief of The Daily Caller, which launched in 2010, said the founders, Tucker Carlson and Neil Patel, started the site because they saw a tremendous market opportunity where a conservative news site could report on news with a different form of selection bias. "A different news outlet could come in and report on stories that people weren't seeing covered by mainstream outlets," he said.
What to watch: The same profit motive that created and helped sustain ideological news sites led to the creation of fake news sites. As Google and Facebook figure out their response to being the conduit for all those ad dollars for fake news sites, it might change the business models for ideological sites as well.
so ramping up private prisons the same day as saying you are going to crackdown on rec marijuana use? That's not a coincidence.
This is the difference between the left and the right.
The left cares about what helps the most people regardless of who or what they are. The right cares about what helps only themselves and those like them. They only get outraged when it impacts them personally.
The right has a give-a-damn priority like this:
1. White, Christian, male. That is priority number 1.
2. White, Christian, female.
3. White, unknown, male.
4. White, unknown, female.
5. White, Jewish, male.
6. White, Jewish, female
7. Black, Christian, male.
8. Black, Christian, female.
9. At this point, their level of give-a-damn is too low to quantify. A case could even be made for anything below 6.
The case for Trump is a case of self-righteousness, victimization and lack of care for everybody else that isn't like yourself.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/24/world/asia/kansas-attack-possible-hate-crime-srinivas-kuchibhotla.html
The case for trump has been made....
"Get out of my country" allegedly...
Quote from: Jim on February 24, 2017, 11:34:43 AM
This is the difference between the left and the right.
The left cares about what helps the most people regardless of who or what they are. The right cares about what helps only themselves and those like them. They only get outraged when it impacts them personally.
The right has a give-a-damn priority like this:
1. White, Christian, male. That is priority number 1.
2. White, Christian, female.
3. White, unknown, male.
4. White, unknown, female.
5. White, Jewish, male.
6. White, Jewish, female
7. Black, Christian, male.
8. Black, Christian, female.
9. At this point, their level of give-a-damn is too low to quantify. A case could even be made for anything below 6.
The case for Trump is a case of self-righteousness, victimization and lack of care for everybody else that isn't like yourself.
I think "God" is meant to be at the top of that list.
Quote from: MusicMan on February 23, 2017, 07:21:13 AM
I would dispute every single thing you say in this quote. Every detail, every assumption. Your just wrong. And that's OK. I assume you are a Trump supporter, or at least a conservative. And that's ok too. Trump had his people come out and say his inauguration was the most watched in person, ever. That was a blatant lie. Trump has said "global warming is a hoax perpetuated by the Chinese." Another lie.
Trump claimed his electoral college victory was one of the largest ever. Not sure why he says things like this, it just makes him (and his supporters) look stupid. BUT THESE ARE VERY TYPICAL OF HOW TRUMP OPERATES. When you run a campaign and your Presidency on half truths and horse shit, you wind up knee deep (or deeper) in it. Time will prove this to be true. Just watch.
Trump's tactic is to repeat his lies and half truths until many people start to believe them. And for the most part the "liberal media" regurgitates it. That's a shame but the truth. It's like the myth of the liberal media. This myth was created and perpetuated by right wing conservatives who got sick of news that did not support their line of thinking, or political view. One of my favorite Trump moments in the last few years was the birther movement. He claimed at the time, "I've got people in Hawaii, you won't believe what they are discovering."
Well, they never discovered anything,there was never a follow up press conference where he revealed all the "things" they found . Because it was all a lie. Another sham he pulled over on all the people who wanted to believe it was true, or possible. It's a popular conservative and liberal technique. State something which you want people to believe, over and over again, like "there is a liberal left wing media bias out there", or "the planet is always warming, it's not human activity which is accelerating it", even though no facts actually back it up, but keep on repeating it, because many people who want to believe will accept it as truth.
So while there is no left wing liberal media bias out there, you can go on believing it. Have a nice day.
LOL, where should I start...So academia, Hollywood, and the mainstream news media isn't heavily liberal? Keep on believing that...I was a Democrat, but I changed my political affiliation to NPA recently because I don't wanna be affiliated with a corrupt establishment party (as is the Republicans) that IMO has way more perniciousness than positivity. I never said that Trump is perfect, but IMO he is a far better option than the other candidate which would have turned the US into a near 3rd World country, like many in Europe are on the verge of being.
I agree with finding alternative energy (which should be the gist) but I'm not sold on some Al Gore ideology (climate change) that IMO isn't accurate, and makes a bunch of liberal bureaucrats more rich; so many of those past predictions were bogus... So even though I'm for clean energy, write me off (like so many liberals do) with no agreeing on anything because I don't agree with the climate change gospel...
The real fascists nowadays are progressives, out here rioting because their candidate lost, destroying businesses and cars, blocking traffic, ambulances, creating Orwellian laws, getting George Soro's money to 'resist' etc etc etc. Despite both parties being corrupt IMO, one side looks like adults (even when they lose), and the other like a bunch of whining babies with temper tantrums. I can go on and on, but I won't.
Quote from: fsquid on February 23, 2017, 09:16:34 AM
Quote from: Adam White on February 23, 2017, 03:47:17 AM
Quote from: I-10east on February 22, 2017, 09:47:21 PM
I can provide video after video of all of the fake news spouted for mainstream media (CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, MSNBC, HLN and others). The leftist news sources are extremely powerful; Although the Fox News Channel can obviously be biased and is large, comparing Fox to the others on the left is like comparing one city to a megalopolis. The liberal media use to tactically hide behind bias, now they dont give a damn. This outspoken and slanted way of 'reporting' spilled over to social media, entertainment like MTV and even sports. There's no secret that the liberal media is faltering in ratings, while alternative media online is surging.
I'd argue that social media is influencing traditional media, not the other way around. I think it has led to a decline in quality and journalistic standards - traditional media outlets are competing against Twitter, et al and the desire not to be beaten to a story ("scooped" as it were) has resulted in a lot of incorrect information being disseminated.
I completely agree.
I agree with Adam too, but IMO the Mark Zuckerberg's of the world have been doing alot of questionable things recently to silence altering voices (I'm not talking about hate speech or anything like that).
Quote from: I-10east on February 25, 2017, 09:58:25 PM
Quote from: fsquid on February 23, 2017, 09:16:34 AM
Quote from: Adam White on February 23, 2017, 03:47:17 AM
Quote from: I-10east on February 22, 2017, 09:47:21 PM
I can provide video after video of all of the fake news spouted for mainstream media (CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, MSNBC, HLN and others). The leftist news sources are extremely powerful; Although the Fox News Channel can obviously be biased and is large, comparing Fox to the others on the left is like comparing one city to a megalopolis. The liberal media use to tactically hide behind bias, now they dont give a damn. This outspoken and slanted way of 'reporting' spilled over to social media, entertainment like MTV and even sports. There's no secret that the liberal media is faltering in ratings, while alternative media online is surging.
I'd argue that social media is influencing traditional media, not the other way around. I think it has led to a decline in quality and journalistic standards - traditional media outlets are competing against Twitter, et al and the desire not to be beaten to a story ("scooped" as it were) has resulted in a lot of incorrect information being disseminated.
I completely agree.
I agree with Adam too, but IMO the Mark Zuckerberg's of the world have been doing alot of questionable things recently to silence altering voices (I'm not talking about hate speech or anything like that).
Zuckerberg - or Facebook - seems to have issues they need to sort out. First there was the concern about how they "curate" the news ticker (or whatever it's called) and then there's the whole "fake news" thing. I realize the evidence was fairly thin regarding the first issue (though it doesn't sound beyond belief) but the second issue is certainly a problem.
Quote from: I-10east on February 25, 2017, 09:51:52 PM
I never said that Trump is perfect, but IMO he is a far better option than the other candidate which would have turned the US into a near 3rd World country, like many in Europe are on the verge of being.
I realise you have your political views and I understand we probably rarely (if ever) find common ground - fair enough. But I'm honestly scratching my head at that one. What criteria are you using to reach the conclusion that many in Europe are on the verge of becoming third world countries.
Rachael Maddow on MSNBC definitely delivered a hard hitting bombshell last night, with Trump's nefarious plan to skip out on taxes and ironclad connection with the Kremlin LOL. Even Van Jones on CNN said Trump got a W. Some are comparing that folly to Geraldo Rivera's 'Al Capone Vault" in '86.
I certainly don't see what was breaking news about the thing and then she got scooped when the WH sent the copy to CNN and Fox.
Can anyone make it through the entirety of this babbling incoherence?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/04/12/president-trumps-throughly-confusing-fox-business-interview-annotated/
Quote from: finehoe on April 12, 2017, 01:49:02 PM
Can anyone make it through the entirety of this babbling incoherence?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/04/12/president-trumps-throughly-confusing-fox-business-interview-annotated/
Quote from: finehoe on April 12, 2017, 01:49:02 PM
Can anyone make it through the entirety of this babbling incoherence?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/04/12/president-trumps-throughly-confusing-fox-business-interview-annotated/
Are you against Chocolate Cake or just desserts in general?