New Poll Shows Republicans Will Believe Anything

That's funny, I'm a little slow, but I just got the joke

 

The fact that you fail to grasp is that I, on the left, can make precisely the same argument against the right, and Fox.

But, unlike MSNBC, or CNN, I can prove to you that daytime FOX is more 'fair and balanced' ,where night time Fox, is not.
That cannot be said of MSNBC or CNN, because, however you view their reportage, it's consistent from day through night.

But, allow me to illuminate your misuse of a particular term, 'censorship'.

You wrote:

Over and over, documented events are reported on MSM networks like a censored script,

What a channel selects for reportage goes to bias, NOT censorship. No channel can include all the stories coming through the various news wires, so it cannot be 'censorship' when a story is excluded. What a channel selects to report on goes to bias.

Both MSNBC/CNN and FOX select stories that support their bias, the former select stories benefiting the left, Fox News picks stories benefiting the right.

But, it's not selective bias that is important, because it is expected, what IS important is the caliber and % of factual reportage. A story can be true, though it's truth benefits the left. Or, a story can be true, but it's truth can benefit the right. Or, the degree of 'truth' can vary, as well. Stores can be misleading, if they miss certain facts.

Are the omissions deliberate ,or are they just careless? I think it is fair say both the right and the left are both deliberate, and careless, in these respective departments, and that is the whole purpose of forums such as this, to bring a subject forth and hash it out, amongst ourselves, so I say we quit bickering about the veracity of left vs right, and challenge the veracity of the subject at hand. And since you have proffered the subject of left vs right, you leave me no choice but to deal with that subject, head on. To wit:

CNN gets a mixed rating from mediabiasfactcheck.org on it's 'factual reportage' meter. Meaning, reportage, insofar as being factual, is hit or miss.

MSNBC ger's a mixed rating..." "

Fox News gets' a mixed rating...." " .

So, with a 'mixed' or above rating, I view any story, insofar as it's correctness, on a case by case basis, but the rating is high enough to consider the story.
Below that, in my view, the source shouldn't be bothered with ( the Wonkette, for example, I read for 'entertainment' NOT factual reportage, as it's a hybrid sight mixing satire and reporting, but often doesn't tell you which is which -- you have to be smart about it when reading it ).

Therefore, any of the above are as good as the other, but, left or right, bias is about the same. The other point being your use of the term 'censorship' is sloppy, indeed.

But, if you want more accurate reporting, though story selection moderately favors the left,

New York Times gets a 'HIGH' rating on the factual reportage meter.

Washington Post gets a 'HIGH" rating....." "

If you want a source which gets a good rating, but bias is stronger:

Time Magazine gets a "HIGH" rating in factual reporting, and is farther to the left in it's story selection.

But, if you want more accurate reporting, though story selection moderately favors the right

WJS gets a 'Mostly Factual" ( which is one notch below "HIGH" ) on the factual reportage meter

Forbes gets a 'Mostly Factual" ...... " " "

If you want fairly accurate reporting though story selection steeply favors the right

National Review gets a 'Mostly Factual' reporting.

And, one notch down,

"Washington Examiner' gets a 'Mixed" rating, and is far to the right in terms of bias.


If you are looking for 'least biased' (just slightly to the left) AND 'HIGH' rating in the 'factual' department, the winner is:

The Christian Science Monitor.

"The Christian Science Monitor has won seven Pulitzer Prizes and more than a dozen Overseas Press Club awards. Although the name contains the words Christian Science, the news reporting is generally not religious and those that are religious in nature are clearly labeled." --MBFC org.

If you are looking for 'least biased' (just slightly to the right) AND 'HIGH' rating in the 'factual' department, the winner is:

Foreign Policy Magazine.

"Foreign Policy has been nominated for eight National Magazine Awards, winning six – three for its print publication, and three for its digital publication at ForeignPolicy.com. FP is the only independent magazine that has won consecutive digital national magazine awards every year from being established in 2009 "--MBFC

The overall point is, your comment is biased to the right, and it's reportage is 'mixed' and, as such, your premise can be equally applied to both sides of the spectrum, depending on whom you are sourcing for your data. The fact that you omit this reality rates your comment, here, as 'factually misleading', and, as such, you are therefore guilty of the very thing of which you accuse your opposition.

 

..no problem.. fake polls are legion, on the democratic plantation.

What it really shows, is the gullibility and indoctrination, from progressive indoctrinees, who nod like bobbleheads at everything their handlers say..

As long as it bashes Trump, somehow..

 

"President Trump ended the Republican National Convention on Thursday with a tidal wave of tall tales, false claims and revisionist history. Here are 25 claims by the president that caught our attention, along with seven claims by speakers earlier in the evening. As is our practice, we do not award Pinocchios for a roundup of claims made in convention events."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...-president-trumps-acceptance-speech-2020-rnc/

25 lies and or distortions of the truth packed in to his acceptance speech. There is nothing fake about asserting Trumpleton's unquestioningly believe what Trump tells them. The evidence can be found on this board every day.

 

There are two sides to every coin.

—————

Recently retired. Over 35 years, I had to write and submit my daily reports to the VP Ops.

No lies
No exaggerations
No double meaning statements/claims
No ambiguities
No misleading quotes
No bullshit
No gibberish

Thus, every single detail I’ve reported were accurate, and straight to the point!

However, In politics, daily reports to the public are highly questionable, and more than often, insults people’s intelligence. Well, let’s assume; “It is what it is to a tolerable degree”.

Key words; to a tolerable degree

Now, in reference to your opening statement; “I think Trump is Trump”.......and obviously, you like him for several reasons.

Well, for anyone’s info, there is only one reason why I don’t like Trump, and it is the cornerstone of all leadership qualities; INTEGRITY.

Typical response; “Yeah, but in reference to integrity, THEY’re all the same”

My previous response; “To a tolerable degree”, and what comes out of Trump’s mouth, I can’t tolerate anymore.

 

It almost hilarious. The Pulitzer Prize named after the guy that more or less invented Yellow Journalism out of whole cloth is an award journalist give themselves for telling each other what they want to hear, see, and read regardless of how factual. It is.
Today they are little more than an award for keeping the narrative alive without regard to whether or not the narrative is true.

 

This coming from the people who believe placing immigration officers at polling stations is voter intimidation.
For those of you who somehow don't know - only US citizens have the right to vote, and ICE agents are tasked to deal with non-US citizens.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pe...any-attention-to-what-the-president-is-saying

 

I don't know a Trump supporter who does not agree that the way he talks is often abrasive. The question is- what will you say qualifies or disqualifies a person for the job of chief executive?
Is his job to sound nice and be popular, seen as a nice guy- or is it to get the job done and make his company a winner?

Rarely is anyone both. Choosing a physician because they have a nice bedside manner despite lacking the skills- is a terrible decision.
While integrity is certainly a highly desirable characteristic in leadership, the lack of integrity is politics is virtually total.
In classes I used to teach on self-improvement, I used a kind of analogy to help people understand how and when integrity works.

You are in a poker game, and you discover that a couple of the players are conspiring to cheat. So what do you do?
The ideal choice is to leave the game; refuse to be victimized.
The second choice is to continue to play, and lose everything. They win again, and you lose more.
Lets say you correctly make the first choice, but the cheating players pull out a gun and tell you that you ARE going to play.
Now the rules have changed, and your choices change- a third one becomes viable.
That is to beat them at their own game; not allow them to use your own integrity to destroy you. You won't win, won
t succeed any other way. IF you play by the rules of the entrenched politicians... you just become one of them and change nothing.

Now in politics, quitting amounts to letting the dishonest people run you out- which means, they win again and nothing changes.
When you are playing with people who have no integrity- your own integrity has to allow for some flexibility. Not to dishonestly take advantage of others- but to prevent them from taking unfair advantage of you.
Politics is a very dirty game and while everyone claims integrity, none of them conduct themselves by it in the way the average citizen defines it. I sincerely doubt anyone who can't play hardball can ever achieve anything in Washington; they would quickly wipe the floor with such a person. There have been good men elected to congress who quit because they found that everything was bought and sold- if you vote for my bill, you get to pack some pork in it. If you don't let me put my pork in your bill, I won't vote for it. The idea that this is an institution of patriots who are there to do keep their oath of office is a fantasy. If you look at the simple ethics guidelines for federal employees (and all members of congress are) you can easily see that virtually every member of congress violates those standards. Washington isn't changing Trump- but Trump is changing Washington. That of course is causing a substantial disturbance, and fundamental change would do so regardless of who sought to achieve it. I'll post a copy of those standards if you want to see it.

You may remember the incident where the "60 minutes" news show exposed that virtually all of of congress was involved in insider stock trading, profiting from the knowledge of coming legislation and rules changes? This exposure was met with shock in congress, as if they had no idea they were doing that, and immediately adopted the posture that this must be stopped- and so passed a law, and told us what a good job they had done. One year later, they very quietly passed a very small change to that law which effectively ended public access to their trading activities- in effect, sheltering themselves from their own law. That law passed unanimously in both houses in less than 30 seconds each , without discussion or notice. Many members were not in Washington at the time and didn't know it existed when it passed. Unanimously.

You may not know that a member of congress can be fired- immediately removed from office if found unfit, just as a typical employee could. However, the only people with the power to do this- is congress. On a 2/3 vote, they can eject any member of congress, and there is no requirement for hearings, no delay, no appeal. Congress has the total ability to clean it's own house. One would think that this power would be used many times by people with integrity- we have for example had a number of members of congress convicted of felonies. However Congress has used this power only twice.... in the last 155 years, since the civil war ended. That is the kind of integrity that congressional politics believes in. You can do most anything, you can even get caught- but don't get caught in a way that would bring the rest of us down.

That's what Trump is dealing with. You as a citizen have been tolerating it all your life, and wondering why things don't change. Trump was elected because the changes were not really happening. He was a total outsider- a disruptor of the kind of "integrity" which never got results and compromised every bill congress passed. Of course they hate his guts- he won without being owned by the party or major donors, the first president I can recall that could actually make a call for the people, without first asking if it would please those whom he owed his loyalty to. I doubt any other person in Washington politics today can do that.

It's an ugly fight because of the anger and resentment and resistance to change. That is a choice of the entrenched establishment, not Trump. He's capable of playing the game however he has to- and I don't care if people don't think he's a nice guy; I care that he get the job done. That is integrity- delivering what you promised, not superficially pleasing the critics.

It's true, Trump can be brash and crude. That doesn't make him wrong- just politically incorrect to some people.

 

I am worse than less impressed with these lists of Trump lies made by orgasmic trump haters.

 

I’ll summarize all of the above; What this country needs is a Mr. Doer like Trump.

Well, for your info, we will soon surpass Italy’s Covid19 Deaths per 1M pop, 565 versus 585. To refresh your memory, back in early April, Trump PROUDLY compared the U.S and the most affected European nations, thus, Belgium, Spain, Italy, Germany, France, and Nertherland. Comparisons were based on Deaths per 100,000 pop.

Since then, we’ve surpassed Netherland, France, and soon, Italy. I also remember that Trump and most of his loyalists in this forum were highly critical of Italy’s handling of Covid19.

Thus, in reference to Covid19/bad economic times, let’s talk about;

Mr. Doer Trump, and

Mr. Leadership Trump

Bottom line, no one will ever convince that Mr. Doer/Leadership Trump deserves a passing grade.

 

Thus, you hold Trump accountable for curing a pandemic. Certainly a rational thing, to expect an elected official to do what all the thousands of scientists and medical teams of the world have so far failed to do.
Maybe if he were a democrat, he could just say- like "Let's not, and say we did". Then, CNN would give him credit for saving humanity and you would be cheering. Of course, an intelligent person does not measure people by things they cannot control. Or do they? Perhaps that is a kind of IQ test- of the person doing the measuring.

I think what the country needs is more who want to get things done and work together, fewer who want to prevent things from getting done for political reasons; who build roadblocks to progress so they will be able to blame others for not moving fast enough. Trump isn't your enemy. Those people are.

Of course, you are free to tell yourself anything you want to hear.

 

Know what's funny? You have to actually tell people what you mean by TDS. But when others are talking about leftists no one has to spell out what TDS means. Because everyone already knows.

 

Anyone who blindly follows a party will believe whatever their party tells them. It’s why both parties love it when they have blind sheep followers.

 

Quote: An intelligent person does not measure people by things they cannot control.

Of course, such as an earthquake, however, the BEFORE and AFTER are measurable.

 

Here's a lie from your video. I won't go point by point of the lies told in that video, however when he talks about Laura Trump's "quote" of Abraham Lincoln he attributes it as a direct quote. It's not. Its paraphrased from Lincolns Lyceum Address.

LINK: Lyceum Address

The essence is the same. The guy in your video wouldn't even provide Lincolns direct quote in order for others to come to their own conclusions. IE: He's attempting to create a narrative. One which you obviously fell for. Of course it is possible that he's just repeating what he's been told. Because he's a lemming.

 

Blaming Trump for Corona virus cases of deaths is like blaming Trump for Hurricane storm surges or forest wild fire fatalities or tornado damage, nonsensical but fodder for the starving TDS syndrome people..

 

This from the not gullible people who believe in the "fine people" myth, the mocked a disabled journalist myth and so on...

 

Why are pollsters holding back the results of the polls since the RNC Convention?

 

Poor analogies, and misunderstanding.

Should anyone be blamed for the formation and trajectory of Hurricane Laura?

Of course not!

However, in reference to an act of God, a man made disaster, or a fluke, people have often blamed their authorities for “FAILING TO”, Before, During, and After, and “FAILING TO” may negatively affect people’s lives.

Thus, inevitable or avertable, it boils down to this;

Poor leadership VERSUS Good leadership

 

Like comparing downtown Minneapolis before and after- yes, definitely measurable- and we have video showing us who did it, and statements from mayors and police telling us who allowed it.
I hope you aren't saying that if Trump says something you (or anybody) doesn't like, they automatically loose control and have to freak out.

I'm old fashioned. I believe you are responsible for everything you think, feel, say and do- because only you can control them. Only weak people who refuse that responsibility blame their tantrums on someone else.
May not be such a popular idea today- but it is the concept that built the nation. Valid as ever, whether people believe it or not.

 

We also have laws, rules, warnings, restrictions, and fines due to irresponsible individuals, and there are numerous chapters, such as;

Driving a motor vehicle;

Talk on a cell phone while driving
Drinking and driving
Not wearing a seatbelt
Driving without a license
Driving without insurance
Insecure load

Last chapter; “Under construction” Individual Responsibility as it relates to Covid19, and Public Safety.

 

Yeah Biden didn't support open borders in the past, but I doubt he will stick to his old school ways. Recently, many top democrats support policies that sit fairly close to open borders.

 

CNN tried fact checking Trump. And Crowder blew up all CNNs opinions on what they thought lies were. It is embarrassing how pathetic CNN is.

Then again, They pushed the Russia hoax for 3 yrs.

 

In addition to the above, conservatives do often talk about Individual Responsibilty, however, most of the time, it relates to socio-economic issues.

However, as it relates to preventing/minimizing Covid19 and enhancing Public Safety, ironically, the liberals are the pro-individual responsibility.

 

Doubleplus ironic projection!