EPTHe might not be able to fix their problems. I don't really think he will be able to. But maybe he will open the path to someone who can.
A short speech from Trump today, covering his (vague) positions on a wide range of issues:
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 6282
| Forum Index > Closed |
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
United Kingdom13775 Posts
He might not be able to fix their problems. I don't really think he will be able to. But maybe he will open the path to someone who can. A short speech from Trump today, covering his (vague) positions on a wide range of issues: | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On November 22 2016 10:48 pmh wrote: Its amazing how little democrats have learned from this election. People voted for trump because they where extremely disappointed with the government from the last 8 years. Is it that difficult to admit this? The democrats not only lost the presidency but also a ton of state legislatives. The more trump voters are being painted as Nazis white supremacists bigotists and deplorable in general the worse the outlook for the democratic party becomes. This is even more stupid then the birther movement. But all this is fine,the longer it takes for the democrats to get their act together the better the position of trump becomes. What the democrats now offer is not an alternative for many trump voters,it only confirms them that they made the right choice lol. you're statements don't really follow that well; and/or have other issues. people rarely learn well in general, dems, reps, others, no need to single out dems on this. it's not like many reps were any better under obama either. there's always a large amount of reasonable people, but a bunch of loudmouths hating on the other side who get more attention than they should for their numbers. also, if they were disappoined with gov't they'd have gone dem, since the gov't has been more rep than dem for the last several years. the dems act is as together, or moreso than the reps. nor does it confirm they made the right cohice, since they didn't (except for the actual neonazis, whcih are pretty few in number), it's simpyl far from that. it's also mostly too early to assess effects, but the reasonable estimation numbers are pretty clear. | ||
|
pmh
1352 Posts
this argument,i don't get it. People don't analyze the last 8 years as being more republican then democratic. They simply look:who was president for the past 8 year and he and his party will get the blame. If it is objectively the right choice is not that important,as long as people feel they made the right choice. And that is what the democrats are doing now,giving the trump voters the feeling that they made the right choice. Anyway,regarding global warming and co2 emissions. Has there been done research in the emissions of coastal city vs rural communitys? I can imagine coastal city communitys emitting more on average. It would be an ironic twist,if the people most worried about global warming are also the bigger emiters. Well,that was just a random thought that crossed my mind. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
Donald Trump scolded media big shots during an off-the-record Trump Tower sitdown on Monday, sources told The Post. “It was like a f–ing firing squad,” one source said of the encounter. “Trump started with [CNN chief] Jeff Zucker and said ‘I hate your network, everyone at CNN is a liar and you should be ashamed,’ ” the source said. “The meeting was a total disaster. The TV execs and anchors went in there thinking they would be discussing the access they would get to the Trump administration, but instead they got a Trump-style dressing down,” the source added. A second source confirmed the fireworks. “The meeting took place in a big board room and there were about 30 or 40 people, including the big news anchors from all the networks,” the other source said. “Trump kept saying, ‘We’re in a room of liars, the deceitful dishonest media who got it all wrong.’ He addressed everyone in the room calling the media dishonest, deceitful liars. He called out Jeff Zucker by name and said everyone at CNN was a liar, and CNN was [a] network of liars,” the source said. “Trump didn’t say [NBC reporter] Katy Tur by name, but talked about an NBC female correspondent who got it wrong, then he referred to a horrible network correspondent who cried when Hillary lost who hosted a debate – which was Martha Raddatz who was also in the room.” The stunned reporters tried to get a word in edgewise to discuss access to a Trump Administration. “[CBS Good Morning co-host Gayle] King did not stand up, but asked some question, ‘How do you propose we the media work with you?’ Chuck Todd asked some pretty pointed questions. David Muir asked ‘How are you going to cope living in DC while your family is in NYC? It was a horrible meeting.” Trump spokeswoman Kellyanne Conway told reporters the gathering went well. “Excellent meetings with the top executives of the major networks,” she said during a gaggle in the lobby of Trump Tower. “Pretty unprecedented meeting we put together in two days.” The meeting was off the record, meaning the participants agreed not to talk about the substance of the conversations. The hour-long session included top execs from network and cable news channels. Among the attendees were NBC’s Deborah Turness, Lester Holt and Chuck Todd, ABC’s James Goldston, George Stephanopoulos, David Muir and Martha Raddatz, Also, CBS’ Norah O’Donnell John Dickerson, Charlie Rose, Christopher Isham and King, Fox News’ Bill Shine, Jack Abernethy, Jay Wallace, Suzanne Scott, MSNBC’s Phil Griffin and CNN’s Jeff Zucker and Erin Burnett. Arthur Sulzberger, publisher of The New York Times, plans to meet with Trump Tuesday. There was no immediate comment from the Trump Team. Source. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On November 22 2016 11:21 pmh wrote: Anyway,regarding global warming and co2 emissions. Has there been done research in the emissions of coastal city vs rural communitys? I can imagine coastal city communitys emitting more on average. It would be an ironic twist,if the people most worried about global warming are also the bigger emiters. Well,that was just a random thought that crossed my mind. Most emissions are quite predictably tied to fossil fuels, their extraction, and their use for a wide range of purposes. Agriculture is another big one but fossil fuels are 90% or more. Generally speaking, rural communities have a tendency to be less efficient on that front but urban communities make up for it in volume. Of course, emissions aren't the only form of troubling pollution, just the one we talk most about. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On November 22 2016 11:21 pmh wrote: if they were disappoined with gov't they'd have gone dem, since the gov't has been more rep than dem for the last several years. this argument,i don't get it. People don't analyze the last 8 years as being more republican then democratic. They simply look:who was president for the past 8 year and he and his party will get the blame. If it is objectively the right choice is not that important,as long as people feel they made the right choice. And that is what the democrats are doing now,giving the trump voters the feeling that they made the right choice. Anyway,regarding global warming and co2 emissions. Has there been done research in the emissions of coastal city vs rural communitys? I can imagine coastal city communitys emitting more on average. It would be an ironic twist,if the people most worried about global warming are also the bigger emiters. Well,that was just a random thought that crossed my mind. it's the difference between perception adn reality. I fully understand that people stupidly blame the president and go against him if the situation is bad, regardless of whether the president actually had anything ot dow ith it. that doesn't mean they're right, it simply means it is. i'd say whether it's objectively the right choice matters a great deal to anyone who ACTUALLY wants things to get better. I do. making bad decisions results in bad outcomes. and only some of the trump voters feel they made the right choice, abotu the same amount that always did; and they weren't really gonna change based on facts anyways, since they choose to vote against facts. also, again you call it "the dems" when it's not the dems, it's certain people, AND it's also not like republicans are any better. While I would prefer if everyone were wiser, that's not the world we live in. and i'm sure there's been some research on that question; but again your statement doesn't follow at all. not everyone urban is big on the environment. you really need to use your logic more carefully and thoughtfully. | ||
|
Orcasgt24
Canada3238 Posts
For once Trump is right. The media needed to get this absolutely scalding talk down to let them know just how useless they have become. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23188 Posts
Well, The meeting was off the record, meaning the participants agreed not to talk about the substance of the conversations. Fail. CNN is quite full of liars, for what people assume, is the more fair outlet between Fox, MSNBC, and them. | ||
|
Orcasgt24
Canada3238 Posts
On November 22 2016 11:32 GreenHorizons wrote: CNN is quite full of liars, for what people assume, is the more fair outlet between Fox, MSNBC, and them. Being less biased than FOX or MSNBC is a very low bar to clear. CNN barely manages to clear it. Truthfully. Nobody manages to clear the bar by much. It is really hard to find unbiased media reporting on politics or news these days. Makes it all the more important to get as many versions of the same story as you can and filter through the bullshit. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On November 22 2016 11:37 Orcasgt24 wrote: Being less biased than FOX or MSNBC is a very low bar to clear. CNN barely manages to clear it. Truthfully. Nobody manages to clear the bar by much. It is really hard to find unbiased media reporting on politics or news these days. Makes it all the more important to get as many versions of the same story as you can and filter through the bullshit. I'd say cspan does just fine. there's also some pretty decent newspapers. It's too bad there isn't more of a market for unbiased reporting, not that most people could even tell what unbiased reporting is. also there's plenty of people worse than fox and msnbc, at least on the internet. I'd take it up, but I'm not a journalist and people barely listen to me anyways, so it doesn't seem worthwhile. and I highly doubt a significant number of people will ask me to start doing it and condense the info for them. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12161 Posts
On November 22 2016 11:37 Orcasgt24 wrote: Being less biased than FOX or MSNBC is a very low bar to clear. CNN barely manages to clear it. It's so funny that these discussions are being had in a conversation where the alternative is Breitbart. Actually, scratch that, it's not that funny. It's basically the same mechanism that got us Trump btw. Yeah, I really dislike Clinton, let's get something even worse! | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23188 Posts
On November 22 2016 11:41 Nebuchad wrote: It's so funny that these discussions are being had in a conversation where the alternative is Breitbart. Actually, scratch that, it's not that funny. It's basically the same mechanism that got us Trump btw. Yeah, I really dislike Clinton, let's get something even worse! I'm with Zlefin on this, the alternatives are more along the lines of PBS and C-SPAN. Problem with those are that we don't educate people to a point where media like that is appealing. Most corporate media should be gag inducing to even moderately informed citizens. Instead Fox News is one of the best rated cable stations (not cable news, cable channels) and C-SPAN could pay people to watch and not rate as high. | ||
|
Chocolate
United States2350 Posts
On November 22 2016 11:41 Nebuchad wrote: It's so funny that these discussions are being had in a conversation where the alternative is Breitbart. Actually, scratch that, it's not that funny. It's basically the same mechanism that got us Trump btw. Yeah, I really dislike Clinton, let's get something even worse! Just because alternative Y to X is bad doesn't mean X can't be bad. Maybe instead of blaming people who dislike CNN and Clinton for fucking things up, how about we blame the party/political leaders and media institutions for falling out of touch with what people want? | ||
CosmicSpiral
United States15275 Posts
| ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12161 Posts
On November 22 2016 12:03 Chocolate wrote: Just because alternative Y to X is bad doesn't mean X can't be bad. Maybe instead of blaming people who dislike CNN and Clinton for fucking things up, how about we blame the party/political leaders and media institutions for falling out of touch with what people want? And just because X is bad doesn't mean alternative Y can't be worse. We're saying the same thing; you are allowed to blame the media for doing a poor job and blame disinformation sites for being objectively even worse, it's a fairly easy concept. I'm not sure why you're opposed to it? GH: Forgive me but I don't really think I've been arguing a lot of CSPAN watchers when I've been discussing Trump people online. | ||
|
Chocolate
United States2350 Posts
Someone on the left needs to make a fun media outlet | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On November 22 2016 12:11 Chocolate wrote: That's very true, reality hurts a lot of feelings on both sides of the aisle. I do think there is room for something in the middle though. The main difference I see between right-leaning media outlets and left-leaning ones is that the right-leaning outlets are more exciting. They yell more, their personalities are more interesting, they focus on scandals and "juicy" in a manner than is much less dry than the others. And you can even see that on reddit. /r/The_Donald is filled with memes and inside jokes and is just fun. /r/politics (by all means very liberal, not leftist, just super Democrat) is boring and whiny. Someone on the left needs to make a fun media outlet the fun comes from ignoring/twisting reality and not trying to solve problems. it doesn't make the world a better place. If you want entertainment, watch just plain entertainment. or at least don't have things that pretend to be news. come to think of it, the left does have fun media outlets, at least in comedian form. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
To be fair, we could pull out some NYP tabloidism from this election of questionable veracity. edit: looks like other sources corroborate. Considering Trump's relationship with the truth, though, he doesn't exactly have the moral high ground over the media. Trump's narrow victory with the benefit of considerable luck is not necessarily evidence of a realignment or predictable groundswell revolution; so this is just Trump being vindictive, as expected. The people in that room are doing a great business thanks to Trump, ironically. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
Very reminiscent of the press conference on birtherism he turned into a campaign ad. They came in expecting to get the lowdown on press access and to push back if Trump wanted to ban establishments ala campaign press core. What they got was something quite different. I'm speaking as someone who looks forward to four years of a nixonian antagonistic press core. Hopefully with less hysteria and faux shock. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On November 22 2016 12:07 CosmicSpiral wrote: I'm not sure why mainstream media would ever return to an attempt at "unbiased" reporting, considering that postmodern critiques of the concept of truth having inherent value are almost universally accepted. Just think about how many times something is criticized due to how it makes someone feel or how it reinforces some dynamic, regardless of its correspondence to reality. Most outlets seem to be focused on entertainment and identity reinforcement since that's how you attract and maintain a consistent viewer base. You're absolutely right in the short term. Heavily biased mainstream media set the stage and right wing alternative media met it with opinion journalism and the rest (including Fox News). Now you have your preferred media outlets and very few consumers able to be gained for a shift towards center. Long term, all that has to happen is for an outlet to make up half the distance between center and left wing narrative (and in case of Breitbart, right wing), not gain some theoretical unbiased reporting. Build respect at giving everyone a hard time, like you might see in older Crossfires and meet the press with Tim Russert. If you can prove you'd treat a Trump scandal like a Clinton scandal, or an Obama foreign policy misstep like a Trump FP misstep, the demand's there to give hard reporting on everything that the viewer can trust. Give journos a generation and who knows? | ||
| ||
