|
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
|
|
On January 05 2023 01:21 plasmidghost wrote:
The chaos in the GOP has me salivating. I want them to completely implode and fail to get anything done for a long time. At this point, they're not going to elect a Speaker for a while lmao
I just want to add the tiniest * to this. Its certainly satisfying to see but the House effectively does not exist right now, if this goes on to long that becomes a problem for the basic running of government. Something certain Republicans wouldn't mind but its generally not a great thing to have happen.
|
The single situation of how-long-will-it-take-for-republicans-to-unify-behind-their-speaker is pretty amusing, but once it's sorted out (whether it's a day or week from now), they'll still be in control... theoretically. What I'm hoping for (and what I imagine many of us are hoping for), is that this kind of chaos will permeate through many other processes and votes that Republicans will try to pass in the House. It would be fantastic if the House Republicans can't all agree on anything, making it harder for them to undo Democratic progress. That being said, I'm still skeptical that this sort of infighting will persist throughout the next two years.
|
|
|
On January 05 2023 01:31 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
The single situation of how-long-will-it-take-for-republicans-to-unify-behind-their-speaker is pretty amusing, but once it's sorted out (whether it's a day or week from now), they'll still be in control... theoretically. What I'm hoping for (and what I imagine many of us are hoping for), is that this kind of chaos will permeate through many other processes and votes that Republicans will try to pass in the House. It would be fantastic if the House Republicans can't all agree on anything, making it harder for them to undo Democratic progress. That being said, I'm still skeptical that this sort of infighting will persist throughout the next two years. I feel like the general consensus has, for some time, been that the Republicans will not get anything done at all.
We, again, already saw this under Trump with full control of all 3 branches. Infighting stopped anything from happening then (aside a tax cut) and it will stop anything from happening now.
Nothing has changed to stop this in the GOP. Its only gotten worse.
Nothing of note will pass through Congress for the next 2 years.
|
On January 05 2023 01:36 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2023 01:31 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
The single situation of how-long-will-it-take-for-republicans-to-unify-behind-their-speaker is pretty amusing, but once it's sorted out (whether it's a day or week from now), they'll still be in control... theoretically. What I'm hoping for (and what I imagine many of us are hoping for), is that this kind of chaos will permeate through many other processes and votes that Republicans will try to pass in the House. It would be fantastic if the House Republicans can't all agree on anything, making it harder for them to undo Democratic progress. That being said, I'm still skeptical that this sort of infighting will persist throughout the next two years. I feel like the general consensus has, for some time, been that the Republicans will not get anything done at all. We, again, already saw this under Trump with full control of all 3 branches. Infighting stopped anything from happening then (aside a tax cut) and it will stop anything from happening now. Nothing has changed to stop this in the GOP. Its only gotten worse. Nothing of note will pass through Congress for the next 2 years.
Do you think the House Republicans will be able to unite behind impeaching Joe Biden (for whatever reason they want)? Obviously, the impeachment won't lead to a Senate conviction, but surely there are many House Republicans who want to impeach Biden.
|
On January 05 2023 01:42 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2023 01:36 Gorsameth wrote:On January 05 2023 01:31 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
The single situation of how-long-will-it-take-for-republicans-to-unify-behind-their-speaker is pretty amusing, but once it's sorted out (whether it's a day or week from now), they'll still be in control... theoretically. What I'm hoping for (and what I imagine many of us are hoping for), is that this kind of chaos will permeate through many other processes and votes that Republicans will try to pass in the House. It would be fantastic if the House Republicans can't all agree on anything, making it harder for them to undo Democratic progress. That being said, I'm still skeptical that this sort of infighting will persist throughout the next two years. I feel like the general consensus has, for some time, been that the Republicans will not get anything done at all. We, again, already saw this under Trump with full control of all 3 branches. Infighting stopped anything from happening then (aside a tax cut) and it will stop anything from happening now. Nothing has changed to stop this in the GOP. Its only gotten worse. Nothing of note will pass through Congress for the next 2 years. Do you think the House Republicans will be able to unite behind impeaching Joe Biden (for whatever reason they want)? Obviously, the impeachment won't lead to a Senate conviction, but surely there are many House Republicans who want to impeach Biden.
Republicans not getting anything done is the best result when republicans are in control. The thing they tend to get done is usually evil.
While nothing getting done is also a bad thing, it is still better than the stuff the republicans would get done.
|
The media calculus often takes a different form of fallacy depending on what side has what predetermined result - Republicans who want to tout their success, like for example Gutfeld when he says he's the highest rated late night show and it's a conservative one, well, that's easy when it's the only conservative one. The truth is Fox's relative success is easily explained by the fact that it's the only channel doing what it does while every other channel is competing for diminishing (when they can't clickbait Trump 24/7) market share of viewers. This level of reasoning is akin to saying Turkey is the tallest country in the world because the tallest man in the world is from Turkey.
You can't really point to the success of one channel as saying in fact the media actually favors conservatives, and then the minute anyone quotes or cites any single thing from that channel, probably dismiss it without reading or watching and go "durr Fox" and "actually it's technically entertainment according to Tucker's lawsuit" especially when that is a channel that is far more critical of members of its "own" party than its counterparts are of Democrats. Furthermore, when something like "Comedy Central" is providing news and political... let's say suggestions - to millions of people, that suggests to reevaluate the big picture, and then you realize that entertainment, movies, TV, music, are almost completely imbued with leftism as "default."
On January 05 2023 01:42 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2023 01:36 Gorsameth wrote:On January 05 2023 01:31 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
The single situation of how-long-will-it-take-for-republicans-to-unify-behind-their-speaker is pretty amusing, but once it's sorted out (whether it's a day or week from now), they'll still be in control... theoretically. What I'm hoping for (and what I imagine many of us are hoping for), is that this kind of chaos will permeate through many other processes and votes that Republicans will try to pass in the House. It would be fantastic if the House Republicans can't all agree on anything, making it harder for them to undo Democratic progress. That being said, I'm still skeptical that this sort of infighting will persist throughout the next two years. I feel like the general consensus has, for some time, been that the Republicans will not get anything done at all. We, again, already saw this under Trump with full control of all 3 branches. Infighting stopped anything from happening then (aside a tax cut) and it will stop anything from happening now. Nothing has changed to stop this in the GOP. Its only gotten worse. Nothing of note will pass through Congress for the next 2 years. Do you think the House Republicans will be able to unite behind impeaching Joe Biden (for whatever reason they want)? Obviously, the impeachment won't lead to a Senate conviction, but surely there are many House Republicans who want to impeach Biden.
They are probably sooner to bring articles of impeachment against the Attorney General, and especially the Secretary of Homeland Security, if you focus on what's going on.
|
On January 05 2023 01:42 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2023 01:36 Gorsameth wrote:On January 05 2023 01:31 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
The single situation of how-long-will-it-take-for-republicans-to-unify-behind-their-speaker is pretty amusing, but once it's sorted out (whether it's a day or week from now), they'll still be in control... theoretically. What I'm hoping for (and what I imagine many of us are hoping for), is that this kind of chaos will permeate through many other processes and votes that Republicans will try to pass in the House. It would be fantastic if the House Republicans can't all agree on anything, making it harder for them to undo Democratic progress. That being said, I'm still skeptical that this sort of infighting will persist throughout the next two years. I feel like the general consensus has, for some time, been that the Republicans will not get anything done at all. We, again, already saw this under Trump with full control of all 3 branches. Infighting stopped anything from happening then (aside a tax cut) and it will stop anything from happening now. Nothing has changed to stop this in the GOP. Its only gotten worse. Nothing of note will pass through Congress for the next 2 years. Do you think the House Republicans will be able to unite behind impeaching Joe Biden (for whatever reason they want)? Obviously, the impeachment won't lead to a Senate conviction, but surely there are many House Republicans who want to impeach Biden. I was mostly thinking in terms of policy.
Yes they might succeed in 1 (or 17) impeachment votes, because even the 'sane' Republicans may support it to appeal to their Trump voters knowing full well that it will never pass the Senate. In the same way that they voted in favour of repealing Obamacare knowing someone else would cause that vote to fail.
|
United States44364 Posts
On January 05 2023 01:58 oBlade wrote:
You can't really point to the success of one channel as saying in fact the media actually favors conservatives, and then the minute anyone quotes or cites any single thing from that channel, probably dismiss it without reading or watching.
You absolutely can point to the success of “one channel” when it is far larger than the others. Calling it one channel doesn’t make it small, it dominates the media landscape. Eurasia is just one continent but it has a population of 6b.
Citations from it are dismissed by non idiots because nonidiots know that it’s not trustworthy. That doesn’t mean it’s not an extremely successful media network, it just means the success is concentrated within the idiot demographic.
Conservative slanted media gets more eyeballs, ears, print lines etc. than liberal media. The media is conservative leaning.
|
On January 05 2023 00:55 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2023 23:55 Introvert wrote:On January 04 2023 17:55 KwarK wrote:On January 04 2023 11:36 Introvert wrote:Except Reagan was just about the only person who followed that rule, and even then not always. Since at least 2010, and certainly the 2012 in presidential primary fight, this rule hasn't been honored. And of course Trump abandoned it entirely. Additionally, every party out of power makes it their primary goal to stop the other party. This is especially true in the House, where being in the minority most of the times means you get nothing at all. The GOP's biggest achievements of the last two decades when they've had control are a few tax bills. Nothing else they run on can they get a consensus. The real reason so many people think this is because it's in the political interest of Democrats to say it, and they have the media megaphone. As for what's happening now, despite their claims otherwise I can't see any Republican allowing a Democrat speaker, THAT would be an instant primary loss. Even if McCarthy were to dangle some goodies to dems, it would be risky. It might weaken his position with his caucus even further, but it could snap some GOP objectors back into line. Anyways, if this gets resolved in not too long it will be nothing but a footnote to the start of what was going to be a turbulent term regardless. Why would you make such as easily disprovable claim as the Democratic Party controlling the media? Did you expect it to go unnoticed or did you just not care about truth? Or perhaps most people here know I don't mean they literally control it, they are just on the same side. The leeway afforded one side is way out of proportion. Maybe you disagree with that too but of course I've said for years the Trump term in office proved that beyond doubt and if it hasn't there's no convincing someone otherwise. Y’all have the biggest newspapers, the most watched cable news, all the local news affiliates, and the most listened to radio shows. The idea that the media is against conservatives is pure persecution fetishism. It’s privately owned by a bunch of multibillionaires who profit hugely from conservatives tax policies.
I second much of what oBlade says, but places like the NYT, WP, etc have a distinct pro-dem slant meanwhile much of conservative media a closed ecosystem.
If it was just who had the most listened/read publications we wouldn't have suffered through 2 years of Russiagate insanity or had the entire Hunter Biden laptop dismissed as a Russian op and suppressed, when it was obvious it was his the whole time. Or the treatment of Trump's mental abilities va Biden's when Biden is even older and obviously even more dull than he was before, etc.
I don't mean to have this conversation for the umpteenth time because of course claiming thr media is too friendly to Republicans is an insane but real belief almost every Dem holds. But that just goes along with their general hysteria about anyone to the right of Mitt Romney (and of course in 2012 they hated him, too.) They treated Obama like a Saint too. Thr BS about his biggest scandal was wearing a tan suit perfectly illustrates both the warped perspective of thr online left and dems generally- it was talked about for like a day by a few people on twitter and then they have the temerity to say his administration was "scandal free." Wrong on all counts.
|
|
|
United States44364 Posts
On January 05 2023 02:17 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2023 00:55 KwarK wrote:On January 04 2023 23:55 Introvert wrote:On January 04 2023 17:55 KwarK wrote:On January 04 2023 11:36 Introvert wrote:Except Reagan was just about the only person who followed that rule, and even then not always. Since at least 2010, and certainly the 2012 in presidential primary fight, this rule hasn't been honored. And of course Trump abandoned it entirely. Additionally, every party out of power makes it their primary goal to stop the other party. This is especially true in the House, where being in the minority most of the times means you get nothing at all. The GOP's biggest achievements of the last two decades when they've had control are a few tax bills. Nothing else they run on can they get a consensus. The real reason so many people think this is because it's in the political interest of Democrats to say it, and they have the media megaphone. As for what's happening now, despite their claims otherwise I can't see any Republican allowing a Democrat speaker, THAT would be an instant primary loss. Even if McCarthy were to dangle some goodies to dems, it would be risky. It might weaken his position with his caucus even further, but it could snap some GOP objectors back into line. Anyways, if this gets resolved in not too long it will be nothing but a footnote to the start of what was going to be a turbulent term regardless. Why would you make such as easily disprovable claim as the Democratic Party controlling the media? Did you expect it to go unnoticed or did you just not care about truth? Or perhaps most people here know I don't mean they literally control it, they are just on the same side. The leeway afforded one side is way out of proportion. Maybe you disagree with that too but of course I've said for years the Trump term in office proved that beyond doubt and if it hasn't there's no convincing someone otherwise. Y’all have the biggest newspapers, the most watched cable news, all the local news affiliates, and the most listened to radio shows. The idea that the media is against conservatives is pure persecution fetishism. It’s privately owned by a bunch of multibillionaires who profit hugely from conservatives tax policies. I second much of what oBlade says, but places like the NYT, WP, etc have a distinct pro-dem slant meanwhile much of conservative media a closed ecosystem. If it was just who had the most listened/read publications we wouldn't have suffered through 2 years of Russiagate insanity or had the entire Hunter Biden laptop dismissed as a Russian op and suppressed, when it was obvious it was his the whole time. Or the treatment of Trump's mental abilities va Biden's when Biden is even older and obviously even more dull than he was before, etc. I don't mean to have this conversation for the umpteenth time because of course claiming thr media is too friendly to Republicans is an insane but real belief almost every Dem holds. But that just goes along with their general hysteria about anyone to the right of Mitt Romney (and of course in 2012 they hated him, too.) They treated Obama like a Saint too. Thr BS about his biggest scandal was wearing a tan suit perfectly illustrates both the warped perspective of thr online left and dems generally- it was talked about for like a day by a few people on twitter and then they have the temerity to say his administration was "scandal free." Wrong on all counts.
WP is owned by Bezos and NYT is neoliberal conservative. You’ve pushed the Overton window so far right that neoliberalism is no longer seen as conservative. It is conservative though.
Trump raves like a lunatic, Biden doesn’t. It was right to question Trump, he launched a coup attempt.
Hunter’s laptop story still makes no sense, the provenance was a lie and they still haven’t been able to actually produce a laptop.
Russia did intervene in the election and the Trump campaign did meet with Russian agents inappropriately, read the damn Mueller report.
You’ve lost your grip on reality.
|
On January 05 2023 02:17 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2023 00:55 KwarK wrote:On January 04 2023 23:55 Introvert wrote:On January 04 2023 17:55 KwarK wrote:On January 04 2023 11:36 Introvert wrote:Except Reagan was just about the only person who followed that rule, and even then not always. Since at least 2010, and certainly the 2012 in presidential primary fight, this rule hasn't been honored. And of course Trump abandoned it entirely. Additionally, every party out of power makes it their primary goal to stop the other party. This is especially true in the House, where being in the minority most of the times means you get nothing at all. The GOP's biggest achievements of the last two decades when they've had control are a few tax bills. Nothing else they run on can they get a consensus. The real reason so many people think this is because it's in the political interest of Democrats to say it, and they have the media megaphone. As for what's happening now, despite their claims otherwise I can't see any Republican allowing a Democrat speaker, THAT would be an instant primary loss. Even if McCarthy were to dangle some goodies to dems, it would be risky. It might weaken his position with his caucus even further, but it could snap some GOP objectors back into line. Anyways, if this gets resolved in not too long it will be nothing but a footnote to the start of what was going to be a turbulent term regardless. Why would you make such as easily disprovable claim as the Democratic Party controlling the media? Did you expect it to go unnoticed or did you just not care about truth? Or perhaps most people here know I don't mean they literally control it, they are just on the same side. The leeway afforded one side is way out of proportion. Maybe you disagree with that too but of course I've said for years the Trump term in office proved that beyond doubt and if it hasn't there's no convincing someone otherwise. Y’all have the biggest newspapers, the most watched cable news, all the local news affiliates, and the most listened to radio shows. The idea that the media is against conservatives is pure persecution fetishism. It’s privately owned by a bunch of multibillionaires who profit hugely from conservatives tax policies. I second much of what oBlade says, but places like the NYT, WP, etc have a distinct pro-dem slant meanwhile much of conservative media a closed ecosystem. If it was just who had the most listened/read publications we wouldn't have suffered through 2 years of Russiagate insanity or had the entire Hunter Biden laptop dismissed as a Russian op and suppressed, when it was obvious it was his the whole time. Or the treatment of Trump's mental abilities va Biden's when Biden is even older and obviously even more dull than he was before, etc. I don't mean to have this conversation for the umpteenth time because of course claiming thr media is too friendly to Republicans is an insane but real belief almost every Dem holds. But that just goes along with their general hysteria about anyone to the right of Mitt Romney (and of course in 2012 they hated him, too.) They treated Obama like a Saint too. Thr BS about his biggest scandal was wearing a tan suit perfectly illustrates both the warped perspective of thr online left and dems generally- it was talked about for like a day by a few people on twitter and then they have the temerity to say his administration was "scandal free." Wrong on all counts.
Talk about selective memory.
The Tan Suit thing was blasted on media outlets for several days, including multiple talk shows and several 24-hour news outlets. This includes CNN, FOX, and many local news stations.
|
On January 05 2023 01:58 oBlade wrote:
The media calculus often takes a different form of fallacy depending on what side has what predetermined result - Republicans who want to tout their success, like for example Gutfeld when he says he's the highest rated late night show and it's a conservative one, well, that's easy when it's the only conservative one. The truth is Fox's relative success is easily explained by the fact that it's the only channel doing what it does while every other channel is competing for diminishing (when they can't clickbait Trump 24/7) market share of viewers. This level of reasoning is akin to saying Turkey is the tallest country in the world because the tallest man in the world is from Turkey.
I feel like that argument would be stronger if Fox News was only marginally more popular than the left-leaning mainstream news sources, such that as an aggregate, the left-leaning mainstream news sources were collectively much more widely viewed... but I'm pretty sure Fox News's ratings go toe-to-toe with the combined force of the other popular alternatives, so the center/leftwing news is being diluted, not necessarily being watched more than Fox, in totality. The split seems to be roughly 50/50 here: + Show Spoiler +
You can't really point to the success of one channel as saying in fact the media actually favors conservatives, and then the minute anyone quotes or cites any single thing from that channel, probably dismiss it without reading or watching and go "durr Fox" and "actually it's technically entertainment according to Tucker's lawsuit" especially when that is a channel that is far more critical of members of its "own" party than its counterparts are of Democrats. Furthermore, when something like "Comedy Central" is providing news and political... let's say suggestions - to millions of people, that suggests to reevaluate the big picture, and then you realize that entertainment, movies, TV, music, are almost completely imbued with leftism as "default."
I don't think either side really pushes back on moderate conservatives or moderate liberals, to be honest. I think it's the case that Fox News is more likely to host and support extreme right-wing guests than CNN hosts and supports extreme left-wing guests. Fox News used to be even more partisan in that extent, before Newsmax and OAN existed as fringe spin-offs, but Fox News continues to platform conservative extremists too.
As far as comedy and music and movies go, I think it's a valid point that those forms of entertainment are skewed more left than right, but I think that's a function of several criteria, such as: who is more likely to spend money on those things, who is more likely to perform/work in those industries, etc. It's certainly the case that religions have a "default" of being rightwing too (both inside and outside of churches/services), if we're talking about inundating people with everyday experiences outside of formal news-watching.
Show nested quote +On January 05 2023 01:42 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On January 05 2023 01:36 Gorsameth wrote:On January 05 2023 01:31 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
The single situation of how-long-will-it-take-for-republicans-to-unify-behind-their-speaker is pretty amusing, but once it's sorted out (whether it's a day or week from now), they'll still be in control... theoretically. What I'm hoping for (and what I imagine many of us are hoping for), is that this kind of chaos will permeate through many other processes and votes that Republicans will try to pass in the House. It would be fantastic if the House Republicans can't all agree on anything, making it harder for them to undo Democratic progress. That being said, I'm still skeptical that this sort of infighting will persist throughout the next two years. I feel like the general consensus has, for some time, been that the Republicans will not get anything done at all. We, again, already saw this under Trump with full control of all 3 branches. Infighting stopped anything from happening then (aside a tax cut) and it will stop anything from happening now. Nothing has changed to stop this in the GOP. Its only gotten worse. Nothing of note will pass through Congress for the next 2 years. Do you think the House Republicans will be able to unite behind impeaching Joe Biden (for whatever reason they want)? Obviously, the impeachment won't lead to a Senate conviction, but surely there are many House Republicans who want to impeach Biden. They are probably sooner to bring articles of impeachment against the Attorney General, and especially the Secretary of Homeland Security, if you focus on what's going on.
Oh, I don't mean in terms of which individuals would be most justified in being impeached; I've just heard plenty of "we're going to impeach Biden as payback for Trump getting impeached twice" threats. I don't think those threats are hollow.
|
On January 05 2023 02:17 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2023 00:55 KwarK wrote:On January 04 2023 23:55 Introvert wrote:On January 04 2023 17:55 KwarK wrote:On January 04 2023 11:36 Introvert wrote:Except Reagan was just about the only person who followed that rule, and even then not always. Since at least 2010, and certainly the 2012 in presidential primary fight, this rule hasn't been honored. And of course Trump abandoned it entirely. Additionally, every party out of power makes it their primary goal to stop the other party. This is especially true in the House, where being in the minority most of the times means you get nothing at all. The GOP's biggest achievements of the last two decades when they've had control are a few tax bills. Nothing else they run on can they get a consensus. The real reason so many people think this is because it's in the political interest of Democrats to say it, and they have the media megaphone. As for what's happening now, despite their claims otherwise I can't see any Republican allowing a Democrat speaker, THAT would be an instant primary loss. Even if McCarthy were to dangle some goodies to dems, it would be risky. It might weaken his position with his caucus even further, but it could snap some GOP objectors back into line. Anyways, if this gets resolved in not too long it will be nothing but a footnote to the start of what was going to be a turbulent term regardless. Why would you make such as easily disprovable claim as the Democratic Party controlling the media? Did you expect it to go unnoticed or did you just not care about truth? Or perhaps most people here know I don't mean they literally control it, they are just on the same side. The leeway afforded one side is way out of proportion. Maybe you disagree with that too but of course I've said for years the Trump term in office proved that beyond doubt and if it hasn't there's no convincing someone otherwise. Y’all have the biggest newspapers, the most watched cable news, all the local news affiliates, and the most listened to radio shows. The idea that the media is against conservatives is pure persecution fetishism. It’s privately owned by a bunch of multibillionaires who profit hugely from conservatives tax policies. I second much of what oBlade says, but places like the NYT, WP, etc have a distinct pro-dem slant meanwhile much of conservative media a closed ecosystem. If it was just who had the most listened/read publications we wouldn't have suffered through 2 years of Russiagate insanity or had the entire Hunter Biden laptop dismissed as a Russian op and suppressed, when it was obvious it was his the whole time. Or the treatment of Trump's mental abilities va Biden's when Biden is even older and obviously even more dull than he was before, etc. I don't mean to have this conversation for the umpteenth time because of course claiming thr media is too friendly to Republicans is an insane but real belief almost every Dem holds. But that just goes along with their general hysteria about anyone to the right of Mitt Romney (and of course in 2012 they hated him, too.) They treated Obama like a Saint too. Thr BS about his biggest scandal was wearing a tan suit perfectly illustrates both the warped perspective of thr online left and dems generally- it was talked about for like a day by a few people on twitter and then they have the temerity to say his administration was "scandal free." Wrong on all counts. "Russiagate" is real, both the Mueller report and later the Republican Senate intelligence committee proved it. Russia interfered in the election and the Trump campaign talking to them are established facts in the real world.
The Hunter laptop is dismissed because there is nothing. they had it for god knows how long, and the Republicans had control of the government AND NOTHING HAPPENED.
The could have charged someone, they could have investigated something. Not even the Republicans believe in it, that is how fake and tainted it is. After 2? years all they have are some dick pics.
Everyone questions Trumps sanity because he can't form coherent sentences and has done bizarre things almost on a weekly basis. It feels like a new book from a 'former Trump White House staffer' comes out atleast once a month that once again highlights how insane and out of touch Trump was/is.
Anything else long since debunked you want to try and propose?
|
|
|
On January 05 2023 02:37 plasmidghost wrote:
Donalds just got six votes and counting. The fourth vote fails
We don't know for sure how many are in the chamber or will vote present by the dems. It's not over yet
|
On January 05 2023 02:23 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2023 02:17 Introvert wrote:On January 05 2023 00:55 KwarK wrote:On January 04 2023 23:55 Introvert wrote:On January 04 2023 17:55 KwarK wrote:On January 04 2023 11:36 Introvert wrote:Except Reagan was just about the only person who followed that rule, and even then not always. Since at least 2010, and certainly the 2012 in presidential primary fight, this rule hasn't been honored. And of course Trump abandoned it entirely. Additionally, every party out of power makes it their primary goal to stop the other party. This is especially true in the House, where being in the minority most of the times means you get nothing at all. The GOP's biggest achievements of the last two decades when they've had control are a few tax bills. Nothing else they run on can they get a consensus. The real reason so many people think this is because it's in the political interest of Democrats to say it, and they have the media megaphone. As for what's happening now, despite their claims otherwise I can't see any Republican allowing a Democrat speaker, THAT would be an instant primary loss. Even if McCarthy were to dangle some goodies to dems, it would be risky. It might weaken his position with his caucus even further, but it could snap some GOP objectors back into line. Anyways, if this gets resolved in not too long it will be nothing but a footnote to the start of what was going to be a turbulent term regardless. Why would you make such as easily disprovable claim as the Democratic Party controlling the media? Did you expect it to go unnoticed or did you just not care about truth? Or perhaps most people here know I don't mean they literally control it, they are just on the same side. The leeway afforded one side is way out of proportion. Maybe you disagree with that too but of course I've said for years the Trump term in office proved that beyond doubt and if it hasn't there's no convincing someone otherwise. Y’all have the biggest newspapers, the most watched cable news, all the local news affiliates, and the most listened to radio shows. The idea that the media is against conservatives is pure persecution fetishism. It’s privately owned by a bunch of multibillionaires who profit hugely from conservatives tax policies. I second much of what oBlade says, but places like the NYT, WP, etc have a distinct pro-dem slant meanwhile much of conservative media a closed ecosystem. If it was just who had the most listened/read publications we wouldn't have suffered through 2 years of Russiagate insanity or had the entire Hunter Biden laptop dismissed as a Russian op and suppressed, when it was obvious it was his the whole time. Or the treatment of Trump's mental abilities va Biden's when Biden is even older and obviously even more dull than he was before, etc. I don't mean to have this conversation for the umpteenth time because of course claiming thr media is too friendly to Republicans is an insane but real belief almost every Dem holds. But that just goes along with their general hysteria about anyone to the right of Mitt Romney (and of course in 2012 they hated him, too.) They treated Obama like a Saint too. Thr BS about his biggest scandal was wearing a tan suit perfectly illustrates both the warped perspective of thr online left and dems generally- it was talked about for like a day by a few people on twitter and then they have the temerity to say his administration was "scandal free." Wrong on all counts. WP is owned by Bezos and NYT are neoliberal conservative. You’ve pushed the Overton window so far right that neoliberalism is no longer seen as conservative. It is conservative though. Trump raves like a lunatic, Biden doesn’t. It was right to question Trump, he launched a coup attempt. Hunter’s laptop story still makes no sense, the provenance was a lie and they still haven’t been able to actually produce a laptop. Russia did intervene in the election and the Trump campaign did meet with Russian agents inappropriately, read the damn Mueller report. You’ve lost your grip on reality.
Sorry, I didn't realize we were doing this thing again where you define yourself into being correct. If I had known that I would have stopped. It's my bad really for having bad pattern recognition. Tho of course by your definition it's still possible for those publications to have a pro-dem slant, which is what I said 
The laptop is Hunter's, that's been verified multiple times now.
For the proposes of this media discussion, I will just day that the truth of Russiagate didn't live up to the hype, which is my point.
On January 05 2023 02:31 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2023 02:17 Introvert wrote:On January 05 2023 00:55 KwarK wrote:On January 04 2023 23:55 Introvert wrote:On January 04 2023 17:55 KwarK wrote:On January 04 2023 11:36 Introvert wrote:Except Reagan was just about the only person who followed that rule, and even then not always. Since at least 2010, and certainly the 2012 in presidential primary fight, this rule hasn't been honored. And of course Trump abandoned it entirely. Additionally, every party out of power makes it their primary goal to stop the other party. This is especially true in the House, where being in the minority most of the times means you get nothing at all. The GOP's biggest achievements of the last two decades when they've had control are a few tax bills. Nothing else they run on can they get a consensus. The real reason so many people think this is because it's in the political interest of Democrats to say it, and they have the media megaphone. As for what's happening now, despite their claims otherwise I can't see any Republican allowing a Democrat speaker, THAT would be an instant primary loss. Even if McCarthy were to dangle some goodies to dems, it would be risky. It might weaken his position with his caucus even further, but it could snap some GOP objectors back into line. Anyways, if this gets resolved in not too long it will be nothing but a footnote to the start of what was going to be a turbulent term regardless. Why would you make such as easily disprovable claim as the Democratic Party controlling the media? Did you expect it to go unnoticed or did you just not care about truth? Or perhaps most people here know I don't mean they literally control it, they are just on the same side. The leeway afforded one side is way out of proportion. Maybe you disagree with that too but of course I've said for years the Trump term in office proved that beyond doubt and if it hasn't there's no convincing someone otherwise. Y’all have the biggest newspapers, the most watched cable news, all the local news affiliates, and the most listened to radio shows. The idea that the media is against conservatives is pure persecution fetishism. It’s privately owned by a bunch of multibillionaires who profit hugely from conservatives tax policies. I second much of what oBlade says, but places like the NYT, WP, etc have a distinct pro-dem slant meanwhile much of conservative media a closed ecosystem. If it was just who had the most listened/read publications we wouldn't have suffered through 2 years of Russiagate insanity or had the entire Hunter Biden laptop dismissed as a Russian op and suppressed, when it was obvious it was his the whole time. Or the treatment of Trump's mental abilities va Biden's when Biden is even older and obviously even more dull than he was before, etc. I don't mean to have this conversation for the umpteenth time because of course claiming thr media is too friendly to Republicans is an insane but real belief almost every Dem holds. But that just goes along with their general hysteria about anyone to the right of Mitt Romney (and of course in 2012 they hated him, too.) They treated Obama like a Saint too. Thr BS about his biggest scandal was wearing a tan suit perfectly illustrates both the warped perspective of thr online left and dems generally- it was talked about for like a day by a few people on twitter and then they have the temerity to say his administration was "scandal free." Wrong on all counts. Talk about selective memory. The Tan Suit thing was blasted on media outlets for several days, including multiple talk shows and several 24-hour news outlets. This includes CNN, FOX, and many local news stations.
Even assuming that's true, thr idea that it was Obama's biggest scandal just demonstrates how kindly he was treated.
On January 05 2023 02:36 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2023 02:17 Introvert wrote:On January 05 2023 00:55 KwarK wrote:On January 04 2023 23:55 Introvert wrote:On January 04 2023 17:55 KwarK wrote:On January 04 2023 11:36 Introvert wrote:Except Reagan was just about the only person who followed that rule, and even then not always. Since at least 2010, and certainly the 2012 in presidential primary fight, this rule hasn't been honored. And of course Trump abandoned it entirely. Additionally, every party out of power makes it their primary goal to stop the other party. This is especially true in the House, where being in the minority most of the times means you get nothing at all. The GOP's biggest achievements of the last two decades when they've had control are a few tax bills. Nothing else they run on can they get a consensus. The real reason so many people think this is because it's in the political interest of Democrats to say it, and they have the media megaphone. As for what's happening now, despite their claims otherwise I can't see any Republican allowing a Democrat speaker, THAT would be an instant primary loss. Even if McCarthy were to dangle some goodies to dems, it would be risky. It might weaken his position with his caucus even further, but it could snap some GOP objectors back into line. Anyways, if this gets resolved in not too long it will be nothing but a footnote to the start of what was going to be a turbulent term regardless. Why would you make such as easily disprovable claim as the Democratic Party controlling the media? Did you expect it to go unnoticed or did you just not care about truth? Or perhaps most people here know I don't mean they literally control it, they are just on the same side. The leeway afforded one side is way out of proportion. Maybe you disagree with that too but of course I've said for years the Trump term in office proved that beyond doubt and if it hasn't there's no convincing someone otherwise. Y’all have the biggest newspapers, the most watched cable news, all the local news affiliates, and the most listened to radio shows. The idea that the media is against conservatives is pure persecution fetishism. It’s privately owned by a bunch of multibillionaires who profit hugely from conservatives tax policies. I second much of what oBlade says, but places like the NYT, WP, etc have a distinct pro-dem slant meanwhile much of conservative media a closed ecosystem. If it was just who had the most listened/read publications we wouldn't have suffered through 2 years of Russiagate insanity or had the entire Hunter Biden laptop dismissed as a Russian op and suppressed, when it was obvious it was his the whole time. Or the treatment of Trump's mental abilities va Biden's when Biden is even older and obviously even more dull than he was before, etc. I don't mean to have this conversation for the umpteenth time because of course claiming thr media is too friendly to Republicans is an insane but real belief almost every Dem holds. But that just goes along with their general hysteria about anyone to the right of Mitt Romney (and of course in 2012 they hated him, too.) They treated Obama like a Saint too. Thr BS about his biggest scandal was wearing a tan suit perfectly illustrates both the warped perspective of thr online left and dems generally- it was talked about for like a day by a few people on twitter and then they have the temerity to say his administration was "scandal free." Wrong on all counts. "Russiagate" is real, both the Mueller report and later the Republican Senate intelligence committee proved it. Russia interfered in the election and the Trump campaign talking to them are established facts in the real world. The Hunter laptop is dismissed because there is nothing. they had it for god knows how long, and the Republicans had control of the government AND NOTHING HAPPENED. The could have charged someone, they could have investigated something. Not even the Republicans believe in it, that is how fake and tainted it is. After 2? years all they have are some dick pics. Everyone questions Trumps sanity because he can't form coherent sentences and has done bizarre things almost on a weekly basis. It feels like a new book from a 'former Trump White House staffer' comes out atleast once a month that once again highlights how insane and out of touch Trump was/is. Anything else long since debunked you want to try and propose?
What was clear pretty early was that it was actually Hunter’s, but what isn't as clear is how much of what he wrote was true. Yet the whole thing was dismissed before even checking. They needed to help Biden, do they doubted even it's ownership long after that was established.
|
Or that Obama wasn't generating a new scandal every week..?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/mpAH7r2.png)
