2020 US Presidential Election (aka: The Trump Coronation)

DrumSteve

Tasfasdf wrote: »

The loony left have a racist as their candidate and still they defend him but but but Trump.

Honestly, Im presuming as an adult, you thought about that phrase before you wrote it.

The Loony Left... Jesus Christ, give me strength. This Trumpification of politics, please make it stop.

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

No he doesn't. I do have what YOU would consider right wing views and sometimes I do agree with Trump. I often disagree with him too.

I sometimes agree with Biden, but often disagree with him too.

Its just odd that it is only when speaking with people like you who automatically dismiss someone who doesn't agree with them on every topic as "the opposition".

It very rarely happens when I voice my concerns to trump supporters.

In my experience there are far more belligerent and intolerant left people than there are belligerent and intolerant right leaning people (far right and far left excluded - they are insufferable)

tolerant right wing people. LOL. thanks for the laugh

Timberrrrrrrr

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Did you report the tweet?

Personally no. I don't care about the tweet or fact checking of social media that much.

I was asking if people who do, would be equally ok if caveats were added to tweets like that or is it only the opposition that should be held accountable for lies.

DrumSteve

Deleted User wrote: »

It was not shoehorning in any way. We were talking about lies on twitter and I used the transwomen tweet as an example of left leaning opinions which aren't facts being given free reign.

Right leaning opinions are often shouted down as lies whereas left aren't.

I agree the president should be held to a higher standard, but there are people on here who feel that right and left opinions are treated equally. I was pointing out they aren't.

What has the acceptance of trans women got to do with left leaning political views?

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

tolerant right wing people. LOL. thanks for the laugh

My point proven in one post.

If you are right wing (i.e - not agreeing with all left principles) you are intolerant.

Amazing.

ELM327

Billy Mays wrote: »

Amazing how they call others racists given daddy's history of being racist

Amazing how women should always be believed unless they accuse biden isnt it.

ohnonotgmail

ELM327 wrote: »

Amazing how women should always be believed unless they accuse biden isnt it.

Tara reade has no credibility. why believe somebody with no credibility who keeps changing her story?

Timberrrrrrrr

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Personally no. I don't care about the tweet or fact checking of social media that much.

I was asking if people who do, would be equally ok if caveats were added to tweets like that or is it only the opposition that should be held accountable for lies.

So you're complaining that there are no fact checks added to that tweet but you don't know if the tweet has been reported?

Personally I couldn't care less if they added a fact check to that if they felt it was needed.

DrumSteve

DrumSteve wrote: »

What has the acceptance of trans women got to do with left leaning political views?

traditionally the acceptance and promotion of gender identity is predominantly more popular in left wing circles. I am in no way saying there aren't examples of right wing support for transgenderism, but in this particular case, the person who wrote this tweet is very left leaning.

I wondered if this person who is left leaning politically, should be pulled up for stating something as a fact

Timberrrrrrrr

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

So you're complaining that there are no fact checks added to that tweet but you don't know if the tweet has been reported?

Personally I couldn't care less if they added a fact check to that if they felt it was needed.

No timberrrrr, I wasn't complaining whatsoever. I was asking if certain people who go on about right wing lies and how often they are fact checked would admit that left wing opinions and statements aren't fact checked as often and are generally given a pass.

MeMen2_MoRi_

Tasfasdf wrote: »

As I said the loony left

Name calling=looney left?

Think old Donnie is maybe on the wrong spectrum of politics, he's some man for the name calling.

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Tara reade has no credibility. why believe somebody with no credibility who keeps changing her story?

Oh dear.

osarusan

Deleted User wrote: »

It was not shoehorning in any way. We were talking about lies on twitter and I used the transwomen tweet as an example of left leaning opinions which aren't facts being given free reign.

Right leaning opinions are often shouted down as lies whereas left aren't.

I agree the president should be held to a higher standard, but there are people on here who feel that right and left opinions are treated equally. I was pointing out they aren't.

David Icke still tweeting away.

The Institute for Creation Research ("Science confirms the Bible") still tweeting away.

Not that those are examples of 'rightwing' opinion, but as evidence that twitter lets lies of many hues go unvetted.

Does Twitter even have a fact-checking policy or ban people for telling lies? It doesn't look like it. How could they implement it with literally millions of tweets every day.

It's bizarre to say that Trump should be held to a higher standard than others, yet at the same time ask why the standard that Twitter has just decided to apply to him isn't being applied to others.

MeMen2_MoRi_

Tasfasdf wrote: »

As Sleepy Joe said "We cannot win this re-election. We can only re-elect Donald Trump."

This is the loonys lefts hopes to beat Trump

I think you also might be in the wrong spectrum of politics, come join us looney lefties and our merry band of name callers.

DrumSteve

osarusan wrote: »

David Icke still tweeting away.

The Institute for Creation Research ("Science confirms the Bible") still tweeting away.

Does Twitter even have a fact-checking policy or ban people for telling lies? It doesn't look like it. How could they implement it with literally millions of tweets every day.

It's bizarre to say that Trump should be held to a higher standard than others, yet at the same time ask why the standard that Twitter has just decided to apply to him isn't being applied to others.

Because he's the ****ing President of America and he's tweeting conspiracy theories about a girl dying.

Maybe if he didn't do stupid **** like that to distract from the crap job he's doing he wouldn't need to be fact checked.

Timberrrrrrrr

[Deleted User] wrote: »

No timberrrrr, I wasn't complaining whatsoever. I was asking if certain people who go on about right wing lies and how often they are fact checked would admit that left wing opinions and statements aren't fact checked as often and are generally given a pass.

Twitter will not check every single post.

You have no way of knowing if that tweet had ever been reported so you have no way of knowing if it was "given a pass" or was just not reported.

Trumps tweet was reported thousands of times hence why Twitter looked at it, checked tonsee if it was true and decided it needed a fact check added to it.

Timberrrrrrrr

osarusan wrote: »

David Icke still tweeting away.

The Institute for Creation Research ("Science confirms the Bible") still tweeting away.

Does Twitter even have a fact-checking policy or ban people for telling lies? It doesn't look like it. How could they implement it with literally millions of tweets every day.

It's bizarre to say that Trump should be held to a higher standard than others, yet at the same time ask why the standard that Twitter has just decided to apply to him isn't being applied to others.

Have either of those accounts accused an innocent man if murder?

Guy:Incognito

ELM327 wrote: »

Amazing how women should always be believed unless they accuse biden isnt it.

All the way through the thread, the closest any of you can get to credibly explaining away any of what Trump does or says is by coming up with a mild example of what someone on "the left" has done similar. The fact that it's not even all from the same person in response to Trumps long list of ****ty stuff alone says a lot.

All that shows is that you know hes a ****ty person and a liar , but you'll ignore it all because hes (currently) a Republican. You people need to sit down and have a think about why you dislike yourselves so much to go on like that.

Timberrrrrrrr

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Twitter will not check every single post.

You have no way of knowing if that tweet had ever been reported so you have no way of knowing if it was "given a pass" or was just not reported.

Trumps tweet was reported thousands of times hence why Twitter looked at it, checked tonsee if it was true and decided it needed a fact check added to it.

My point was (haphazardly framed I admit), that left leaning social media users and left leaning politicians are not put under the same scrutiny.

I admit, it wasn't the best example and I later clarified that I wasn't comparing like for like. It wasn't a direct comparison of the tweets, but more like trying to point out that lies that support your own side are tolerated but that is not unique to either side. Some posters here seem to believe that is is only the opposition that tolerate or turn a blind eye to lies.

Guy:Incognito

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

All the way through the thread, the closest any of you can get to credibly explaining away any of what Trump does or says is by coming up with a mild example of what someone on "the left" has done similar. The fact that it's not even al, from the same person in response to Trumps long list of ****ty stuff alone says a lot.

All that shows is that you know hes a ****ty person and a liar , but you'll ignore it all because hes (currently) a Republican. You people need to sit down and have a think about why you dislike yourselves so much to go on like that.

That's unfair and there are plenty of people doing exactly the same on the Biden side.

And the believing all women didn't start with trump. Women tend to believed as long as the accused is someone you dislike. It's hypocritical to the extreme.

Professor Moriarty

Deleted User wrote: »

Personally no. I don't care about the tweet or fact checking of social media that much.

I was asking if people who do, would be equally ok if caveats were added to tweets like that or is it only the opposition that should be held accountable for lies.

Personally, I'd have no problem with Biden's tweets being fact checked. I'm guessing Biden wouldn't have a problem either.

Professor Moriarty

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Personally, I'd have no problem with Biden's tweets being fact checked. I'm guessing Biden wouldn't have a problem either.

I doubt that Biden tweets for himself.

Professor Moriarty

Deleted User wrote: »

I doubt that Biden tweets for himself.

I'm 100% certain that he controls what is tweeted. My point remains. Biden would have no problem with his tweets being fact checked. Unlike the manchild.

Quin_Dub

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Personally, I'd have no problem with Biden's tweets being fact checked. I'm guessing Biden wouldn't have a problem either.

Indeed - The correct response from Trump should have been

"What do you mean 'Unproven' ? , here's a bunch of evidence that show's my concerns are valid"

But as he has no evidence he doesn't do that , he just makes utterly empty threats and displays once again his utter ignorance of the US Constitution and of the powers available to the President.

Professor Moriarty

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

I'm 100% certain that he controls what is tweeted. My point remains. Biden would have no problem with his tweets being fact checked. Unlike the manchild.

I honestly would have thought differently. Fair enough though, you seem confident.

Now without responding with "no more than the man hold" or "better than what is there", can you honestly say that you aren't a little concerned by Bidens public appearances and his ramblings about cockroaches and hairy legs?

Do you think he is fit for presidency? (Again, not in comparison to what is there, or whether you think trump has lowered the bar, just in general)

Guy:Incognito

Deleted User wrote: »

That's unfair and there are plenty of people doing exactly the same on the Biden side.

And the believing all women didn't start with trump. Women tend to believed as long as the accused is someone you dislike. It's hypocritical to the extreme.

It's not unfair in the slightest.

Trump has such a litany of lying and general ****ty behaviour it takes examples from multiple people for his supporters to counter with whataboutery even just taking his actions a week or so at a time.


Hes a ****ty person by anyone's metric. The fact that people dont even bother defending him but ignore what he does and have to use whataboutery to counter it speaks volumes about him and them.

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

I honestly would have thought differently. Fair enough though, you seem confident.

Now without responding with "no more than the man hold" or "better than what is there", can you honestly say that you aren't a little concerned by Bidens public appearances and his ramblings about cockroaches and hairy legs?

Do you think he is fit for presidency? (Again, not in comparison to what is there, or whether you think trump has lowered the bar, just in general)

compared to trump he is a mensa member.

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

compared to trump he is a mensa member.

Hahaha... Point proven.

Guy:Incognito

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

It's not unfair in the slightest.

Trump has such a litany of lying and general ****ty behaviour it takes examples from multiple people for his supporters to counter with whataboutery even just taking his actions a week or so at a time.


Hes a ****ty person by anyone's metric. The fact that people dont even bother defending him but ignore what he does and have to use whataboutery to counter it speaks volumes about him and them.

Again, I'm not defending trump, but merely pointing out that people from the other side are also using whataboutery.

Professor Moriarty

Deleted User wrote: »

I honestly would have thought differently. Fair enough though, you seem confident.

Now without responding with "no more than the man hold" or "better than what is there", can you honestly say that you aren't a little concerned by Bidens public appearances and his ramblings about cockroaches and hairy legs?

Do you think he is fit for presidency? (Again, not in comparison to what is there, or whether you think trump has lowered the bar, just in general)

I've seen a few mistakes but I don't yet think they make him unfit. But I think he's unfit for a different reason. Similar to Sanders, he's simply too old. Which is why his VP pick is vital.