• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 00:03
CEST 06:03
KST 13:03
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Power Rank - Esports World Cup 202547RSL Season 1 - Final Week9[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall15HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16
Community News
BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams4Weekly Cups (July 14-20): Final Check-up0Esports World Cup 2025 - Brackets Revealed19Weekly Cups (July 7-13): Classic continues to roll8Team TLMC #5 - Submission re-extension4
StarCraft 2
General
Jim claims he and Firefly were involved in match-fixing Power Rank - Esports World Cup 2025 RSL Revival patreon money discussion thread RSL Season 1 - Final Week The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings
Tourneys
Esports World Cup 2025 Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond) FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation #239 Bad Weather Mutation # 483 Kill Bot Wars Mutation # 482 Wheel of Misfortune Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava
Brood War
General
BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ [Update] ShieldBattery: 1v1 Fastest Support! Ginuda's JaeDong Interview Series ASL20 Preliminary Maps BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams
Tourneys
CSL Xiamen International Invitational [Megathread] Daily Proleagues [CSLPRO] It's CSLAN Season! - Last Chance [BSL 2v2] ProLeague Season 3 - Friday 21:00 CET
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do.
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread [MMORPG] Tree of Savior (Successor of Ragnarok) Path of Exile CCLP - Command & Conquer League Project
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread The Games Industry And ATVI Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club! Maru Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
[\m/] Heavy Metal Thread Anime Discussion Thread Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Korean Music Discussion
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NBA General Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Installation of Windows 10 suck at "just a moment" Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Ping To Win? Pings And Their…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Socialism Anyone?
GreenHorizons
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 676 users

US Politics Mega-thread - Page 6253

Forum Index > Closed
Post a Reply
Prev 1 6251 6252 6253 6254 6255 10093 Next
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.

In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!

NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious.
Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
LegalLord
Profile Blog Joined April 2013
United Kingdom13775 Posts
November 17 2016 02:43 GMT
#125041
At this point I'm mostly hoping he appoints a SoS who isn't a rabid warhawk.
History will sooner or later sweep the European Union away without mercy.
GoTuNk!
Profile Blog Joined September 2006
Chile4591 Posts
November 17 2016 02:47 GMT
#125042
On November 17 2016 11:42 Sent. wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 17 2016 08:57 Gorsameth wrote:
On November 17 2016 08:53 LegalLord wrote:
Speaking of which, are there still any open allegations of sexual misconduct on behalf of our president-elect? Or did they basically drop off after they stopped being politically relevant?

I don't think anyone of them actually filled charges, so they are not relevant.


I'm more interested in Trump's promise to sue them "after the election".


He should go after every woman that slandered him and after the people who likely payed them, at the very least. Not him personally obviously, but someone from his team.
TheTenthDoc
Profile Blog Joined February 2011
United States9561 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-11-17 03:12:14
November 17 2016 02:52 GMT
#125043
On November 17 2016 11:01 a_flayer wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 17 2016 10:22 Nyxisto wrote:
On November 17 2016 09:53 a_flayer wrote:
On November 17 2016 09:38 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Pretty scary when one thinks about it...



That makes it look like anything "non-mainstream" is false news. How exactly is that a sensible way to approach the problem of false news? When is something mainstream news? Would it be false news in October when some alternative news source reports Trump is looking like he is poised to win?


Trump didn't look like he was poised to win even by admission of his own team. A broken clock is still right twice a day. Being right occasionally doesn't validate a faulty method. The same thing is true for conspiracy theories. They're not redeemed by the fact that they contingently might be true.


I wish I could argue without bringing in specific examples that are easily debunked with pointless sayings such as "a broken clock..." The "Trump poised to win" thing is just one example where I can imagine that'd be the sort of "alternative news headline" that wouldn't make the cut in mainstream media headlines, despite the fact there might be accurate reporting within such an article (maybe they're basing it on their observations of enthusiasm at rallies instead of broken polls?). Please don't bother coming up with specific mainstream media examples where they happen to have used that headline, that is really besides the point.

I simply don't think it is fair nor accurate to put something as oblique as "mainstream news" against something equally oblique in what essentially boils down to "alternative news" and then label the latter as "fake" because it is not mainstream. I'm assuming here that "mainstream news" in that graphic is filtered almost directly from headlines matching with those on a limited number of (mainstream approved) websites, and then the rest is classified as "fake". I just have so many questions regarding where those numbers are coming from, and what is considered as real or fake.

Would a headline from breitbart or infowars always be classified as non-mainstream (and thus fake?) in this listing regardless of the accuracy of the report within? Maybe the people who came up with that graph do have some advanced algorithm for determining the fakeness or reality of an individual report, but if I believed in conspiracies it could just as easily be some mainstream organization simply trying to debunk others for their own profit.

I do not believe that last claim, by the way, and I absolutely do think there is a serious problem with the spreading of bullshit news in social media, but also in other media such as the billboards and TV ads I've seen in the United States that suggest global warming is a hoax or that there's a god and Jesus was his son. I feel I should also point out that I don't read either infowars or breitbrat beyond the occasional scanning of headlines in general disbelief.



I'm pretty sure they mean literal fake news that were total hoaxes-like the Macedonian articles that were completely fabricated purely to generate revenue. Some infowars stories definitely fall in this zone because their standards are total shit, but not all.

E.g. Obama and Clinton are literal demons and smell like sulphur.
Doodsmack
Profile Blog Joined August 2010
United States7224 Posts
November 17 2016 02:55 GMT
#125044
I don't believe Bernie supporters would accept Bannon's Judeo Christian superiority argument and Bill O'Reilly culture war stance. All very intolerant and tribal. You don't need to overreact to terror attacks and say "all-consuming Islamic fascism vs Christianity global war". He's even using terror attacks as part of his argument that capitalism is in crisis.

The economic argument that bankers and their corrupt politicians are to blame for the working class woes is all well and good. The cultural loss stuff is very abstract in its reasoning (probably just based in racial anxiety deep down since they can't think of concrete reasoning) and intolerant in its practice.

His media strategy kind of discredits the "halo around the head" posture as well. He baits the racial wing and employs a lower standard of truth than the MSM.
xDaunt
Profile Joined March 2010
United States17988 Posts
November 17 2016 03:04 GMT
#125045
On November 17 2016 11:55 Doodsmack wrote:
I don't believe Bernie supporters would accept Bannon's Judeo Christian superiority argument and Bill O'Reilly culture war stance. All very intolerant and tribal. You don't need to overreact to terror attacks and say "all-consuming Islamic fascism vs Christianity global war". He's even using terror attacks as part of his argument that capitalism is in crisis.

The economic argument that bankers and their corrupt politicians are to blame for the working class woes is all well and good. The cultural loss stuff is very abstract in its reasoning (probably just based in racial anxiety deep down since they can't think of concrete reasoning) and intolerant in its practice.

His media strategy kind of discredits the "halo around the head" posture as well. He baits the racial wing and employs a lower standard of truth than the MSM.

Why does the reasoning matter more than the bottom line? I highly doubt that Bernie supporters will care about the motivations if Trump gives them what they want.
Doodsmack
Profile Blog Joined August 2010
United States7224 Posts
November 17 2016 03:08 GMT
#125046
On November 17 2016 12:04 xDaunt wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 17 2016 11:55 Doodsmack wrote:
I don't believe Bernie supporters would accept Bannon's Judeo Christian superiority argument and Bill O'Reilly culture war stance. All very intolerant and tribal. You don't need to overreact to terror attacks and say "all-consuming Islamic fascism vs Christianity global war". He's even using terror attacks as part of his argument that capitalism is in crisis.

The economic argument that bankers and their corrupt politicians are to blame for the working class woes is all well and good. The cultural loss stuff is very abstract in its reasoning (probably just based in racial anxiety deep down since they can't think of concrete reasoning) and intolerant in its practice.

His media strategy kind of discredits the "halo around the head" posture as well. He baits the racial wing and employs a lower standard of truth than the MSM.

Why does the reasoning matter more than the bottom line? I highly doubt that Bernie supporters will care about the motivations if Trump gives them what they want.


Yeah for the economic part, there could be similarity there. However Trump's trickle down plan starts to cause confusion here. My question is what actual policies the Judeo-Christian culture argument actually calls for. All the immigration stuff I presume.
xDaunt
Profile Joined March 2010
United States17988 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-11-17 03:15:37
November 17 2016 03:15 GMT
#125047
On November 17 2016 12:08 Doodsmack wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 17 2016 12:04 xDaunt wrote:
On November 17 2016 11:55 Doodsmack wrote:
I don't believe Bernie supporters would accept Bannon's Judeo Christian superiority argument and Bill O'Reilly culture war stance. All very intolerant and tribal. You don't need to overreact to terror attacks and say "all-consuming Islamic fascism vs Christianity global war". He's even using terror attacks as part of his argument that capitalism is in crisis.

The economic argument that bankers and their corrupt politicians are to blame for the working class woes is all well and good. The cultural loss stuff is very abstract in its reasoning (probably just based in racial anxiety deep down since they can't think of concrete reasoning) and intolerant in its practice.

His media strategy kind of discredits the "halo around the head" posture as well. He baits the racial wing and employs a lower standard of truth than the MSM.

Why does the reasoning matter more than the bottom line? I highly doubt that Bernie supporters will care about the motivations if Trump gives them what they want.


Yeah for the economic part, there could be similarity there. However Trump's trickle down plan starts to cause confusion here. My question is what actual policies the Judeo-Christian culture argument actually calls for. All the immigration stuff I presume.

I'm only focusing on the banking regulations. Bannon clearly has a lot of the same ideas as the Bernie crowd. And let's face it: Trump is better positioned to pass financial reform than any democrat. Thus, for those people who consider reining in the banks to be national priority number one, Trump may end up being a very, very pleasant surprise.
Nyxisto
Profile Joined August 2010
Germany6287 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-11-17 04:06:59
November 17 2016 04:03 GMT
#125048
On November 17 2016 11:01 a_flayer wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 17 2016 10:22 Nyxisto wrote:
On November 17 2016 09:53 a_flayer wrote:
On November 17 2016 09:38 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Pretty scary when one thinks about it...

https://twitter.com/BuzzFeedBen/status/799014832402038784


That makes it look like anything "non-mainstream" is false news. How exactly is that a sensible way to approach the problem of false news? When is something mainstream news? Would it be false news in October when some alternative news source reports Trump is looking like he is poised to win?


Trump didn't look like he was poised to win even by admission of his own team. A broken clock is still right twice a day. Being right occasionally doesn't validate a faulty method. The same thing is true for conspiracy theories. They're not redeemed by the fact that they contingently might be true.


I wish I could argue without bringing in specific examples that are easily debunked with pointless sayings such as "a broken clock..." The "Trump poised to win" thing is just one example where I can imagine that'd be the sort of "alternative news headline" that wouldn't make the cut in mainstream media headlines, despite the fact there might be accurate reporting within such an article (maybe they're basing it on their observations of enthusiasm at rallies instead of broken polls?). Please don't bother coming up with specific mainstream media examples where they happen to have used that headline, that is really besides the point.

I simply don't think it is fair nor accurate to put something as oblique as "mainstream news" against something equally oblique in what essentially boils down to "alternative news" and then label the latter as "fake" because it is not mainstream. I'm assuming here that "mainstream news" in that graphic is filtered almost directly from headlines matching with those on a limited number of (mainstream approved) websites, and then the rest is classified as "fake". I just have so many questions regarding where those numbers are coming from, and what is considered as real or fake.

Would a headline from breitbart or infowars always be classified as non-mainstream (and thus fake?) in this listing regardless of the accuracy of the report within? Maybe the people who came up with that graph do have some advanced algorithm for determining the fakeness or reality of an individual report, but if I believed in conspiracies it could just as easily be some mainstream organization simply trying to debunk others for their own profit.

I do not believe that last claim, by the way, and I absolutely do think there is a serious problem with the spreading of bullshit news in social media, but also in other media such as the billboards and TV ads I've seen in the United States that suggest global warming is a hoax or that there's a god and Jesus was his son. I feel I should also point out that I don't read either infowars or breitbrat beyond the occasional scanning of headlines in general disbelief.


The problem is simply that the average reader does not have the stamina or the knowledge to discern fake from reality based on the underlying facts alone if that were the case we would need no classification of established or "alternative" news at all.

The "alternative" news sites are alternative in the same sense that 'alternative medicine' is. They exist to push some obnoxious agenda that isn't finding representatives in 'mainstream media' for a reason. We don't need to ask whether something specific is publish is true because one true article in a pile of bullshit isn't going to salvage it.

I'd go further and argue that even engaging in debate with these organisations is dangerous because pulling everybody down into a mud-fight is what they want to accomplish in the first place. It's like starting to argue with creationists, you can't really win even if you try, it just normalises their position.
ACrow
Profile Joined October 2011
Germany6583 Posts
November 17 2016 05:06 GMT
#125049
On November 17 2016 12:15 xDaunt wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 17 2016 12:08 Doodsmack wrote:
On November 17 2016 12:04 xDaunt wrote:
On November 17 2016 11:55 Doodsmack wrote:
I don't believe Bernie supporters would accept Bannon's Judeo Christian superiority argument and Bill O'Reilly culture war stance. All very intolerant and tribal. You don't need to overreact to terror attacks and say "all-consuming Islamic fascism vs Christianity global war". He's even using terror attacks as part of his argument that capitalism is in crisis.

The economic argument that bankers and their corrupt politicians are to blame for the working class woes is all well and good. The cultural loss stuff is very abstract in its reasoning (probably just based in racial anxiety deep down since they can't think of concrete reasoning) and intolerant in its practice.

His media strategy kind of discredits the "halo around the head" posture as well. He baits the racial wing and employs a lower standard of truth than the MSM.

Why does the reasoning matter more than the bottom line? I highly doubt that Bernie supporters will care about the motivations if Trump gives them what they want.


Yeah for the economic part, there could be similarity there. However Trump's trickle down plan starts to cause confusion here. My question is what actual policies the Judeo-Christian culture argument actually calls for. All the immigration stuff I presume.

I'm only focusing on the banking regulations. Bannon clearly has a lot of the same ideas as the Bernie crowd. And let's face it: Trump is better positioned to pass financial reform than any democrat. Thus, for those people who consider reining in the banks to be national priority number one, Trump may end up being a very, very pleasant surprise.

Oh please, it's already being speculated that a Goldman Sachs guy might get the treasury. There won't be any bank regulation, and I think that's been pretty clear from his campaign and his lack of policy plans during it already.
Get off my lawn, young punks
a_flayer
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
Netherlands2826 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-11-17 05:47:33
November 17 2016 05:14 GMT
#125050
On November 17 2016 13:03 Nyxisto wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 17 2016 11:01 a_flayer wrote:
On November 17 2016 10:22 Nyxisto wrote:
On November 17 2016 09:53 a_flayer wrote:
On November 17 2016 09:38 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Pretty scary when one thinks about it...

https://twitter.com/BuzzFeedBen/status/799014832402038784


That makes it look like anything "non-mainstream" is false news. How exactly is that a sensible way to approach the problem of false news? When is something mainstream news? Would it be false news in October when some alternative news source reports Trump is looking like he is poised to win?


Trump didn't look like he was poised to win even by admission of his own team. A broken clock is still right twice a day. Being right occasionally doesn't validate a faulty method. The same thing is true for conspiracy theories. They're not redeemed by the fact that they contingently might be true.


I wish I could argue without bringing in specific examples that are easily debunked with pointless sayings such as "a broken clock..." The "Trump poised to win" thing is just one example where I can imagine that'd be the sort of "alternative news headline" that wouldn't make the cut in mainstream media headlines, despite the fact there might be accurate reporting within such an article (maybe they're basing it on their observations of enthusiasm at rallies instead of broken polls?). Please don't bother coming up with specific mainstream media examples where they happen to have used that headline, that is really besides the point.

I simply don't think it is fair nor accurate to put something as oblique as "mainstream news" against something equally oblique in what essentially boils down to "alternative news" and then label the latter as "fake" because it is not mainstream. I'm assuming here that "mainstream news" in that graphic is filtered almost directly from headlines matching with those on a limited number of (mainstream approved) websites, and then the rest is classified as "fake". I just have so many questions regarding where those numbers are coming from, and what is considered as real or fake.

Would a headline from breitbart or infowars always be classified as non-mainstream (and thus fake?) in this listing regardless of the accuracy of the report within? Maybe the people who came up with that graph do have some advanced algorithm for determining the fakeness or reality of an individual report, but if I believed in conspiracies it could just as easily be some mainstream organization simply trying to debunk others for their own profit.

I do not believe that last claim, by the way, and I absolutely do think there is a serious problem with the spreading of bullshit news in social media, but also in other media such as the billboards and TV ads I've seen in the United States that suggest global warming is a hoax or that there's a god and Jesus was his son. I feel I should also point out that I don't read either infowars or breitbrat beyond the occasional scanning of headlines in general disbelief.


The problem is simply that the average reader does not have the stamina or the knowledge to discern fake from reality based on the underlying facts alone if that were the case we would need no classification of established or "alternative" news at all.

The "alternative" news sites are alternative in the same sense that 'alternative medicine' is. They exist to push some obnoxious agenda that isn't finding representatives in 'mainstream media' for a reason. We don't need to ask whether something specific is publish is true because one true article in a pile of bullshit isn't going to salvage it.

I'd go further and argue that even engaging in debate with these organisations is dangerous because pulling everybody down into a mud-fight is what they want to accomplish in the first place. It's like starting to argue with creationists, you can't really win even if you try, it just normalises their position.


I definitely see the problem with regards to allowing certain amounts of nonsense into the discussion and that resulting in diluting said discussion, but I'm also looking at it from the following perspective:

I've always been thoroughly annoyed by corporations (banks, wallstreet, whatever) and their influence on government policies. However, until quite recently, I felt like that dislike was constantly pushed aside and often dismissed as "too alternative" or even "obnoxious" by the mainstream. Now, however, there's people like Bernie basically railing against the same thing that I've disliked so much for so long. As a consequence, this makes me apprehensive of people dismissing anything "alternative" as fake, bad or inaccurate because the mainstream perception of both these things can in fact change. Comparing my viewpoints regarding banks and corporations with some alternative medicine bullshit was something that would have been easily done before 2008, but since then things seem to have changed somewhat.

Of course, overwhelming evidence will obviously sway more people to the point where it becomes mainstream, but things regarding the accuracy of news are still more complex than what was said in that tweet and the graphic attached to it (which culminated into mainstream vs fake). In skimming over the article, I couldn't find a comprehensive description of how they got to that graphic (I only saw they used "19 websites" to denote the mainstream?), and thus my previous comments. There were a lot of links in the article that I didn't click on, so it's possible there's a lot more information there. None of it, however, was added to the post in the thread. It was just the tweet and graphic, which I then commented on.

I also see a certain (minor, not literal) equivalence between only allowing mainstream opinions in the media and only allowing state opinions in the media that could be boiled down to censorship. And now I am supposed to trust Facebook and Google to filter out "fake news" when they are unlikely to ever release the algorithms or software being used to for that system of filtration? That's not going to make it easier to form my own opinion, and seems like it might even be more prone to manufacturing it. In this case, I've skipped the step where one might investigate an individual article, but I think that's irrelevant when we're talking about the accurate aggregation of "real news".
When you came along so righteous with a new national hate, so convincing is the ardor of war and of men, it's harder to breathe than to believe you're a friend. The wars at home, the wars abroad, all soaked in blood and lies and fraud.
xDaunt
Profile Joined March 2010
United States17988 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-11-17 05:29:21
November 17 2016 05:25 GMT
#125051
On November 17 2016 14:06 ACrow wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 17 2016 12:15 xDaunt wrote:
On November 17 2016 12:08 Doodsmack wrote:
On November 17 2016 12:04 xDaunt wrote:
On November 17 2016 11:55 Doodsmack wrote:
I don't believe Bernie supporters would accept Bannon's Judeo Christian superiority argument and Bill O'Reilly culture war stance. All very intolerant and tribal. You don't need to overreact to terror attacks and say "all-consuming Islamic fascism vs Christianity global war". He's even using terror attacks as part of his argument that capitalism is in crisis.

The economic argument that bankers and their corrupt politicians are to blame for the working class woes is all well and good. The cultural loss stuff is very abstract in its reasoning (probably just based in racial anxiety deep down since they can't think of concrete reasoning) and intolerant in its practice.

His media strategy kind of discredits the "halo around the head" posture as well. He baits the racial wing and employs a lower standard of truth than the MSM.

Why does the reasoning matter more than the bottom line? I highly doubt that Bernie supporters will care about the motivations if Trump gives them what they want.


Yeah for the economic part, there could be similarity there. However Trump's trickle down plan starts to cause confusion here. My question is what actual policies the Judeo-Christian culture argument actually calls for. All the immigration stuff I presume.

I'm only focusing on the banking regulations. Bannon clearly has a lot of the same ideas as the Bernie crowd. And let's face it: Trump is better positioned to pass financial reform than any democrat. Thus, for those people who consider reining in the banks to be national priority number one, Trump may end up being a very, very pleasant surprise.

Oh please, it's already being speculated that a Goldman Sachs guy might get the treasury. There won't be any bank regulation, and I think that's been pretty clear from his campaign and his lack of policy plans during it already.


This post is what we call being unfair. First, speculation is just that -- speculation. That guy hasn't been picked for anything yet. Second, Bannon has already been appointed to a cabinet position -- a very important one. He's in; that other guy isn't. Third, Bannon is also a former Goldman Sachs guy, so don't damn everyone that comes out of that place as automatically being in the tank for the banks. And fourth, it's almost a certainty that advocacy for Glass-Steagall came from Trump's camp, so writing off Trump's appetite for going after the banks is way, way premature.
LuckyFool
Profile Blog Joined June 2007
United States9015 Posts
November 17 2016 05:53 GMT
#125052
I can't believe how hard the media is scrutinizing the Trump transition. (Or maybe I can...)

Is this what we are to expect for his entire presidency haha. I literally saw an article saying he didn't show transparency the other night because he didn't notify the media he was going out to dinner with his family and how that's a dangerous indicator of things to come...the fear mongering continues. At least my social media outlets have chilled out, the past week was a bit obnoxious, I realized a great many of my friends were woefully uneducated when it came to the electoral college.
ACrow
Profile Joined October 2011
Germany6583 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-11-17 11:20:38
November 17 2016 05:58 GMT
#125053
On November 17 2016 14:25 xDaunt wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 17 2016 14:06 ACrow wrote:
On November 17 2016 12:15 xDaunt wrote:
On November 17 2016 12:08 Doodsmack wrote:
On November 17 2016 12:04 xDaunt wrote:
On November 17 2016 11:55 Doodsmack wrote:
I don't believe Bernie supporters would accept Bannon's Judeo Christian superiority argument and Bill O'Reilly culture war stance. All very intolerant and tribal. You don't need to overreact to terror attacks and say "all-consuming Islamic fascism vs Christianity global war". He's even using terror attacks as part of his argument that capitalism is in crisis.

The economic argument that bankers and their corrupt politicians are to blame for the working class woes is all well and good. The cultural loss stuff is very abstract in its reasoning (probably just based in racial anxiety deep down since they can't think of concrete reasoning) and intolerant in its practice.

His media strategy kind of discredits the "halo around the head" posture as well. He baits the racial wing and employs a lower standard of truth than the MSM.

Why does the reasoning matter more than the bottom line? I highly doubt that Bernie supporters will care about the motivations if Trump gives them what they want.


Yeah for the economic part, there could be similarity there. However Trump's trickle down plan starts to cause confusion here. My question is what actual policies the Judeo-Christian culture argument actually calls for. All the immigration stuff I presume.

I'm only focusing on the banking regulations. Bannon clearly has a lot of the same ideas as the Bernie crowd. And let's face it: Trump is better positioned to pass financial reform than any democrat. Thus, for those people who consider reining in the banks to be national priority number one, Trump may end up being a very, very pleasant surprise.

Oh please, it's already being speculated that a Goldman Sachs guy might get the treasury. There won't be any bank regulation, and I think that's been pretty clear from his campaign and his lack of policy plans during it already.


This post is what we call being unfair. First, speculation is just that -- speculation. That guy hasn't been picked for anything yet. Second, Bannon has already been appointed to a cabinet position -- a very important one. He's in; that other guy isn't. Third, Bannon is also a former Goldman Sachs guy, so don't damn everyone that comes out of that place as automatically being in the tank for the banks. And fourth, it's almost a certainty that advocacy for Glass-Steagall came from Trump's camp, so writing off Trump's appetite for going after the banks is way, way premature.

I don't know who this "we" (going pluralis majestatis, ey?) is that calls it unfair, it's just my opinion. I don't think it is necessary to preclude statements here as "in my opinion" as they clearly are; after all, I'd call a lot of your opinion pieces as highly unfair as well, but take them for what they are, and don't feel the need to point this out all the time.
My opinion is entirely based on what I saw so far from the Trump camp, starting with his ridiculous platitude ridden campaign, over his transition efforts thus far and based on his history as being a business man that is very heavily entangled with banks. And yes, anyone who's worked for Goldmann Sachs will be assumed to be very pro-Bank in the public eye until proven otherwise. The only thing Bannon's proven so far, is that he gives white nationalists a platform.

But, you are right, all of this is speculation; it's up to Trump to prove he means it. He has a stronger position to make changes there than any president had in a while, with both chambers of congress firmly in his hands, and public opinion seemingly in favor of banking regulation. So we will see, no excuses in case he should fail.
Get off my lawn, young punks
Danglars
Profile Blog Joined August 2010
United States12133 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-11-17 06:07:22
November 17 2016 06:06 GMT
#125054
On November 17 2016 14:53 LuckyFool wrote:
I can't believe how hard the media is scrutinizing the Trump transition. (Or maybe I can...)

Is this what we are to expect for his entire presidency haha. I literally saw an article saying he didn't show transparency the other night because he didn't notify the media he was going out to dinner with his family and how that's a dangerous indicator of things to come...the fear mongering continues. At least my social media outlets have chilled out, the past week was a bit obnoxious, I realized a great many of my friends were woefully uneducated when it came to the electoral college.

The usual outlets are doing their usual schtick, but this time Americans know they've been exposed and the majority (including Bernie folks) doesn't trust them. The rocky transition coverage has been narrative-driven and it's obvious. Nobody cares, except for beltway pundits, about the (overblown) transition minutiae, everybody cares who ends up where.

He is full of inconsistencies and will take deserved hammering for it in time. It's only Trump that can make errors hurting Trump; the media has much time and work to go in order to narrow the credibility gap.
Great armies come from happy zealots, and happy zealots come from California!
TL+ Member
CatharsisUT
Profile Joined March 2011
United States487 Posts
November 17 2016 06:17 GMT
#125055
He's being scrutinized because he has zero government experience and it provides an early look at how effectively he might be able to govern. Seems like a reasonable coverage area, and honestly what other follow-up stories from the election are there right now?
KT_Elwood
Profile Joined July 2015
Germany935 Posts
November 17 2016 07:15 GMT
#125056
On November 17 2016 06:29 xDaunt wrote:
You guys are missing the larger genius of Trump's Twitter usage. Twitter lets Trump speak directly to the American people without being filtered by a biased press.


Or he can tell lies, directly, without being questioned. He can bloat out statements that never get put into the greater picture, never get analyzed.
If he does not like a statement, he deletes the tweet, and calls everybody "crooked-screenshoting-criminals".
That's what has made him president. The "biased Press" actually thought anybody in the right mind, seeing tweets and campaign speech outburst would come to the conclusion that trump is nothing more than a lout irritating person, that has no clue how to run an administration.

"First he eats our dogs, and then he taxes the penguins... Donald Trump truly is the Donald Trump of our generation. " -DPB
jellyjello
Profile Joined March 2011
Korea (South)664 Posts
November 17 2016 08:31 GMT
#125057
On November 17 2016 15:17 CatharsisUT wrote:
He's being scrutinized because he has zero government experience and it provides an early look at how effectively he might be able to govern. Seems like a reasonable coverage area, and honestly what other follow-up stories from the election are there right now?


I fully expected the media to go all berserk on the coverage of what kind of pets the Trump family may adapt, if any, or new decorations that Mrs. Trump is bringing into the WH. Why not? That's what they did for Obama, so let's treat the man fair.

If there is still any doubt as to existence of the biased reporting of the mainstream media, you really have to be blinded (and deaf) literally.
KT_Elwood
Profile Joined July 2015
Germany935 Posts
November 17 2016 09:51 GMT
#125058
Journalism and Free Press are a part of democracy. Not something that comes along, but a very important part. It is there to check back on the politicians, industry and corporations. Question them and dig up scandals. Politicians will always listen to Economy leaders, because they shape peoples lifes and got the damn cash.
With "Whistle Blowers" jailed across the globe, and any "uncovering story" being borderline criminal...it's hard.
The guys that uncover that Luxembourg helps international Corps to dodge taxes...in jail. The guy that showed US military is killing civilians (and does not give a fuack) = Jailed.
People have giving up on journalism when it came "for Free" from the internet, and all its doing there is creating content you can put advertisement in. It's even the written down purpose of most newspapers today, to create content somebody clicks and sell the advertisement spaces. Also having access to the internet gives you the illusion that you hav access to EVERY bit of information. But as soon as you get to wikileaks, and have to go through 1500 pages of original info, you give up.
Journalists have to dig up sources, have to understand them, and present a easy to comprehend conclusion.
"First he eats our dogs, and then he taxes the penguins... Donald Trump truly is the Donald Trump of our generation. " -DPB
Blisse
Profile Blog Joined July 2010
Canada3710 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-11-17 10:51:41
November 17 2016 10:41 GMT
#125059
I've been away but has anyone seen rounds of a Trump surrogate whatever that means saying that there's precedent to catalogue Muslims and then referencing doing so with the Japanese in the WW2 internment camps? I mean like, present the argument better jeez, way to make it sound awful.

NPR podcast guy also interviewed a Breitbart editor for more info about Bannon. Never heard the NPR guy get mad before. The editor makes some good points about Breitbart necessity but he sounds a bit delusional at times trying to cover for Bannon's remarks and misleading articles, but I can't blame him. At least he believes in what he's standing for in Breitbart.
There is no one like you in the universe.
a_flayer
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
Netherlands2826 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-11-17 11:18:05
November 17 2016 10:43 GMT
#125060
On November 17 2016 16:15 KT_Elwood wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 17 2016 06:29 xDaunt wrote:
You guys are missing the larger genius of Trump's Twitter usage. Twitter lets Trump speak directly to the American people without being filtered by a biased press.


Or he can tell lies, directly, without being questioned. He can bloat out statements that never get put into the greater picture, never get analyzed.
If he does not like a statement, he deletes the tweet, and calls everybody "crooked-screenshoting-criminals".
That's what has made him president. The "biased Press" actually thought anybody in the right mind, seeing tweets and campaign speech outburst would come to the conclusion that trump is nothing more than a lout irritating person, that has no clue how to run an administration.


At the same time, I do wonder if Bernie could have won the DNC primary (in spite of the artificial construct opposing him from within) if he had 15 million followers like Trump, and he overflowed it with messages that were more suited for your own personal perception of the world (and yet still wouldn't be covered fairly by the mainstream because even back then they were already sold on Hillary's upcoming win of the primary).

You can complain about the accuracy of twitter messages, but nobody is expecting 100% accuracy from a tweet (at least I hope not). I would, however, expect more accuracy from the mainstream media, which I didn't get. Instead I got faulty polls and flawed/biased/extremist opinions from talking heads that compared Trump to Hitler amongst other things.

Edit: Twitter can be used by candidate to talk to their supporters in their own words, however twisted those may appear to someone outside their circle. For an extreme example, sometimes people send bomb threats by accident because they are communicating in jest within their own circle of friends. Those on the receiving end of the threat also see that twitter post but simply don't perceive it as a jest and thus alert the authorities. This is the same kind of thing that I feel is happening between Trump and his followers, and the people outside that particular group, except on a much more massive scale.
When you came along so righteous with a new national hate, so convincing is the ardor of war and of men, it's harder to breathe than to believe you're a friend. The wars at home, the wars abroad, all soaked in blood and lies and fraud.
Prev 1 6251 6252 6253 6254 6255 10093 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 5h 58m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
WinterStarcraft464
Livibee 131
Ketroc 56
StarCraft: Brood War
Light 3436
Leta 476
ggaemo 203
Noble 86
NaDa 77
Sharp 65
Icarus 5
Dota 2
monkeys_forever1120
League of Legends
JimRising 775
Counter-Strike
Stewie2K953
Other Games
summit1g12273
hungrybox413
ViBE211
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick1748
BasetradeTV37
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 16 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Hupsaiya 60
• practicex 46
• intothetv
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• Azhi_Dahaki15
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
League of Legends
• Scarra1733
• Stunt97
Other Games
• Shiphtur325
Upcoming Events
Esports World Cup
5h 58m
Reynor vs Zoun
Solar vs SHIN
Classic vs ShoWTimE
Cure vs Rogue
Esports World Cup
1d 6h
CranKy Ducklings
2 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
2 days
CSO Cup
2 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
2 days
Bonyth vs Sziky
Dewalt vs Hawk
Hawk vs QiaoGege
Sziky vs Dewalt
Mihu vs Bonyth
Zhanhun vs QiaoGege
QiaoGege vs Fengzi
FEL
3 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
3 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
3 days
Bonyth vs Zhanhun
Dewalt vs Mihu
Hawk vs Sziky
Sziky vs QiaoGege
Mihu vs Hawk
Zhanhun vs Dewalt
Fengzi vs Bonyth
Sparkling Tuna Cup
5 days
[ Show More ]
Online Event
5 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Xiamen Invitational
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL20 Non-Korean Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
CC Div. A S7
Underdog Cup #2
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25

Upcoming

CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #1
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #2
ASL Season 20
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
RSL Revival: Season 2
Maestros of the Game
SEL Season 2 Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
FEL Cracov 2025
HCC Europe
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.