Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

2020 US Presidential Election (aka: The Trump Coronation)

Options
1…131132134136137…331

Comments

  • Options
    #3992
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    weisses wrote: »
    I'm shocked ... Fox news broadcasting factual correct statements .... I assume you don't know what viciously attacking someone is in that context ???

    Let me give you an example ... Accusing someone of murder without a shred of evidence via Twitter ...... You get the jest right ??
    Wow, so those news outlets viscous attacks on Trump don't count because Fox News had the audacity to show them. That's some weird stuff, there.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #3993
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users Posts: 14,375 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Oops. Now I'm going to pick on your semantics.

    Trump didn't accuse Joe Scarborough of murder.

    When you find yourself defending Trump's tweets on Scarborough, it's time to take a look in the mirror.


  • Options
    #3994
    B00MSTICK
    Registered Users Posts: 1,917 ✭✭✭B00MSTICK


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Trump uses Twitter perfectly. In the past republicans had to deal and placate to the democrat loving mainstream media in order to get any positive stories and information out. Twitter allows Trump to bypass the biased media who hates him, and go directly to the public in a humorous and informative manner. And it causing the democrat’s media handmaidens heads to collectively explode.

    Trump is probably is somewhat of a political genius because he has done something that no other republican was able to accomplish before him... get his message out without the biased and hateful media middleman. He has taught republicans how to fight in the modern era. Not bad for a political novice... Not bad at all.

    I won't deny that some media outlets will suppress any positive stories around Trump and focus on the negatives but again he is the victim of his own actions.

    If he solely used Twitter to post the positive and factual events and didn't just constantly brain-fart on it he'd be much better off.
    His Twitter his feed would basically be "Economy reaches new heights..." "Just signed a massive new deal with XXXXX". There's nothing any biased media can really go after there...

    So certainly a new medium to get a message across without it being censored or suppressed, but if you're a fool and your "message" is completely nonfactual then you should expect to be crucified.


  • Options
    #3995
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,438 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Gee thanks Brian.

    You're welcome, I'm always happy to educate and inform.

    But as I said, I was referring to the "polls" that were reported on and broadcast on telly. So the polls that people saw on the vast vast majority of their traditional media were wrong as they were reported on falsely/incorrectly.

    Bizarre how they all managed to get it wrong when you've made it clear you'd be deluded not to see such a statistical toss up.

    They were telling people Hillary was definitely getting in. That's where most people get traditionally get their news from. That's my point.

    Not every person is as clued in as you Brian. When their go-to news reports and news papers are telling them that Clinton is the next president, a lot of people have no reason to doubt them and check poll aggregates

    A lot of people should cop themselves on and inform themselves.

    Again the polls were not wrong. The way people interpreted them were. Some people mind you, not everyone was. Even Michael Moore predicted a Trump win.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Options
    #3996
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,602 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Yes, in some ways Twitter IS like Boards. Here, you can get unfairly targeted and banned for claiming things (because you have the audacity to read other media than the likes of the Washington Post, The NY Times, MSLSD or CNN) that prove out to be true... Like the Trump campaign was spied upon.

    Playing the victim

    Straight outta the Trump playbook :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #3997
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,438 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Oops. Now I'm going to pick on semantics.

    Trump didn't accuse Joe Scarborough of murder.

    I wasn't being semantic. You were simply wrong. I wasn't not picking at the language you used, your point was wrong.

    Oh, and that's exactly what Trump did.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Options
    #3998
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    When you find yourself defending Trump's tweets on Scarborough, it's time to take a look in the mirror.

    Pointing out that something isn't true is not defending someone. It's pointing out a mistake or a lie.

    Just mad that people are banging on about fact checking then claiming trump was telling people to inject bleach and accusing people of murder.

    Trump has said and done enough to allow people to give out about him, but when you make up **** or exaggerate it, it's unnecessary and somewhat invalidates your criticism.


  • Options
    #3999
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Brian? wrote: »
    I wasn't being semantic. You were simply wrong. I wasn't not picking at the language you used, your point was wrong.

    Oh, and that's exactly what Trump did.

    I wasn't. But it's ok. We seem to be missing each others point. That can happen.

    Did he? Can you please show me where? I must have missed the tweet


  • Options
    #4000
    peddlelies
    Closed Accounts Posts: 840 ✭✭✭peddlelies


    Zuckerberg has come out and said that it's a mistake to do what twitter did, and he's right.

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/may/28/zuckerberg-facebook-police-online-speech-trump


  • Options
    #4001
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Brian? wrote: »
    You're welcome, I'm always happy to educate and inform.



    A lot of people should cop themselves on and inform themselves.

    Again the polls were not wrong. The way people interpreted them were. Some people mind you, not everyone was. Even Michael Moore predicted a Trump win.

    A lot of people do believe they are informing themselves by watching the news or various news outlets. They had graphics showing anywhere between a 70-99% chance of Clinton winning.

    So the reporting on the polls was wrong/dishonest/misleading. That was my point. Which I have tried to explain a few times. Sorry about that.

    I'll be sure to contact you and Michael Moore come November.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4002
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,438 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    I wasn't. But it's ok. We seem to be missing each others point. That can happen.

    Did he? Can you please show me where? I must have missed the tweet

    No. I understand your point. It was wrong though.

    You know well what tweets I'm talking about. No need to be facetious.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Options
    #4003
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,438 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    A lot of people do believe they are informing themselves by watching the news or various news outlets. They had graphics showing anywhere between a 70-99% chance of Clinton winning.

    So the reporting on the polls was wrong/dishonest/misleading. That was my point. Which I have tried to explain a few times. Sorry about that.

    I'll be sure to contact you and Michael Moore come November.

    I'll do my prediction now. Trump to be 're elected while losing the popular vote.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Options
    #4004
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users Posts: 14,375 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    peddlelies wrote: »
    Zuckerberg has come out and said that it's a mistake to do what twitter did, and he's right.

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/may/28/zuckerberg-facebook-police-online-speech-trump

    So twitter and facebook should continue disseminating fake news and hate speech. Okie dokie.


  • Options
    #4005
    peddlelies
    Closed Accounts Posts: 840 ✭✭✭peddlelies


    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    So twitter and facebook should continue disseminating fake news and hate speech. Okie dokie.

    You should like your wan off channel 4. "So what you're saying is"

    Did you stop for a second and think how much "fake news" was spread about Russian collusion on social media platforms and the blue check marks? People made careers out of it like that Seth Abraham guy. No you likely didn't.


  • Options
    #4006
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    So twitter and facebook should continue disseminating fake news and hate speech. Okie dokie.

    They can choose to merely be a provider of legal user comments or they can choose to be an editor of content. They can’t choose to be both and hope to be free from libel charges.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #4007
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,602 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    one world order wrote: »
    Fact checked by CNN lies. Mail in voting is open to corruption, anyone can see that. Social media outlets have been coordinating together to take down conservative videos and posts in advance of the election in November. The mass produced MSM has been corrupt for a very long time as they have a left agenda and they distort the truth.

    Jaysus if you had just thrown in an auld MAGA there I would have had 2 lines in my Trump bingo card :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #4008
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,438 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    notobtuse wrote: »
    They can choose to merely be a provider of legal user comments or they can choose to be an editor of content. They can’t choose to be both and hope to be free from libel charges.

    Who’s content are they editing?

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Options
    #4009
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,602 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Wow, so those news outlets viscous attacks on Trump don't count because Fox News had the audacity to show them. That's some weird stuff, there.

    Puts him in a bit of a sticky situation I guess :D


  • Options
    #4010
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Brian? wrote: »
    No. I understand your point. It was wrong though.

    You know well what tweets I'm talking about. No need to be facetious.

    I do know what tweets you are talking about. I understand your point. It is wrong though


  • Options
    #4011
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Brian? wrote: »
    Who’s content are they editing?
    Trumps.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4012
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,438 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    I do know what tweets you are talking about. I understand your point. It is wrong though

    How clever

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Options
    #4013
    duploelabs
    Registered Users Posts: 11,461 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Trumps.

    How were Trump's tweets changed?


  • Options
    #4014
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,438 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Trumps.

    I really don’t think they were. A caveat was added, nothing he said was edited.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Options
    #4015
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,657 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    Brian? wrote: »
    Who’s content are they editing?
    notobtuse wrote: »
    Trumps.

    Did they remove or change a single word he posted??

    Or did they just add a link under the tweet? - Not really "editing"

    And anyway, the link itself actually looks like it's just supporting Trumps position

    TM5piv2.jpg

    It's only when you click on the link you see anything , it's actually a really weak censure to be honest.

    As an aside - Does the man do ANY actual work ???

    I went looking for the above tweet and scrolled through his tweets.

    Whilst I didn't do a full count he must have tweeted/retweeted 50+ times in the last 24 hours or so.

    Does he not have , you know - A Day job!!??!


  • Options
    #4016
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,438 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Wow, so those news outlets viscous attacks on Trump don't count because Fox News had the audacity to show them. That's some weird stuff, there.

    None of those were even attacks, never mind vicious attacks.

    You must be very thin skinned.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Options
    #4017
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    duploelabs wrote: »
    How were Trump's tweets changed?
    By tagging his tweet stating a warning “Get the facts about mail in ballots” and then when you click their alert it links you to... “Trump falsely claimed that mail-in ballots would lead to ‘a Rigged Election.’ However, fact-checkers say there is no evidence that mail-in ballots are linked to voter fraud,”

    “No evidence” is a false claim in the supposed 'fact-checking' by Twitter as there is evidence mail in ballots have been subject to voter fraud in the past.

    The same date Twitter flagged Trump there was a federal charge brought against a mail carrier for changing what was filled out on mail in ballots.

    So Twitter IS editing Trump’s post.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #4018
    DrumSteve
    Registered Users Posts: 10,798 ✭✭✭✭DrumSteve


    peddlelies wrote: »
    You should like your wan off channel 4. "So what you're saying is"

    Did you stop for a second and think how much "fake news" was spread about Russian collusion on social media platforms and the blue check marks? People made careers out of it like that Seth Abraham guy. No you likely didn't.

    I'm curious, as I follow Seth on twitter, what fake news did he peddle?


  • Options
    #4019
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Brian? wrote: »
    None of those were even attacks, never mind vicious attacks.

    You must be very thin skinned.
    Should I flag your post and provide an alert to warn readers that your comment is a lie because I FEEL they were in fact attacks and I'm not thin skinned? :p

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Options
    #4020
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 40,236 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    It would be hilarious if he was banned.

    We'd have to imagine the melt down, since his people won't allow him to have press conferences anymore since he went full Dotard.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4021
    Blueshoe
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,964 ✭✭✭Blueshoe


    Boggles wrote: »
    It would be hilarious if he was banned.

    We'd have to imagine the melt down, since his people won't allow him to have press conferences anymore since he went full Dotard.

    I would like to see him banned and all of his millions and millions of followers to leave twitter.

    Twitter would be out of business overnight if they lost that number of accounts. Advertising revenue would plummet. Stock price would plummet.
    Please ban him


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement