Twitter is an "echo chamber" that doesn’t reflect how most Americans think
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 11, 12, 13, 14  Next
 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Halflife
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 15 Aug 2015
Posts: 16656

PostPosted: Tue Jul 23, 2019 7:01 pm    Post subject:

i love how networks that fact check the president, call him out are referred to as left. the only propaganda mainstream channel is fox.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
kikanga
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 29150
Location: La La Land

PostPosted: Tue Jul 23, 2019 9:22 pm    Post subject:

There's left leaning. There's right leaning. And then there's bull (bleep) dressed up like it's news. The third category is standard for alot of conservative outlets. For example:

Quote:
Omar Explodes At Questioner: ‘Waste’ Of ‘Time’ Condemning ‘Al-Qaeda,’ ‘FGM,’ ‘Hamas’

https://www.dailywire.com/news/49806/omar-explodes-questioner-waste-time-condemning-al-ryan-saavedra

Headlines like this is why she gets death threats. Just read the comments at the bottom calling her (a congresswoman) a terrorist. FWIW, this is what she actually said:
https://twitter.com/abgutman/status/1153841594631507968
_________________
"Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better”
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763

PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2019 6:44 am    Post subject:

Perhaps the biggest problem with these discussions is that most people cling to the horizontal left-right axis to define politics. It was always too simplistic, but in this era it actually impedes clear thought. There is a populist Y-axis that cuts across party lines. Likewise, there is an identity politics z-axis. You could probably identify more axes, but those are the main ones.

Bizarrely enough, the one major politician who seems to understand this is Trump. This does not seem to be a product of cognition so much as intuition. He has obliterated the tea party movement to an extent that would have been unthinkable four years ago. Why? Because, except for the tax cutting part, the tea party ideology does not speak to the populist axis. Both the socialists and the corporate interests want to see lots of money getting spent, though of course in different ways. Likewise, he empowers the identity politicians on the left, knowing that this will alienate moderate voters.

So, in this era, it is more accurate to rank media outlets based on their coverage of Trump, as opposed to ranking them based on a traditional left-right axis. Some of the traditional conservative outlets are aghast at Trumpism, though they aren’t as shrill and sensationalist as MSNBC and the Huff Post.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ribeye
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 10 Nov 2001
Posts: 12611

PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2019 8:11 am    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Some of the traditional conservative outlets are aghast at Trumpism, though they aren’t as shrill and sensationalist as MSNBC and the Huff Post.


I was with you up to this line, though I won't say I disagree with it, as I don't know which of the "some of the traditional conservative outlets are aghast at Trumpism" is it you referance. Perhaps you could list these.
_________________
"A metronome keeps time by using a Ringo"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763

PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2019 8:32 am    Post subject:

National Review is the example that jumps to mind.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2019 11:18 am    Post subject:

ribeye wrote:
adkindo wrote:
ribeye wrote:
Left-leaning? There begins the bias. CNN, the NY Times and WaPo are not left leaning


Like you friend, but you truly cannot believe the words that you write? CNN, NY Times Editorial and WaPo Editorial are far left on the spectrum, while NY Times and WaPo hard news has leaned left for many decades, and leans harder today than ever before. The biggest difference today in US print journalism if that hard barrier between the editorial side and the news side has softened.


As I've said before, there are times I see a left-leaning CNN discussion, and there are times I will see a right leaning CNN discussion. But I am not just going to give my opinion, I will provide an example of the latter (borrowed from the political forum so if this gets involved, we should continue there):

ribeye wrote:


CNN presented a group of pro-Trump political activists as average Republican voters—again

Quote:
In fact, what CNN identified only as a panel of Republican voters were eight Trump-supporting party activists from the rather humiliatingly self-named group Trumpettes of America. It is a group literally devoted to selling itself as American jus' folk who happen to, when asked, Still Support Trump regardless of what he does. But CNN did not mention this; again, the only identification the audience received was that they were Republicans.

Quote:

It's a pro-wrestling move. The viewer is not seeing what they think they are seeing: The segment was orchestrated, in advance, with the parts of Republicans being played by actors who have professionally dedicated themselves to the roles.

Quote:

It's crooked. CNN is lying to its viewers about what they are seeing.


As for the NY Times, I will say the same: left points of view can be presented, but let's make no bones about it, so are right points of view, and often with devastating consequencs. I will present an example of this here as well:

Way back when (I guess 2002 - 2003), a series of front page articles, by Judith Miller, were run on the various aspects of WMD, including the ridiculous aluminum tubes allegation, in the lead up to the Iraq War, effectively help sell the war and all its displacement, disruption, carnage, and death, and end her career as a respected journalist.

As such, the difference I tend to see is that these news organizations make every attempt to tell the news straight, but that sometimes in a presentation, a bias can be seen, but when they might take a liberal point of view on a subject, it is almost always factually presented, while sometimes when they take a conservative point of view on a subject, it is flat out deceiving or wrong, as my cases in point demonstrate.


Question isn’t whether there are left or right leaning discussions, it is the preponderance of the content. In other words, it doesn’t have to be 100%?or 0%. There just isn’t an objective and politically neutral network currently that just reports news. Maybe USA Today? I dunno. But CNN?

It’s like saying Fox News is center because they hired Donna Brazile and they have on left leaning people therefore they cover both sides.

Until Fox has a leftie Tucker Carlson and CNN has a conservative Don Lemon, their respective leanings are pretty obvious.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ribeye
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 10 Nov 2001
Posts: 12611

PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2019 12:06 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
ribeye wrote:
adkindo wrote:
ribeye wrote:
Left-leaning? There begins the bias. CNN, the NY Times and WaPo are not left leaning


Like you friend, but you truly cannot believe the words that you write? CNN, NY Times Editorial and WaPo Editorial are far left on the spectrum, while NY Times and WaPo hard news has leaned left for many decades, and leans harder today than ever before. The biggest difference today in US print journalism if that hard barrier between the editorial side and the news side has softened.


As I've said before, there are times I see a left-leaning CNN discussion, and there are times I will see a right leaning CNN discussion. But I am not just going to give my opinion, I will provide an example of the latter (borrowed from the political forum so if this gets involved, we should continue there):

ribeye wrote:


CNN presented a group of pro-Trump political activists as average Republican voters—again

Quote:
In fact, what CNN identified only as a panel of Republican voters were eight Trump-supporting party activists from the rather humiliatingly self-named group Trumpettes of America. It is a group literally devoted to selling itself as American jus' folk who happen to, when asked, Still Support Trump regardless of what he does. But CNN did not mention this; again, the only identification the audience received was that they were Republicans.

Quote:

It's a pro-wrestling move. The viewer is not seeing what they think they are seeing: The segment was orchestrated, in advance, with the parts of Republicans being played by actors who have professionally dedicated themselves to the roles.

Quote:

It's crooked. CNN is lying to its viewers about what they are seeing.


As for the NY Times, I will say the same: left points of view can be presented, but let's make no bones about it, so are right points of view, and often with devastating consequencs. I will present an example of this here as well:

Way back when (I guess 2002 - 2003), a series of front page articles, by Judith Miller, were run on the various aspects of WMD, including the ridiculous aluminum tubes allegation, in the lead up to the Iraq War, effectively help sell the war and all its displacement, disruption, carnage, and death, and end her career as a respected journalist.

As such, the difference I tend to see is that these news organizations make every attempt to tell the news straight, but that sometimes in a presentation, a bias can be seen, but when they might take a liberal point of view on a subject, it is almost always factually presented, while sometimes when they take a conservative point of view on a subject, it is flat out deceiving or wrong, as my cases in point demonstrate.


Question isn’t whether there are left or right leaning discussions, it is the preponderance of the content. In other words, it doesn’t have to be 100%?or 0%. There just isn’t an objective and politically neutral network currently that just reports news. Maybe USA Today? I dunno. But CNN?

It’s like saying Fox News is center because they hired Donna Brazile and they have on left leaning people therefore they cover both sides.

Until Fox has a leftie Tucker Carlson and CNN has a conservative Don Lemon, their respective leanings are pretty obvious.


That's merely an opinion. I bet you rarely watch CNN and why you don't provide examples backing your opinion. I have never seen CNN put on a bunch of liberal activists as though they were just average liberals. Never.
_________________
"A metronome keeps time by using a Ringo"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2019 1:28 pm    Post subject:

ribeye wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
ribeye wrote:
adkindo wrote:
ribeye wrote:
Left-leaning? There begins the bias. CNN, the NY Times and WaPo are not left leaning


Like you friend, but you truly cannot believe the words that you write? CNN, NY Times Editorial and WaPo Editorial are far left on the spectrum, while NY Times and WaPo hard news has leaned left for many decades, and leans harder today than ever before. The biggest difference today in US print journalism if that hard barrier between the editorial side and the news side has softened.


As I've said before, there are times I see a left-leaning CNN discussion, and there are times I will see a right leaning CNN discussion. But I am not just going to give my opinion, I will provide an example of the latter (borrowed from the political forum so if this gets involved, we should continue there):

ribeye wrote:


CNN presented a group of pro-Trump political activists as average Republican voters—again

Quote:
In fact, what CNN identified only as a panel of Republican voters were eight Trump-supporting party activists from the rather humiliatingly self-named group Trumpettes of America. It is a group literally devoted to selling itself as American jus' folk who happen to, when asked, Still Support Trump regardless of what he does. But CNN did not mention this; again, the only identification the audience received was that they were Republicans.

Quote:

It's a pro-wrestling move. The viewer is not seeing what they think they are seeing: The segment was orchestrated, in advance, with the parts of Republicans being played by actors who have professionally dedicated themselves to the roles.

Quote:

It's crooked. CNN is lying to its viewers about what they are seeing.


As for the NY Times, I will say the same: left points of view can be presented, but let's make no bones about it, so are right points of view, and often with devastating consequencs. I will present an example of this here as well:

Way back when (I guess 2002 - 2003), a series of front page articles, by Judith Miller, were run on the various aspects of WMD, including the ridiculous aluminum tubes allegation, in the lead up to the Iraq War, effectively help sell the war and all its displacement, disruption, carnage, and death, and end her career as a respected journalist.

As such, the difference I tend to see is that these news organizations make every attempt to tell the news straight, but that sometimes in a presentation, a bias can be seen, but when they might take a liberal point of view on a subject, it is almost always factually presented, while sometimes when they take a conservative point of view on a subject, it is flat out deceiving or wrong, as my cases in point demonstrate.


Question isn’t whether there are left or right leaning discussions, it is the preponderance of the content. In other words, it doesn’t have to be 100%?or 0%. There just isn’t an objective and politically neutral network currently that just reports news. Maybe USA Today? I dunno. But CNN?

It’s like saying Fox News is center because they hired Donna Brazile and they have on left leaning people therefore they cover both sides.

Until Fox has a leftie Tucker Carlson and CNN has a conservative Don Lemon, their respective leanings are pretty obvious.


That's merely an opinion. I bet you rarely watch CNN and why you don't provide examples backing your opinion. I have never seen CNN put on a bunch of liberal activists as though they were just average liberals. Never.


Well of course it is an opinion. It’s also an opinion (a poor one IMO) that CNN is simply reporting news.

It’s pretty hilarious that your “example” is by your own admission so rare, so uncommon, that you have “never” seen CNN do it. That basically is by definition an exception.

My example of Don Lemon, (not a single case segment but a regularly occurring show) is the rule. I suppose you think Jim Acosta defines objectivity too? Do you think The View is partisan neutral political commentary by chance too? Haha.

Who at CNN in your mind, simply reports news and facts? I’m curious what you consider to be reporting facts neutrally.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ribeye
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 10 Nov 2001
Posts: 12611

PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2019 2:00 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
ribeye wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
ribeye wrote:
adkindo wrote:
ribeye wrote:
Left-leaning? There begins the bias. CNN, the NY Times and WaPo are not left leaning


Like you friend, but you truly cannot believe the words that you write? CNN, NY Times Editorial and WaPo Editorial are far left on the spectrum, while NY Times and WaPo hard news has leaned left for many decades, and leans harder today than ever before. The biggest difference today in US print journalism if that hard barrier between the editorial side and the news side has softened.


As I've said before, there are times I see a left-leaning CNN discussion, and there are times I will see a right leaning CNN discussion. But I am not just going to give my opinion, I will provide an example of the latter (borrowed from the political forum so if this gets involved, we should continue there):

ribeye wrote:


CNN presented a group of pro-Trump political activists as average Republican voters—again

Quote:
In fact, what CNN identified only as a panel of Republican voters were eight Trump-supporting party activists from the rather humiliatingly self-named group Trumpettes of America. It is a group literally devoted to selling itself as American jus' folk who happen to, when asked, Still Support Trump regardless of what he does. But CNN did not mention this; again, the only identification the audience received was that they were Republicans.

Quote:

It's a pro-wrestling move. The viewer is not seeing what they think they are seeing: The segment was orchestrated, in advance, with the parts of Republicans being played by actors who have professionally dedicated themselves to the roles.

Quote:

It's crooked. CNN is lying to its viewers about what they are seeing.


As for the NY Times, I will say the same: left points of view can be presented, but let's make no bones about it, so are right points of view, and often with devastating consequencs. I will present an example of this here as well:

Way back when (I guess 2002 - 2003), a series of front page articles, by Judith Miller, were run on the various aspects of WMD, including the ridiculous aluminum tubes allegation, in the lead up to the Iraq War, effectively help sell the war and all its displacement, disruption, carnage, and death, and end her career as a respected journalist.

As such, the difference I tend to see is that these news organizations make every attempt to tell the news straight, but that sometimes in a presentation, a bias can be seen, but when they might take a liberal point of view on a subject, it is almost always factually presented, while sometimes when they take a conservative point of view on a subject, it is flat out deceiving or wrong, as my cases in point demonstrate.


Question isn’t whether there are left or right leaning discussions, it is the preponderance of the content. In other words, it doesn’t have to be 100%?or 0%. There just isn’t an objective and politically neutral network currently that just reports news. Maybe USA Today? I dunno. But CNN?

It’s like saying Fox News is center because they hired Donna Brazile and they have on left leaning people therefore they cover both sides.

Until Fox has a leftie Tucker Carlson and CNN has a conservative Don Lemon, their respective leanings are pretty obvious.


That's merely an opinion. I bet you rarely watch CNN and why you don't provide examples backing your opinion. I have never seen CNN put on a bunch of liberal activists as though they were just average liberals. Never.


Well of course it is an opinion. It’s also an opinion (a poor one IMO) that CNN is simply reporting news.

It’s pretty hilarious that your “example” is by your own admission so rare, so uncommon, that you have “never” seen CNN do it. That basically is by definition an exception.

My example of Don Lemon, (not a single case segment but a regularly occurring show) is the rule. I suppose you think Jim Acosta defines objectivity too? Do you think The View is partisan neutral political commentary by chance too? Haha.

Who at CNN in your mind, simply reports news and facts? I’m curious what you consider to be reporting facts neutrally.


Moved to the Politics thread
_________________
"A metronome keeps time by using a Ringo"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2019 2:12 pm    Post subject:

^ Awwww. Where debates and discussion go to die. Welp.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ribeye
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 10 Nov 2001
Posts: 12611

PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2019 2:17 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
^ Awwww. Where debates and discussion go to die. Welp.


Breaking the rules may be some kind of badge for you, but here (LG), I appreciate that we (those who make and honest attempt to actually debate) can have a civil discussion on politics--where it is appropriate.
_________________
"A metronome keeps time by using a Ringo"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
nickuku
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 09 Jul 2010
Posts: 7844
Location: Orange County

PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2019 2:22 pm    Post subject:

Sounds like RF doesn't even watch Don Lemon. These days he lets the clips of trump speak for themselves. So because of trump's own words CNN is left leaning? Ridiculous.
_________________
Don't let perfect be the enemy of good
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2019 2:26 pm    Post subject:

nickuku wrote:
Sounds like RF doesn't even watch Don Lemon. These days he lets the clips of trump speak for themselves. So because of trump's own words CNN is left leaning? Ridiculous.


One thing I agree with ribeye on, let’s dump the politics stuff in that other thread.

There’s a lot going on in social media that is worth discussing separately from that if you can.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
nickuku
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 09 Jul 2010
Posts: 7844
Location: Orange County

PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2019 2:29 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
nickuku wrote:
Sounds like RF doesn't even watch Don Lemon. These days he lets the clips of trump speak for themselves. So because of trump's own words CNN is left leaning? Ridiculous.


One thing I agree with ribeye on, let’s dump the politics stuff in that other thread.

There’s a lot going on in social media that is worth discussing separately from that if you can.


Funny you try to take the high road after that condescending remark to Ribeye.
_________________
Don't let perfect be the enemy of good
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763

PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2019 3:06 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
I’m curious what you consider to be reporting facts neutrally.


Neutrality is an illusion. News, like history in general, comes from a perspective. Unless you get down to granular details (“The high temperature was 90 degrees”j, you cannot separate the facts from the perspective.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 52624
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2019 3:11 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
^ Awwww. Where debates and discussion go to die. Welp.


Only because some republicans such as yourself can't debate on substance and facts and get frustrated by that and do what amounts to taking your ball and going home to pout.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell

Man, do those lyrics resonate right now
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2019 3:25 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
I’m curious what you consider to be reporting facts neutrally.


Neutrality is an illusion. News, like history in general, comes from a perspective. Unless you get down to granular details (“The high temperature was 90 degrees”j, you cannot separate the facts from the perspective.


Well, you’re probably right.

But some places try a lot harder at being objective than others. Some don’t even claim to be objective.

I think CNN used to be the “most” objective news source, at least that is how I remember them anyway.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
kikanga
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 29150
Location: La La Land

PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2019 8:16 pm    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
^ Awwww. Where debates and discussion go to die. Welp.


Only because some republicans such as yourself can't debate on substance and facts and get frustrated by that and do what amounts to taking your ball and going home to pout.


If I'm not mistaken. He expressed a desire to have a liberal thread, and a conservative thread, and a moderate thread. Which is interesting, because that type of closed discussion encourages extremism.
_________________
"Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better”
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90299
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2019 8:41 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
I’m curious what you consider to be reporting facts neutrally.


Neutrality is an illusion. News, like history in general, comes from a perspective. Unless you get down to granular details (“The high temperature was 90 degrees”j, you cannot separate the facts from the perspective.


Well, you’re probably right.

But some places try a lot harder at being objective than others. Some don’t even claim to be objective.

I think CNN used to be the “most” objective news source, at least that is how I remember them anyway.


I’m not going to get too deep in the weeds here, but I suspect someone completely unable or unwilling to identify their own slant by an egregious margin is not much of an expert witness about the slant of news organizations...
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Lucky_Shot
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 10 Jan 2016
Posts: 5140

PostPosted: Thu Jul 25, 2019 2:15 am    Post subject:

CNN is way left and Don lemon is crazy bias.

Nothing wrong with believing in the left but saying cnn is not left is crazy town. Its slightly better than msnbc but cnn will attack anyone who hold different beliefs from the left platform and they dont even try to hide it anymore

Its just like theres nothing wrong with believing in the right but lets not call fox news fair and balanced
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
governator
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 24995

PostPosted: Thu Jul 25, 2019 4:37 am    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Perhaps the biggest problem with these discussions is that most people cling to the horizontal left-right axis to define politics. It was always too simplistic, but in this era it actually impedes clear thought. There is a populist Y-axis that cuts across party lines. Likewise, there is an identity politics z-axis. You could probably identify more axes, but those are the main ones.

Bizarrely enough, the one major politician who seems to understand this is Trump. This does not seem to be a product of cognition so much as intuition. He has obliterated the tea party movement to an extent that would have been unthinkable four years ago. Why? Because, except for the tax cutting part, the tea party ideology does not speak to the populist axis. Both the socialists and the corporate interests want to see lots of money getting spent, though of course in different ways. Likewise, he empowers the identity politicians on the left, knowing that this will alienate moderate voters.

So, in this era, it is more accurate to rank media outlets based on their coverage of Trump, as opposed to ranking them based on a traditional left-right axis. Some of the traditional conservative outlets are aghast at Trumpism, though they aren’t as shrill and sensationalist as MSNBC and the Huff Post.


You think Trump fueling white identity politics which in turn rile up the left identity politics which turn off moderate... white moderate? any stats/poll? (I think Trump did better than expected on latino voters but worse with asian voters?. Black voters are solid anti-Trump)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
governator
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 24995

PostPosted: Thu Jul 25, 2019 4:53 am    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
^ Awwww. Where debates and discussion go to die. Welp.


Only because some republicans such as yourself can't debate on substance and facts and get frustrated by that and do what amounts to taking your ball and going home to pout.


RF's a democrat
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90299
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Thu Jul 25, 2019 7:33 am    Post subject:

governator wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
^ Awwww. Where debates and discussion go to die. Welp.


Only because some republicans such as yourself can't debate on substance and facts and get frustrated by that and do what amounts to taking your ball and going home to pout.


RF's a democrat


And I’m a sexy woman
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763

PostPosted: Thu Jul 25, 2019 7:52 am    Post subject:

governator wrote:
You think Trump fueling white identity politics which in turn rile up the left identity politics which turn off moderate... white moderate? any stats/poll? (I think Trump did better than expected on latino voters but worse with asian voters?. Black voters are solid anti-Trump)


You're thinking purely in terms of race. There are other aspects to identity politics -- gender, sexual orientation and identity, region, and nationality (which overlaps with race in some, but not all, respects). Trump knows that elements of the left will call any white person a white supremacist (it used to be "racist," but people started blocking that out, so they had to raise the ante) at the drop of a hat. Likewise, they will call any man, especially an older white man, a sexist homophobe at the drop of a hat. Finally, they tend to be urban, and so they will vilify from non-urban areas, especially the south and central states. The more that he can goad those elements of the left to scream insults at white people, men, and people from red and purple states, the more it benefits him.

Consider the recent AOC-Pelosi flap. AOC and the Squad suggest that Pelosi is racist, which is what people like AOC do. The Democrats start to rally around Pelosi. So Trump issues a masterstroke -- he jumps in and defends Pelosi and attacks the Squad. This means that the Democrats are forced to change course and rally around AOC and the Squad. Trump would just love for AOC and the Squad to be the faces of the Democratic Party.

Remember that the 2020 election will not present a "Yes/No" choice next to Trump's name. It will be Trump vs. some Democrat. To the extent that the Democrat has a bunch of wingnut baggage attached (Green New Deal, reparations, or whatever), Trump's chances of winning go up. Likewise, he would love to be running against a Muslim transgender lesbian from San Francisco. If he doesn't get those wishes, then he wants the identity politicians of the left to be as noisy and empowered as possible.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 52624
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Thu Jul 25, 2019 8:42 am    Post subject:

governator wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
^ Awwww. Where debates and discussion go to die. Welp.


Only because some republicans such as yourself can't debate on substance and facts and get frustrated by that and do what amounts to taking your ball and going home to pout.


RF's a democrat







You're kidding right? Please tell me you don't buy that BS.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell

Man, do those lyrics resonate right now
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 11, 12, 13, 14  Next
Page 12 of 14
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB