Elections Fakenews fabricates Trump "bloodbath" hoax

[terrapin]

Nah', that's just as partisan. The news should never be telling people who to vote for, or offering an opinion on what they think something meant. It just makes them seem corrupt and paid for. Back in the day, it was considered wholly unethical to take a partisan political stance in journalism. They should just report the news, and then let the people make up their minds. An off the cuff comment in an hour long speech, is not news. It's clickbait. Maybe cover it in a general sense if it gained some steam in the public conscience and warranted some coverage, but don't go out of your way to create a story around it and then tell people what to think about it. That's just propaganda, even if you agree with their stance.

The news should not be attempting to form opinions. People's opinions should come naturally from the news.

Okay, but that would only get rid of telling them not to ever vote for him, which i think is a moral issue and back in the day that you keep mentioning would have never been considered even by the degenerate republicans.

So taking that out you still have to say news at 9:00 Trump the liar manipulator con man grifter who practices is double speak and trolls says another absurd thing meant to tie us up and we won't bother listening to him or commenting further on it.

 

[Andy Capp]

Trump is a brash, blustering NYer pure and simple.

No worse or better than his opposition IMO, they're all crooked.

Money and power is all they crave.

None of them actually care about the people.

Please.

No worse? Seriously?

 

[Yorick]

That's what I said, motherfucker.

Read you can?


LOL

 

[HereticBD]

Okay, but that would only get rid of telling them not to ever vote for him, which i think is a moral issue and back in the day that you keep mentioning would have never been considered even by the degenerate republicans.

No. Even offering personal opinions on him being a "liar" or "immoral" is still wrong from a journalistic standpoint. If he is a liar and/or immoral, the people can figure that out for themselves through generic reporting of the goings on. Just report the lies if there are any, and offer statistics to back up the correction of them, but don't follow that up with your own opinion. You're falling into the same trap they are, where you think your opinion should drive the conversation, and it just gives off a "holier than thou" vibe. That only turns people off, and makes them question why you're not as opinionated over another candidate/topic, that could be just as easily picked apart by anyone that was inclined to do so on the other side.

The news should not have a "side" and is just supposed to be "the news". Not personal opinions, unless otherwise stated.

 

[terrapin]

No. Even offering personal opinions on him being a "liar" or "immoral" is still wrong from a journalistic standpoint. If he is a liar and/or immoral, the people can figure that out for themselves through generic reporting of the goings on. Just report the lies if there are any, and offer statistics to back up the correction of them, but don't follow that up with your own opinion. You're falling into the same trap they are, where you think your opinion should drive the conversation, and it just gives off a "holier than thou" vibe. That only turns people off, and makes them question why you're not as opinionated over another candidate/topic, that could be just as easily be picked apart by anyone that was inclined to do so on the other side.

The news should not have a "side" and just is supposed to be "the news". Not personal opinions, unless otherwise stated.

Now you are just being partisan. Of course he's a liar. That's a fact, not an opinion. Everybody knows it. He's also a criminal criminal and a con man and that's also facts.

Only a partisan hack would pretend otherwise. The news doesn't have to be neutral. It has to be honest if you tell the truth about Trump, you have to say he's a con man and a liar and a troll and practices double speak.

 

[nostradumbass]

excuse me dumbass , whats common figure of speech are we talking about?


There were several mentioned in this thread? Which one do you commonly use, dumbass?



"They're coming from the Congo. They're coming from de-brAsia"

"MAGA will always be MAGA...as opposed to TANG"

“You know what’s interesting? Joe Biden won against Barack Hussein Obama"

"A friend of mine, all he does is build car manufacturing plants, he's the biggest in the world. I mean honestly, I joke about it. He can't walk across the street. In that way, he's like Biden. But for building the plants, he's building the biggest plants in the world, right?"

"The people that like me the most are steel companies"

"Look at all the television up there. I got all the television"



I'm interested to hear the true meaning/translation of these!

Yikes, so not only do you think it takes an "astute intellectual" to understand a basic figure of speech, but you apparently can't even read to know what thread you're posting in. You seem to be having a tough time here, so stay in school and maybe come back in a few years once you've learned to speak and read basic English.

 

[Jack V Savage]

That's what I said, motherfucker.

Read you can?

I think he just has a hard time believing anyone can seriously believe that. I think you probably know better, TBH.

 

[HereticBD]

The news doesn't have to be neutral.

No, it absolutely does, and you just tipped your hand. You just want your ego to be stroked. As long as the news people say what you want them to, you're happy. You're not after objectivity. You're after personal gratification.

It's why even in threads where I agree with you(the tranny threads), you just post the same three videos you've been obsessed with for God knows how long, and demand people watch them and agree with your takes on them, as if they're gospel. You can't comprehend people disagreeing with your takes on them, because it's "the truth"...according to you.

 

[Yorick]

I think he just has a hard time believing anyone can seriously believe that. I think you probably know better, TBH.

Oh, Jack. Next time say HI on the trail by Arbolado Park.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Oh, Jack. Next time say HI on the trail by Arbolado Park.

I think ultra cynical types see themselves as being hard on corruption, but in reality the "everyone is corrupt" view is extremely beneficial to people who are actually corrupt, and folks who hold it invariably oppose holding corrupt politicians to account.

 

[terrapin]

No, it absolutely does, and you just tipped your hand. You just want your ego to be stroked. As long as the news people say what you want them to, you're happy. You're not after objectivity. You're after personal gratification.

It's why even in threads where I agree with you(the tranny threads), you just post the same three videos you've been obsessed with for God knows how long, and demand people watch them and agree with your takes on them, as if they're gospel. You can't comprehend people disagreeing with your takes on them, because it's "the truth"...according to you.

But everything I said about Trump is factual and if you're going to do the news, you would have to tell the truth about him and all those things are true. Respectfully, I think you tipped your hand and what you want is a news that's so "neutral" that it doesn't tell the truth when there's a villain on the scene.

I think you want a post a fact world and I don't think that's anything to do with news and news reporting.

 

[nostradumbass]

Now you are just being partisan. Of course he's a liar. That's a fact, not an opinion. Everybody knows it. He's also a criminal criminal and a con man and that's also facts.

Only a partisan hack would pretend otherwise. The news doesn't have to be neutral. It has to be honest if you tell the truth about Trump, you have to say he's a con man and a liar and a troll and practices double speak.

Lol, "now you are just being partisan" because he said the news should report the news instead of pushing your candidate and validating your anger issues.

Is it their moral duty to also call Joe Biden a liar and discuss his dementia? Should we even have elections in your opinion? If according to you, there's a "dangerous villain on the scene", seems like it would be their moral duty to rig the election or not even have one, no? Should probably just let your moral superiors in the media appoint the president.

 

[terrapin]

Lol, "now you are just being partisan" because he said the news should report the news instead of pushing your candidate and validating your anger issues.

Is it their moral duty to also call Joe Biden a liar and discuss his dementia? Should we even have elections in your opinion? If according to you, there's a "dangerous villain on the scene", seems like it would be their moral duty to rig the election or not even have one, no?

No, you are just lying because I never said the news should support any candidate. I only said the news should tell the truth. If a candidate is a liar or a con man or a criminal they should say so and I think they should say that whether it's left or right.

You just made up a bunch of things and lied to make a point, but I don't know who you're talking to. It isn't me.

Yes, it is absolutely their moral duty to call Joe Biden a liar when he lies.

 

[Yorick]

I think ultra cynical types see themselves as being hard on corruption, but in reality the "everyone is corrupt" view is extremely beneficial to people who are actually corrupt, and folks who hold it invariably oppose holding corrupt politicians to account.

Couldn't agree more, but I don't think cynics see themselves that way tbh. The 'everyone is corrupt' dismissal only fosters more acceptance of the practice and the prevailing blase attitude towards it on all sides of the political spectrum.

 

[nostradumbass]

No, you are just lying because I never said the news should support any candidate. I only said the news should tell the truth. If a candidate is a liar or a con man or a criminal they should say so and I think they should say that whether it's left or right.

You just made up a bunch of things and lied to make a point, but I don't know who you're talking to. It isn't me.

Yes, it is absolutely their moral duty to call Joe Biden a liar when he lies.

Lol "Nobody should vote for him" isn't supporting a candidate, or are you saying they should tell people not to vote at all?

 

[terrapin]

Lol "Nobody should vote for him" isn't supporting a candidate, or are you saying they should tell people not to vote at all?

I recanted that and you said I was telling them they should say who to vote for not who not to vote for.

But I do agree the news shouldn't say that and it was a mistake for me to to say it. I don't think that.

 

[nostradumbass]

I recanted that and you said I was telling them they should say who to vote for not who not to vote for.

But I do agree the news shouldn't say that and it was a mistake for me to to say it. I don't think that.

How generous. So just speaking hypothetically, let's say the media were to take your advice and keep calling Trump a liar about some pretty huge stories, what would happen if it turned out that he was right and they were the ones lying?

Let's use some crazy hypotheticals that would never happen in the real world, like say he made the outlandish claim that his campaign was being spied on, and the media said that was a dangerous lie made to undermine faith in the intelligence agencies, and laughed at how insane that is, but then it turned out the intelligence were in fact spying on his campaign.

Or let's get even crazier and say the media told us every night for years that he was a secret spy working behind the scenes with the Russian government to steal the presidential election, and he said it was hoax and they called him a liar, only to find out again that he was right and they were lying.

How about if a hypothetical virus was spreading around, and he said that it came from a lab in China, and again they called him not just a liar, but a racist liar this time, and whoopsie daisy, it turned out that it did come from a lab in China.

What if Trump said Joe Biden's son abandoned a laptop with a bunch of incriminating shit about their family's shady foreign business dealings, and they again called him a liar, said it was "Russian misinformation", and even got 50 former intelligence officials to sign a letter calling fake Russian disinformation, only to find out a few months later that Trump was right again, and they were the ones lying yet again?

Do you not see where hypothetically rushing to call someone a liar, only for it to subsequently come out that he was right, and you are the liar, might hypothetically cause the public's trust in media to dip to all time low with 2/3 saying they have "not very much trust" or "no trust at all", including like 70% of independent voters?

 

[terrapin]

How generous. So just speaking hypothetically, let's say the media were to take your advice and keep calling Trump a liar about some pretty huge stories, what would happen if it turned out that he was right and they were the ones lying?

Let's use some crazy hypotheticals that would never happen in the real world, like say he made the outlandish claim that his campaign was being spied on, and the media said that was a dangerous lie made to undermine faith in the intelligence agencies, and laughed at how insane that is, but then it turned out the intelligence were in fact spying on his campaign.

Or let's get even crazier and say the media told us every night for years that he was a secret spy working behind the scenes with the Russian government to steal the presidential election, and he said it was hoax and they called him a liar, only to find out again that he was right and they were lying.

How about if a hypothetical virus was spreading around, and he said that it came from a lab in China, and again they called him not just a liar, but a racist liar this time, and whoopsie daisy, it turned out that it did come from a lab in China.

What if Trump said Joe Biden's son abandoned a laptop with a bunch of incriminating shit about their family's shady foreign business dealings, and they again called him a liar, said it was "Russian misinformation", and even got 50 former intelligence officials to sign a letter calling fake Russian disinformation, only to find out a few months later that Trump was right again, and they were the ones lying yet again?

Do you not see where hypothetically rushing to call someone a liar, only for it to subsequently come out that he was right, and you are the liar, might hypothetically cause the public's trust in media to dip to all time low with 2/3 saying they have "not very much trust" or "no trust at all", including like 70% of independent voters?

How about we stop playing pretend and just admit in principle that when someone lies we should call them out on it left or right?

What I have said is that they should call Trump a liar when he lies and they should call Biden a liar when he lies. The argument is about the principle of the press. Should the press tell the truth or should the press be so "neutral" that it doesn't tell the truth??



Sounds like you disagree somehow that it's a journalists job to admit when people lie....

 

[nostradumbass]

How about we stop playing pretend and just admit in principle that when someone lies we should call them out on it left or right?

What I have said is that they should call Trump a liar when he lies and they should call Biden a liar when he lies. The argument is about the principle of the press. Should the press tell the truth or should the press be so "neutral" that it doesn't tell the truth??



Sounds like you disagree somehow that it's a journalists job to admit when people lie....

A journalist's job is whatever the publication they work for tells them it is, which is what we have already. The complaint, which is shared by 2/3 of the country, is that we don't have a disinterested media that are just there to inform the public, we have a handful of corporations who own all of it, and employ social climbers to be the liars themselves and are paid handsomely to intentionally deceive the public and push their political preferences. A politician's job is to convince the public that they are the best choice, and the job of the press SHOULD be to cover important events, and a commentator, who is not a journalist, can provide commentary and their opinions. News and commentary should be kept separate, not gradually blend into one another.

 

[ColemanwastheGOAT]

Now you are just being partisan. Of course he's a liar. That's a fact, not an opinion. Everybody knows it.

Name a politician that isn't.