192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
blatham
 
  4  
Sat 3 Dec, 2016 09:31 am
Quote:
As Politico’s Susan Glasser wrote in a sobering assessment of election coverage for the Brookings Institution, “Even fact-checking perhaps the most untruthful candidate of our lifetime didn’t work; the more news outlets did it, the less the facts resonated.”

Indeed, Hannah Arendt, writing in 1967, presciently explained the basis for this phenomenon: “Since the liar is free to fashion his ‘facts’ to fit the profit and pleasure, or even the mere expectations, of his audience, the chances are that he will be more persuasive than the truth teller.”
link
That's one hell of a bright insight.
layman
 
  1  
Sat 3 Dec, 2016 09:32 am
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

“There’s no such thing, unfortunately, anymore, of facts,” she declared

Trump people go full Derrida


Trump "people," eh? Who would that be, exactly? Let me guess: Everybody who ever said anything positive about Trump, right?

Seeing as how she's just a complete subjectivist, like Derrida, I wonder why she uses qualifiers like "unfortunately" and "anymore?"

Could it be possible that she is just making a factual point about how people react? Or making a valid distinction between what is actually true, and what is perceived to be true?

Naw. That interpretation wouldn't make "Trump people" seem like wack-jobs.

Got any more sophistical smears in store for us today?
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  0  
Sat 3 Dec, 2016 09:35 am
@Lash,
They're too arrogant to admit it to themselves. But the people seem to have wised up and realized that they don't report the news they sell the news as infotainment and more insidiously pump the airwaves full of liberal revisionist propaganda.
0 Replies
 
Frugal1
 
  -1  
Sat 3 Dec, 2016 09:37 am
Contemporary liberals get it so freaking wrong.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PyEXshBOwEU
giujohn
 
  0  
Sat 3 Dec, 2016 09:41 am
@revelette2,
revelette2 wrote:

Who are you to speak for "real America?" I am not even sure who she is, I might have read some of her work and didn't remark her name, but really, Yall's win has gone to your heads.


Yes...yes it has! And I for one am enjoying the hell out of it.
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  -1  
Sat 3 Dec, 2016 09:46 am
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

Quote:
As Politico’s Susan Glasser wrote in a sobering assessment of election coverage for the Brookings Institution, “Even fact-checking perhaps the most untruthful candidate of our lifetime didn’t work; the more news outlets did it, the less the facts resonated.”

Indeed, Hannah Arendt, writing in 1967, presciently explained the basis for this phenomenon: “Since the liar is free to fashion his ‘facts’ to fit the profit and pleasure, or even the mere expectations, of his audience, the chances are that he will be more persuasive than the truth teller.”
link
That's one hell of a bright insight.


If the people thought that Trump had lied at all they probably weighed it against Hillary's violation of the public trust and their knowledge that she would say anything to get elected therefore making her the most dangerous liar of all.
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  1  
Sat 3 Dec, 2016 09:46 am
@Frugal1,
Frugal1 wrote:

Contemporary liberals get it so freaking wrong.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PyEXshBOwEU




Frug, if you want to actually imbed a youtube video you're linking to, like this, then:

Just put [youtube] in front of the link, then put [/youtube] behind it.
Frugal1
 
  0  
Sat 3 Dec, 2016 09:50 am
@layman,
Muchas gracias
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  1  
Sat 3 Dec, 2016 10:00 am
@Frugal1,
I heard this on Sean Hannity show yesterday when he had Ann Coulter on the show with him. This is the equivalent of the newspaper Truman held up with the headline Dewey defeats Truman. It was a delight to see those smug smirks wiped off all those Hollywood and MSM faces. What a wonderful Christmas present.
revelette2
 
  3  
Sat 3 Dec, 2016 10:12 am
@blatham,
Sure is, the Karl, Cheney had it down to a tee, tell a lie often enough and people will believe it.

The following is dated but it is an article I think you would find very interesting.

The Propaganda Professor
Frugal1
 
  0  
Sat 3 Dec, 2016 10:22 am
Liberal elites assured their blind followers that Hillary would defeat all comers this time.

Wrong again.
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  0  
Sat 3 Dec, 2016 10:26 am
@giujohn,
giujohn wrote:

This is the equivalent of the newspaper Truman held up with the headline Dewey defeats Truman.


Yeah, it literally was, eh, John?



0 Replies
 
layman
 
  1  
Sat 3 Dec, 2016 10:37 am
@revelette2,
revelette2 wrote:

. Do you think every recount in history risked the electoral votes?


Of course not. Wisconsin can recount its electronic votes quite quickly. But, of course, that would not result in the necessary delay being sought, would it? So, what now?

They file a lawsuit in Wisconsin demanding that the votes be counted by hand. Yeah, that should do the trick.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Sat 3 Dec, 2016 10:59 am
@layman,
I got a real kick out of the "Trump will never be Prsident" clips. The complacent, smug certainty .... and folly among the self-appoinbted, all knowing "elites" is something of which we should periodically remind ourselves .... and them.
layman
 
  2  
Sat 3 Dec, 2016 11:02 am
@georgeob1,
Since they only talk to themselves, and only read what's written by their ilk, since they vigorously suppress any differing opinions, and since they never think for themselves rather than just adopt "popular" opinions, they are truly mystified that anyone could POSSIBLY think any way other than what they do.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  -1  
Sat 3 Dec, 2016 11:15 am
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

I'm travelling so intermittent posts for a few days.

This level of personal insult here is increasing. Don't do it. It's a violation of site rules. If someone is behaving in this manner, report it to the moderators and refuse to join in. If he/she refuses to engage in discussion with integrity, put them on ignore and carry on. Trolls push emotional buttons - that's a key behavior/intention which defines tolling. Don't play along. There's a LOT to pay attention to now in politics and in media. Focus on the real stuff, not the noise.


I think this means "Hey what's happening, now they're insulting ME !!??" Then there's the additional encouragement to silencing opposing voices by using the "ignore" feature and complaining to the moderators.... the plaintive cries of "don't listen to them !" "they're just trolls, don't listen to them" resound.

It's a little pathetic.

What happened to the former patronizing instruction of the poorly indoctrinated? The chrystaline logic of supposed fact-based argument ?(actually it was a tedious litany of quotes from like-minded reporters and blogs, devoid of originality or meaningful analysis.)

layman
 
  1  
Sat 3 Dec, 2016 11:24 am
@georgeob1,
I have a sister who is a knee-jerk liberal. She's a great person and I love her dearly. But, unfortunately, when it comes to her political beliefs, she doesn't want to know, and refuses to even contemplate, any thing inconsistent with the party line.

Her "knowledge" of the candidates in this race (and all others) was based upon what she "knew" based, primarily, on left-wing comedy shows which bashed Trump 24/7, making him out to be the most ridiculous crazed buffoon imaginable.

I mention the name of Bannon the other day. She let out an audible shriek of horror at the mere mention. I asked her if she had ever heard a single word spoken, or read a single word written, by Bannon himself. Her response was that no she hadn't, and furthermore, she never would. She didn't need to. She already KNEW exactly who he was, and what his "agenda" was.

When I told her that one of his biggest complaints, about both parties, was the wall street bail-out, I thought she, being a huge Bernie supporter, might find that somewhat intriguing. Hell, no. He didn't really believe that, she promptly informed me, and she sure wasn't gunna read his "lies."

"The trouble with the world is not that people know too little, but that they know so many things that ain't so." (Samuel Clemens)
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  0  
Sat 3 Dec, 2016 11:24 am
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

Quote:
Trump Backers Go to Court to Block Vote Recounts in 3 States
NY Times

I confess I don't understand the strategy here. Re Stein, there's no political analyst I read who believes Stein's move will alter any result. So what she's up to looks just weird.

But why is the right advancing such a robust legal attempt to stop the recounts? That's just as weird. One would think that verification of results would be desirable, not just in terms of solidifying Trump's victory in the EC but as a verification that the US's electoral system is not badly corrupted. The complaint forwarded - unnecessary expense - is valid but it rings rather hollow given the lack of concern re NC or the lack of it eight years ago when Franken was held back for months.

Anyone have a good idea on this?

I think you've raised a good question, and I don't claim to know the answer.

One possibility is that Stein is (or is feard to be) just a front for some hidden money and that her focus and intent here may not be as innocuous as some of her apologists (oddly) cleaim. Politics is hardball, and the stakes are high. The Clinton campaign's reassurances that they're just trying to make sure there's an adult (them) in the room don't sound very authentic to me.
blatham
 
  1  
Sat 3 Dec, 2016 11:37 am
@revelette2,
Quote:
The following is dated but it is an article I think you would find very interesting.
Yup. It's a serious problem getting much worse.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Sat 3 Dec, 2016 11:40 am
@georgeob1,
Quote:
One possibility is that Stein

But I'm not asking about Stein's motivations/strategy. I am posing a question regarding why GOP groups are moving as they are in response.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.42 seconds on 05/11/2024 at 08:43:55