2020 Politics Thread - Enter At Your Own Risk - RULES IN OP

[Jopeal]

Originally Posted by rman112

It doesn't make the other right.

Trumps incessant lies don’t equal media honesty, nor does labeling everything in the msm “fake news” make anything the president says true.

Trump has convinced a percentage of the population otherwise.

[discostu]

Originally Posted by rman112

I'm kind of shocked at the idea that the media lying is something that doesn't need to be made right.

Please post one lie.

And I'm in no way asking for restraint in posting more if you so choose.

Should be an easy ask of this is your stance.

[rman112]

Originally Posted by Jopeal

Trumps incessant lies don’t equal media honesty, nor does labeling everything in the msm “fake news” make anything the president says true.

Where was I saying this? You're just trying to make different points (that I haven't even made...) as justification for ignoring the problems with our media.

[Jopeal]

Originally Posted by rman112

Where was I saying this? You're just trying to make different points (that I haven't even made...) as justification for ignoring the problems with our media.

“Our media” isn’t a single entity, despite the Trump narrative that it is.

[Onions]

Originally Posted by JustRachel

He's been jousting with the media since at least the 90s, but it certainly ramped up. Why do you figure that is?

And, I believe a country's media should absolutely be working against a country's president. They certainly shouldn't be working for the president, or any government official. Their function is to check the government whenever they see anything that looks even remotely fishy. That's what they did.

I'll agree that some (maybe most) of the spin they tossed on stories went too far, both pro-Trump and anti-Trump spin.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

Prepare to be disappointed for the next 4 years.

[coltsnsox07]

Aside from Susan Rice, I like the names being mentioned as possible cabinet members of Biden's.
Even if some folks are calling it the Affirmative Action Cabinet, I like the diversity.

[JustRachel]

Originally Posted by rman112

I'm kind of shocked at the idea that the media lying is something that doesn't need to be made right.

I'm shocked that you're shocked.

The President lying is something that needs to be made right. The government lying needs to be made right. The media is just the media, and there are enough competing networks that they check each other.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

[rman112]

Originally Posted by discostu

Please post one lie.

And I'm in no way asking for restraint in posting more if you so choose.

Should be an easy ask of this is your stance.

This one's kinda funny.

https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/s...99056439214080

https://twitter.com/Fahrenthold/stat...48969747636224

[JustRachel]

Originally Posted by Onions

Prepare to be disappointed for the next 4 years.

Well yeah, there is that. Ugh.

But whenever I'm in an anti-Biden mood (which will be often I'm sure) I can just switch over to FoxNews or whichever network is bashing him.

Freedom rocks.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

[rman112]

Originally Posted by JustRachel

I'm shocked that you're shocked.

The [I]President [/B]lying is something that needs to be made right. The government lying needs to be made right. The media is just the media, and there are enough competing networks that they check each other.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

If the media wasn't an influencer, sure. But we all know that's not true.

Question: How do we have people believing something like the Trump/NY/vaccine issue stance, for example? How does that happen? It happens because the story is spun as such.

[discostu]

Originally Posted by rman112

This one's kinda funny.

https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/s...99056439214080

https://twitter.com/Fahrenthold/stat...48969747636224

Mistakes are not lies. You know this

This error was clearly addressed. But if this is some example of an outrageous lie from the media, I'm at a loss.

[JustRachel]

Originally Posted by rman112

If the media wasn't an influencer, sure. But we all know that's not true.

Question: How do we have people believing something like the Trump/NY/vaccine issue stance, for example? How does that happen? It happens because the story is spun as such.

The media does not govern the country.

No amount of foot-stomping by either party is going to change our media, either.

The tiny fraction of Americans that believe nonsense like the NY vaccine deployment non-story aren't a part of the electorate that could be swayed anyway.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

[rman112]

Originally Posted by discostu

Mistakes are not lies. You know this

This error was clearly addressed. But if this is some example of an outrageous lie from the media, I'm at a loss.

I kind of figured you would go this route - anything that is later changed or addressed ("an error") becomes technically not a lie to begin with. It's why I tried to avoid something like an unverified claim, because the same could be said.. even though the story gets originally printed without the writers/networks actually having a clue as to whether it's true or not.

Anything technically can be framed as a mistake. If I say, "Hey, I just saw discostu murder an entire family" .. and then come back a month from now and say I made a mistake .. then I was never lying to begin with. Just one of those daggum mistakes.

[rman112]

Originally Posted by JustRachel

The media does not govern the country.

No amount of foot-stomping by either party is going to change our media, either.

The tiny fraction of Americans that believe nonsense like the NY vaccine deployment non-story aren't a part of the electorate that could be swayed anyway.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

Trump dishonesty is the worst. Media dishonesty is OK.

[irv]

Originally Posted by rman112

It was a problem pre-Trump, and it'll be a problem post-Trump. Only who is viewed as good or bad will change.

Originally Posted by rman112

He didn't start the fire with the media, though. Once he was announced as running, it was hit piece after hit piece. Plus all the crap stories and claims since. It never stopped. A country's media shouldn't be working against a country's President.

There was no one bigger than Obama who tried to control and manipulate the media.

I wonder how many Dem fans know this, and if they do, were they OK with it?
Also, if anyone has not seen the examples of censorship from Twitter, Facebook nor NOT seen the blatant bias and conditioning phrases in the media since the election, they have their blinders on.


Obama undermined press freedom. Now he wants a strong media to stop Trump?

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...p-donald-trump

Obama's Efforts to Control Media Are 'Most Aggressive' Since Nixon, Report Says
https://www.wired.com/2013/10/obama-nixon-media-war/

Barack Obama was a greater enemy of the free press than Trump — Michael's essay
https://www.cbc.ca/radio/sunday/the-...ssay-1.5121514

Obama's Lasting Damage
President Donald Trump is waging a war with the media but the former president has a shaky record.
https://www.usnews.com/opinion/artic...press-freedoms

[discostu]

Originally Posted by rman112

I kind of figured you would go this route - anything that is later changed or addressed ("an error") becomes technically not a lie to begin with. It's why I tried to avoid something like an unverified claim, because the same could be said.. even though the story gets originally printed without the writers/networks actually having a clue as to whether it's true or not.

Anything technically can be framed as a mistake. If I say, "Hey, I just saw discostu murder an entire family" .. and then come back a month from now and say I made a mistake .. then I was never lying to begin with. Just one of those daggum mistakes.

You're being completely disingenuous.

This should have been a softball task for someone with an anti-media, "media lies" slant.

I'd post the definition of "lie" but I won't.

Enjoy your manufactured enemy.

[rman112]

Originally Posted by discostu

You're being completely disingenuous.

This should have been a softball task for someone with an anti-media, "media lies" slant.

I'd post the definition of "lie" but I won't.

Enjoy your manufactured enemy.

Because I was trying to point out that the media does the same when it prints a certain type of story - whether it's known to be true at the time doesn't matter. The story gets it's due. Then later when it's corrected or shown to be crap, the damage is already done. Rinse. Repeat.

You've created a spin to where the media can never technically be at fault no matter what.

[JustRachel]

Originally Posted by rman112

Trump dishonesty is the worst. Media dishonesty is OK.

Pretty much. I'm glad we agree.

This term "the media" includes many different organizations with many different points of view. None of them govern the country and all of them are accountable under liable or slander laws. All of them are Constitutionally protected and they all enjoy the freedom to report whatever they deem appropriate.

I would change zero percent of that.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

[rman112]

Originally Posted by JustRachel

Pretty much. I'm glad we agree.

This term "the media" includes many different organizations with many different points of view. None of them govern the country and all of them are accountable under liable or slander laws. All of them are Constitutionally protected and they all enjoy the freedom to report whatever they deem appropriate.

I would change zero percent of that.

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk

Nah. Not even close.

[oldgoldy97]

Originally Posted by discostu

You're being completely disingenuous.

This should have been a softball task for someone with an anti-media, "media lies" slant.

I'd post the definition of "lie" but I won't.

Enjoy your manufactured enemy.

That’s his middle name. He tries to play off being this innocent truth seeker when in fact he is as snaky as they come.

[rman112]

What would a headline like this be categorized as? From March:

Man Dies, Woman Hospitalized After Taking Form Of Chloroquine To Prevent COVID-19

First paragraph:

'An Arizona man is dead and his wife was hospitalized after the couple ingested a form of chloroquine, a chemical that has been hailed recently by President Trump as a possible "game changer" in the fight against the novel coronavirus, according to the Phoenix hospital that treated the couple.'

[discostu]

Originally Posted by rman112

Because I was trying to point out that the media does the same when it prints a certain type of story - whether it's known to be true at the time doesn't matter. The story gets it's due. Then later when it's corrected or shown to be crap, the damage is already done. Rinse. Repeat.

You've created a spin to where the media can never technically be at fault no matter what.

This is a garbage defense.

Again. It's a softball question.

You claim that the media lies.

You cannot show an example.

Instead, you posted a story that was based on federal intelligence investigations at the time. The Post updated and corrected immediately as the information came in.

The media can most certainly be at fault. Great examples would be publishing that is purposefully and knowingly incorrect.

This is how adults act. They own mistakes.

The media makes for a good boogeyman, but so does the monster under my son's bed.

[rman112]

Originally Posted by oldgoldy97

That’s his middle name. He tries to play off being this innocent truth seeker when in fact he is as snaky as they come.

Thanks.

I saw you doing some terrible things. I'll update this post in a few weeks to say that I was mistaken, and that never actually happened .. media-style.

[discostu]

Originally Posted by rman112

What would a headline like this be categorized as? From March:

Man Dies, Woman Hospitalized After Taking Form Of Chloroquine To Prevent COVID-19

First paragraph:

'An Arizona man is dead and his wife was hospitalized after the couple ingested a form of chloroquine, a chemical that has been hailed recently by President Trump as a possible "game changer" in the fight against the novel coronavirus, according to the Phoenix hospital that treated the couple.'

What is a lie?

And why not post the second paragraph?

"Banner Health hospital said in a statement that "the couple, both in their 60s, ingested chloroquine phosphate, an additive commonly used at aquariums to clean fish tanks." The aquarium additive the couple ingested is not the same as the medication that has been used to treat malaria."

Oh, because they clearly state what was taken is not the same as Trump was pushing.

Got it.

[rman112]

Originally Posted by discostu

This is a garbage defense.

Again. It's a softball question.

You claim that the media lies.

You cannot show an example.

Instead, you posted a story that was based on federal intelligence investigations at the time. The Post updated and corrected immediately as the information came in.

The media can most certainly be at fault. Great examples would be publishing that is purposefully and knowingly incorrect.

This is how adults act. They own mistakes.

The media makes for a good boogeyman, but so does the monster under my son's bed.

And I gave you a story that was shown to be a lie. Your defense was that they later fixed it. It was still a lie to begin with. The story that was presented was not true.

I'm glad you posted the bolded. Unverifiable hearsay has been the basis for plenty of stories. How many anti-Trump stories have been based off of "Someone close to Trump behind closed doors has said.." ?