US Politics Mega-thread - Page 8536

On August 24 2017 04:32 Nebuchad wrote:


There's a label for people who can't be contained in leftist or liberal labels. They are called centrists.

On August 24 2017 04:33 Nyxisto wrote:


The guy who re-tweeted Hillary Clinton on a David star and a pile of money fuels anti-semitsm? Shocker

On August 24 2017 04:41 Falling wrote:

Ha. Yeah, certain elements will see this as all good- international Jewry on the run or some such.

@Wolf

You must not be a hardline NDP voter, as I doubt many would think that

On August 24 2017 04:45 Plansix wrote:

I will not bow to your pejorative middle of the road label. It is to dull for me.

A staggering 5 million incidents of stop and frisk took place in New York since 2002. Nearly 90% of those stops were of people who were found to be completely innocent. The overwhelming majority of stops, of course, were done against black and Latino residents of the city. When the practice was formally disbanded in New York City after Judge Scheindlin’s decision, it was seen as an enormous victory for police reforms. And it was, but something that is perhaps even more nefarious than stop and frisk unofficially rose up within the NYPD to take its place — a crisis of false arrests driven by an unwritten quota system being overseen by precincts across the city.

Just three days after Donald Trump was inaugurated, New York City agreed to something that is so scandalous, so huge, that only the incoming presidency of Donald Trump could’ve outshined it. New York City agreed to pay $75 million (that’s $75,000,000) out in a police corruption case that should’ve rocked the city and the nation to its core. They likely chose that date and time on purpose. The case had been in litigation for years and years, but the city chose one of the most fragile, news heavy times in the history of modern American media to drop an absolute bomb. The city admitted that it was forced to dismiss over 900,000 arrests and summonses because they simply didn’t have the evidence to back them. These weren’t 900,000 stops that were made, but 900,000 legal actions accusing people of crimes that they did not commit. They were all bogus. Not 9,000. Not 90,000 — which seems like an outrageous number, but 900,000. Not only that, but the case actually had its very own deleted email scandal, where almost every single email Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly ever sent was deleted — never to be found again. Yeah, really.

On August 24 2017 05:01 GreenHorizons wrote:
But the poor oppressed Nazis though...




Source

More White House leaks! Anonymous “aides” have rushed, right on cue, to disavow Donald Trump’s fiery speech in Phoenix, Arizona Monday night and tell establishment reporters that they had nothing to do with the red meat the president served up to his Deplorable supporters.

From Politico:

President Donald Trump spent much of last week hearing from friends, donors and aides that he needed to dial back some of his rhetoric in the wake of Charlottesville.

He gave his response on Tuesday night in Phoenix, with an angry, meandering and frequently disingenuous 75-minute rally address designed to soothe his ego, rev up his base, and remind the naysayers in Washington and New York that he can still command love from his crowd.

Aides said he had a carefully vetted message on a TelePrompTer, but his eyes quickly wandered away for a discursive, meandering torching of the news media —who he said didn’t care about the country.

On August 24 2017 05:10 mozoku wrote:
I'm pretty surprised that so many people are defending the journalism status quo. I think the current echo chamber flavor of journalism is quite self-evidently destructive for society. That isn't really a partisan issue at all.

Nor is it necessarily journalists' fault, but the system is clearly broken imo. And a lot of what oBlade said is fairly true (journalists wield a massive amount of power in society by nature of their position, there's no real implicit or explicit checks on them to ensure they use it vaguely in society's interest, and journalism is arguably the largest contributor to the current federal government's dysfunction).

I'd love to see some public debate on how to fix journalism.

On August 24 2017 05:23 Wulfey_LA wrote:
Biased press is the status quo since forever. There were yellow journalism rags in the 1900s and the printing presses throughout history were used to pump out the views of their owners. It is on the viewer to balance out the perspectives and weigh the alleged facts presented against the strength of the sources for those facts. Objective reality does exist and it is possible to ascertain its nature, but it requires significant effort and skepticism.

On August 24 2017 05:01 GreenHorizons wrote:
But the poor oppressed Nazis though...




Source

On August 24 2017 05:24 mozoku wrote:
I was using "journalism" rather loosely to mean the news media organizations in general. I was under the impression oBlade was doing something similar.

Though I'm not quite as quick to absolve journalists of blame as Plansix, I think. It was a little striking to see how confident journalists' were of HRC's impending victory when her national polling advantage was within a fairly standard presidential election polling error, and I find it hard to believe it has nothing to do with the fact that 90% of journalists at such organizations are liberals/leftists.

Not sure how to fix that issue though, and I think it's far less of a problem than the misaligned incentives of news media organizations combined with modern day internet technology.

On August 24 2017 05:26 Plansix wrote:

Are you talking about the hosts of cable news networks, like CNN and MSNBC?

On August 24 2017 05:28 mozoku wrote:

I'm talking about the entire mainstream industry--TV and print/internet--(ignoring HuffPo, Breitbart, Infowars, etc.). I'm pretty sure even the WSJ was declaring an inevitable HRC victory.

On August 24 2017 05:30 Nevuk wrote:
I will always recall some journalists blasting 538 for saying Trump had a 30% chance to win.

On August 24 2017 05:10 mozoku wrote:
I'm pretty surprised that so many people are defending the journalism status quo. I think the current echo chamber flavor of journalism is quite self-evidently destructive for society. That isn't really a partisan issue at all.

Nor is it necessarily journalists' fault, but the system is clearly broken imo. And a lot of what oBlade said is fairly true (journalists wield a massive amount of power in society by nature of their position, there's no real implicit or explicit checks on them to ensure they use it vaguely in society's interest, and journalism is arguably the largest contributor to the current federal government's dysfunction).

I'd love to see some public debate on how to fix journalism.

On August 24 2017 05:30 Plansix wrote:

Yes, that is because the polling data said it was likely. There were 90000000 stories about how the data changed in the week leading up to the election. They literally wrote stories about what they and the polling missed. They wrote stories about their own mistake.

On August 24 2017 05:36 mozoku wrote:

I don't recall any election day stories writing about the changing poll numbers giving Trump a realistic shot though (besides 538). Shouldn't that have been newsworthy?