1
Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Time to give Trump Presidency it's own Thread.Follow

#502 Sep 29 2017 at 1:07 PM Rating: Good
******
49,733 posts
I like how people are actually pretending that politicians are honest.

Edited, Sep 29th 2017 3:09pm by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#503 Sep 29 2017 at 1:18 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Pretty sure you need to be on the floor to vote but, if the whip count showed the votes were there, Cochran would have been there. He was only home resting because there was no reason for him to be in DC while they were 3-5 votes away from passing the repeal.

The story wasn't really "Trump lies about Cochran being in hospital" but "Trump lies about the failure of the bill being because Cochran was in the hospital" with the fact that Cochran wasn't actually in the hospital being the cherry rather than the ice cream.

But a media outlet making an error or writing a sensational headline isn't "fake news" except to the Trump supporters who want to equate "ABC made an error and had to issue a correction the next day" with "Liberal-Media-Freedom-Watch says Clinton sold nuclear missiles to Ecuador".
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#504 Sep 29 2017 at 1:23 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
16,883 posts
Samira wrote:
I dunno, Cochran tweeted that he was NOT in the hospital, but was at home. So maybe Trump meant "out sick", and maybe he should learn to be a little more specific.
Yet the article headlines read "Trumps Lies about Senator!". I never denied that Cochran tweeted he wasn't in the Hospital (I actually already confirmed his actual situation). That's not the point. The point is the exaggerated headlines that fuel the narrative.

Samira wrote:
The fake news narrative exists because 45 wants it to exist. He fears and hates the media, and his first instinct is to foment chaos and profit from the result. None of this is mysterious in the least.


And the media seems to do everything it can to give him examples to help him with his narrative. Maybe they want to sit back and secretly laugh at Trump and his Fake News claims, while feeding him to keep him doing it. But that's not exactly hurting Trump. Fake News isn't a negative for him or his voters. And everything that can be used to support it is a good thing for them. Whether it's him being criticized for calling out countries that "owe" on defense spending. Or for "ignoring" Puerto Rico. Or for Hospitalization vs Out Sick after some medical event.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#505 Sep 29 2017 at 1:50 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
TirithRR wrote:
Samira wrote:
I dunno, Cochran tweeted that he was NOT in the hospital, but was at home. So maybe Trump meant "out sick", and maybe he should learn to be a little more specific.
Yet the article headlines read "Trumps Lies about Senator!".

Which headline?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#506 Sep 29 2017 at 2:09 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
16,883 posts
Jophiel wrote:
TirithRR wrote:
Samira wrote:
I dunno, Cochran tweeted that he was NOT in the hospital, but was at home. So maybe Trump meant "out sick", and maybe he should learn to be a little more specific.
Yet the article headlines read "Trumps Lies about Senator!".

Which headline?

I believe it started with Politico two days ago, even Huff yesterday, with the Trump falsely claiming a Senator was in the Hospital. Then once it was discovered which Senator Trump was referring to, the articles tend move to be more about how he was falsely attributing the failure to the Senator. I think if you search, you can see the trend in the timeline of the articles. Starting with the, Trump falsely claims senator in hospital, and moving toward the, Trump falsely blames senator is 'hospitalized' for bill failure.

Jophiel wrote:
But a media outlet making an error or writing a sensational headline isn't "fake news" except to the Trump supporters who want to equate "ABC made an error and had to issue a correction the next day"


First headlines are all that matter in the days of Twitter / Social Media. People aren't clicking on articles to read actual content, or to read corrections to the article or even headline 2 hours later.

Edited, Sep 29th 2017 4:21pm by TirithRR
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#507 Sep 29 2017 at 4:06 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
A tweet isn't a headline and taking one tweet out of the timeline is disingenuous. You should know better. Dawsey was tweeting from Trump's press gaggle where Trump did, indeed continually insist that a senator was in the hospital and the reporters were trying to figure out what he was talking about because, to their knowledge, no senator was hospitalized.

So if we're down to "It was in Huffington Post", I'm failing to see the cause for alarm with the media.

Also, it was factual that Trump continually insisted that a senator was hospitalized. You might not like how it was reported but nothing about it was "fake news" and people trying to pin that label on legitimate news that they just don't like is pretty much Trump's delight as Samira pointed out.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#508 Sep 29 2017 at 5:11 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,922 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Also, it was factual that Trump continually insisted that a senator was hospitalized. You might not like how it was reported but nothing about it was "fake news" and people trying to pin that label on legitimate news that they just don't like is pretty much Trump's delight as Samira pointed out.


Putting the emphasis on whether the man couldn't vote because he was at home recovering from a procedure/problem/whatever, or was actually in a physical hospital, when that actually doesn't make a lick of difference, is what makes it "fake news". It makes it blatantly about finding something, anything, that Trump says that isn't 100% accurate and making that the absolute focus of attention, even if it's totally irrelevant.

Would Trump's statement have made any difference or had any more or less impact if he'd said that one of the votes was at home recuperating from a medical condition and couldn't vote? No, right? So it's not like Trump gains anything by lying or anything. So one could reasonably assume that he thought he was in the hospital (perhaps he had been, but was released or something? I don't really feel like researching the details here), rather than inventing some evil lie to trick the public. Cause... and this bears repeating, there's no gain from inventing the claim that he was in the hospital versus at home recovering. In both cases, he's unable to vote. It's not like telling the media that an attack was the result of a protest over a video or anything. That's an actual lie that totally changes the narrative of the event itself, and is actually relevant. But let's not pick nits or anything here.


It's this whole "make something out of nothing and imply it's something nefarious" pattern that the media seems to do, repeatedly. And it's that pattern of reporting that people are picking up on. And yeah, the more the media does this kind of silly stuff, the more it strengthens the whole "fake news" claim. And it doesn't help them that they are so obvious about doing it in a totally partisan way. Democrats can blatantly lie about stuff, and the media (Candy Crowley anyone?) will fall over themselves to cover for it. Republican says something slightly incorrect in a way that is irrelevant to the issue at hand, and it's "Wham! Gotcha! OMG it's a lie Lie LIE!!!!".

That's what people are becoming increasingly aware of and angry about.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#509 Sep 29 2017 at 5:21 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Putting the emphasis on whether the man couldn't vote because he was at home recovering from a procedure/problem/whatever, or was actually in a physical hospital, when that actually doesn't make a lick of difference, is what makes it "fake news".

No.

But it's great that Trump and the GOP trained you to think so. Makes it easier to water down criticism of legitimately made from whole cloth false stories. Good dog, Gbaji -- have a biscuit.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#510 Sep 29 2017 at 5:21 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
As long as I'm double posting -- Again, the whole "Repeal didn't pass because a senator was absent" is a lie in of itself. Repeal didn't pass because there were at least three hard "no" votes and possibly as many as six (Paul, McCain, Collins, Cruz, Lee & Murkowski) if not more.

Trying to make this hand-wringing about "Well, Trump said hospital but actually it was at home but what's the difference so FAKE NEWS!!!!" misses the entire point of why this was a story to begin with. Trump lied about why the ACA repeal failed both in general terms (because a senator was absent) and in specifics (because he was hospitalized). If someone legitimately wants to cry about "fake news", you're doing it wrong if your focus is HuffPo.

Edited, Sep 29th 2017 6:36pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#511 Sep 29 2017 at 5:40 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
***
3,355 posts
I cry about fake news, but not for the reasons you were suggesting.





(It's because I'm a whiner, and a cry baby)
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#512 Sep 29 2017 at 5:53 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
And a monkey!
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#513 Sep 29 2017 at 5:58 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,922 posts
Jophiel wrote:
If they're speaking for their teams then let their teams deal with it. The NFL doesn't need you having conniption fits on their behalf. They're all big boys who can handle their own companies.


It's interesting that you feel the need to call my fairly objective post a "conniption". I'm simply pointing out that ultimately the power here lies with the fans. The entire operation, from ticket sales, merchandise sales, advertising revenue, etc, requires a large and appreciative fan base. If enough fans decide that enough is enough, they'll apply pressure on the NFL via their pocketbooks. And based on declining viewership and polls showing said decline is at least in part because of the protests, it's something that they might want to look into. Ticket sales are down 18%, which is also something they might want to think about. ABC ran some videos of fans burning tickets and jerseys. How representative that isn't clear, but it's also something that the league might want to take a look at. DirectTV obviously thinks this is a big deal, since they apparently sent out a public statement to their subscribers giving them the option to cancel their sports package subscriptions if they were doing so in response to players kneeling for the national anthem. They don't normally allow cancellations once the season starts, but they are in response to this. Again. Something the league might just want to take note of. The Pittsburgh Steelers owner had to send out a letter apologizing to fans after massive negative response to the entire team (sans one player) simply not taking the field for the anthem (claiming it was all a misunderstanding, or something, but still). Again, this is a pretty strong signal that the fans were "not happy"(tm) about this. At all.

It's a losing fight for the NFL. It's a losing fight for the players. I'm just pointing out the obvious here. People are getting sick and tired of the idea that everything one does in support of a cause is magically made OK, and any questioning or condemning of it means you oppose the cause itself. Nope. That's not the issue. Being upset about people refusing to stand for the national anthem does not mean we don't care about black lives, and it's frankly offensive to claim that it is. Yet that's the narrative being posited. Somehow, if you dare to stand for the anthem, now you're a racist supporter of white supremacy. So now there's no middle ground between embracing and respecting the ideals your nation stands for and being a white supremacist?

Sorry. That's disgusting. And yeah. It's also a losing fight. If those being called racists for the horrible crime of choosing to respect their flag choose to make a fight of it. And yeah, while I'm not a huge fan of Trump's methodology, what he's doing is upping that ante and forcing the fight. Fair or not, his tweet created a crucible on this issue. It forced a reaction from the players, which in turn is forcing a reaction from the fans. And again, at the risk of repeating myself, in a players versus fans fight, the fans win. Every. Single. Time.


Quote:
I do love the whole "There's lots of other guys who'd take their job!" bit though. Sure there are. But that doesn't mean that the teams want those guys in the job which is why they pay their current guys millions and millions of dollars to work for them. If they were easily replaceable with people of equivalent skill then they'd be paying them like fast food managers.


Certainly. Which is why the teams should be doing a better job to prevent this sort of protest. They need to weigh the cost of the players to their teams versus the cost of losing those players if enough fans put enough pressure on the league to force the issue in some way. My point was that there's plenty of players willing to play *and* respect the flag during the anthem. In the absence of outrage, they'd not get to play. With enough outrage? Who knows...
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#514 Sep 29 2017 at 6:06 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,922 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Putting the emphasis on whether the man couldn't vote because he was at home recovering from a procedure/problem/whatever, or was actually in a physical hospital, when that actually doesn't make a lick of difference, is what makes it "fake news".

No.


You do realize that you don't get to be the arbiter of what conservatives call Fake News, right?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#515 Sep 29 2017 at 6:20 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Of what conservatives call it? Of course not. Conservatives make up all sorts of false definitions to fit their agenda over reality. Nothing I can do about that.

Of what fake news actually is? That's more solid which is why Trump works so hard to blur the lines and fool the less capable thinkers into arguing that news they don't like qualifies for the same label as news that's just completely made up.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#516 Sep 29 2017 at 7:19 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,253 posts
gbaji wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Putting the emphasis on whether the man couldn't vote because he was at home recovering from a procedure/problem/whatever, or was actually in a physical hospital, when that actually doesn't make a lick of difference, is what makes it "fake news".

No.


You do realize that you don't get to be the arbiter of what conservatives call Fake News, right?


Holy ****, people get to define their own reality set now?

____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#517 Sep 29 2017 at 7:52 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,922 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Of what conservatives call it? Of course not. Conservatives make up all sorts of false definitions to fit their agenda over reality. Nothing I can do about that.


But news organizations continuing to do exactly what people are labeling as Fake News sure does help substantiate those claims.

Quote:
Of what fake news actually is?


There's two forms of fake news Joph:

One is actual BS sites intentionally creating false stories in the hopes that they get picked up on social media, go viral, etc, and thus influence people There's plenty of that on the internet, and it comes in all shapes, sizes, and political orientations.

The other form is legitimate news organizations using clever wordplay, selection bias, and sometimes just outright poor sourcing to write stories that create a false perception in the minds of their audience. They often skirt the edge of outright lying or writing things that are provably false, but just the edge. The examples given above illustrate this. In each case, the facts of the story were technically true, but the choice to put emphasis on one aspect of a story versus another influences the audiences perception of the events themselves. So by focusing on the fact of the Jones Act not being waived quickly, we're led to believe that insufficient emergency supplies were arriving in Puerto Rico, when in fact there was no lack of capacity nor delivery of those supplies to the island itself. By focusing on quotes from people talking about how difficult it is to get supplies, the perception that it's the result of some kind of delay in shipping is reinforced, when in actual fact, the issue was with distribution on the island itself. The entire line of reporting is about misleading the reader into thinking that the problem was with shipping of goods to the island.

One might think that this is merely sensationalism to sell papers and whatnot, but if that was the point, why not focus on the real problem with relief supply distribution? Because that's not directly in Trump's hands, and can't be tied in (even weakly) to waiting a few days to waive the Jone's Act. By writing about one, and then including facts about the other, the journalist can tie two unrelated "true facts" together to create a false perception.


That's what we're talking about when we call these media outlets "fake news". You may not like the label. I'm sure you don't. But that's what people are increasingly becoming annoyed with. And if it was just occasionally, or even if it were equally aimed, it would be one thing. But we just saw 8 years of the very same journalists falling over themselves to excuse, downplay, and dismiss any possible negative or questionable action or statement that the Obama administration made. The reversal is so jarring that even folks who are not particularly conservative leaning can see it pretty plainly.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#518 Sep 29 2017 at 7:53 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,922 posts
Gah!

Edited, Sep 29th 2017 6:54pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#519 Sep 29 2017 at 7:58 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,922 posts
angrymnk wrote:
gbaji wrote:
You do realize that you don't get to be the arbiter of what conservatives call Fake News, right?


Holy ****, people get to define their own reality set now?


Yeah, I know. It's an amazing concept. That there's no one single authoritative source of what is, should be, must be, etc. It's almost like we live in a world where people have this crazy thing called "liberty" and are free to express their own opinions about things. Nah! That's crazy. Nothing may be called "fake news" unless Joph thinks that it should be called that. New rule I guess. All hail Joph, Lord commander of the Truth! Hurrah!
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#520 Sep 29 2017 at 10:59 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
One is actual BS sites intentionally creating false stories in the hopes that they get picked up on social media, go viral, etc, and thus influence people There's plenty of that on the internet, and it comes in all shapes, sizes, and political orientations.

The other form is legitimate news organizations using clever wordplay, selection bias, and sometimes just outright poor sourcing to write stories that create a false perception in the minds of their audience.

You realize that the "second type" (which isn't even the case in this instance) only exists because Trump told you it does, right? Because he was intentionally blurring the line and trying to delegitimize news sources that were critical of him? You know, like when they point out that Trump is making up a narrative about how the ACA repeal only failed because one senator was out sick?

Have another biscuit. Good doggie. Keep it up so Trump can keep outright lying and you're too busy yapping at HuffPo to notice.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#521 Sep 30 2017 at 7:33 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,253 posts
gbaji wrote:
angrymnk wrote:
gbaji wrote:
You do realize that you don't get to be the arbiter of what conservatives call Fake News, right?


Holy ****, people get to define their own reality set now?


Yeah, I know. It's an amazing concept. That there's no one single authoritative source of what is, should be, must be, etc. It's almost like we live in a world where people have this crazy thing called "liberty" and are free to express their own opinions about things. Nah! That's crazy. Nothing may be called "fake news" unless Joph thinks that it should be called that. New rule I guess. All hail Joph, Lord commander of the Truth! Hurrah!


Sure, I personally believe in a world that has negative Pi and feel that gravity is a liberal conspiracy bent on keeping us down. One day we will outlaw this horrible, job destroying limitation, but for the time being, we will pretend it simply does not exist! Poof. If someone dies falling into Grand Canyon, for legal purposes, it was the ground that killed him.

Just because you believe in something, it does not make it true. Likewise, just, because something is branded fake news does not make it not true.

It is not my ******* fault that there was notable increase of people who think gravity is an oped piece.

In short, there is no truth commander, but gravity doesn't care.

TLDR, There is no alternative reality. Things are what they are. Cryst

____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#522 Sep 30 2017 at 7:33 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,253 posts
gbaji wrote:
angrymnk wrote:
gbaji wrote:
You do realize that you don't get to be the arbiter of what conservatives call Fake News, right?


Holy ****, people get to define their own reality set now?


Yeah, I know. It's an amazing concept. That there's no one single authoritative source of what is, should be, must be, etc. It's almost like we live in a world where people have this crazy thing called "liberty" and are free to express their own opinions about things. Nah! That's crazy. Nothing may be called "fake news" unless Joph thinks that it should be called that. New rule I guess. All hail Joph, Lord commander of the Truth! Hurrah!


Sure, I personally believe in a world that has negative Pi and feel that gravity is a liberal conspiracy bent on keeping us down. One day we will outlaw this horrible, job destroying limitation, but for the time being, we will pretend it simply does not exist! Poof. If someone dies falling into Grand Canyon, for legal purposes, it was the ground that killed him.

Just because you believe in something, it does not make it true. Likewise, just, because something is branded fake news does not make it not true.

It is not my ******* fault that there was notable increase of people who think gravity is an oped piece.

In short, there is no truth commander, but gravity doesn't care.

TLDR, There is no alternative reality. Things are what they are. Cryst

____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#523 Sep 30 2017 at 8:57 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
***
3,355 posts
It's like the old story about a bunch of blind men trying to describe an elephant from different parts, but the republicans are actually stuffing their fists up their own a$sholes, and when the democrats say "It has a long trunk, and it has two tusks" the republicans jam their heads up next to their fists, and scream into the brown abyss "Fake News"

Too =/= Two

Edited, Sep 30th 2017 8:17am by stupidmonkey
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#524 Sep 30 2017 at 1:28 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,253 posts
Professor stupidmonkey wrote:
It's like the old story about a bunch of blind men trying to describe an elephant from different parts, but the republicans are actually stuffing their fists up their own a$sholes, and when the democrats say "It has a long trunk, and it has two tusks" the republicans jam their heads up next to their fists, and scream into the brown abyss "Fake News"

Too =/= Two

Edited, Sep 30th 2017 8:17am by stupidmonkey


I am starring to think T is onto something with the NFL. I had a spat with a random woman this morning. She eventually delivered the 'if you dont like this country you can get out" . I was surprised. I did not expect it All I had was, it is my country too.

My point T really tapped into some raw emotions.
____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#525 Sep 30 2017 at 7:29 PM Rating: Decent
Keeper of the Shroud
*****
13,549 posts
Honestly, I just don't give a **** about football in general. I was sick of this story long before Trump turned it into the latest national distraction from how terrible he is.
#526 Sep 30 2017 at 7:47 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
16,883 posts
Turin wrote:
Honestly, I just don't give a **** about football in general. I was sick of this story long before Trump turned it into the latest national distraction from how terrible he is.


I'm pretty sure most people are. But the media likes to play along for some reason.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 97 All times are in CDT
Anonymous Guests (97)