2020 the battle of the septuagenarians - Trump vs Biden, Part 2

Quin_Dub

Hector Savage wrote: »

I see the media are reporting that Trump is encouraging voter fraud .... a felony.

Oh no wait, he's proving a point how unreliable the mail in voting system is ...

Pity he couldn't prove that point in a court of law when his lawyers were asked to though.


So what's his plan? - Encourage his supporters to commit voter fraud and when they do and they get caught he'll shout "See!!! I told you there was voter fraud!!!"

namloc1980

Hector Savage wrote: »

I see the media are reporting that Trump is encouraging voter fraud .... a felony.

Oh no wait, he's proving a point how unreliable the mail in voting system is ...

I know this is hard to believe but the President of the United States actually did encourage voter fraud.....crazy right?

You do know that his legal team were asked to produce evidence of widespread mail in voting fraud in a court case in Pennsylvania as they claimed and couldn't produce ANY evidence. None.

LessOutragePlz

duploelabs wrote: »

Where'd you get that 90% from?

Myself?

duploelabs

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

Myself?

So you don't know definitively that it's 90%, do you not realise how susceptible you are to being coerced?

Leroy42

Hector Savage wrote: »

I see the media are reporting that Trump is encouraging voter fraud .... a felony.

Oh no wait, he's proving a point how unreliable the mail in voting system is ...

And offering up absolutely nothing to fix it, if it even is broken.

So basically, he has thrown up an idea, as if it was actually true, but he is actually in a position to have got all the required evidence from each state.

But as we have seen, it appears that Trump supporters don't actually expect Trump to actually solve any problems.

LessOutragePlz

duploelabs wrote: »

So you don't know definitively that it's 90%, do you not realise how susceptible you are to being coerced?

Of course it's a possibility but I believe that they are a trustworthy news source.

namloc1980

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

Of course it's a possibility but I believe that they are a trustworthy news source.

How do you distinguish between the 90% that you say you trust as unbiased and the 10% of stories pushing a certain agenda?

Billy Mays

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

I get a lot of my news from YouTube.

I watch:

Liberal Hivemind
Steven Crowder
Ben Shapiro
Fleccas Talks
Barely Informed with Elad
Slightly Offens*ve
The Hodgetwins
Liberty Hangout
Tim Pool
Mark Dice

No wonder you swallow that "land of the free, home of the brave" bullsh!t if this is the sort of stuff you're watching

LessOutragePlz

namloc1980 wrote: »

How do you distinguish between the 90% that you say you trust as unbiased and the 10% of stories pushing a certain agenda?

See what other news sources are saying in relation to the event/story being reported and decide whether a bias may or may not exist.

LessOutragePlz

Billy Mays wrote: »

No wonder you swallow that "land of the free, home of the brave" bullsh!t if this is the sort of stuff you're watching

I find the content that they produce very informative and entertaining.

Leroy42

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

See what other news sources are saying in relation to the event/story being reported and decide whether a bias may or may not exist.

You already know a bias exists, you happen to have made up a figure of 10%.

But what 10%? And which stories?

And does that include the omission of stories?

LessOutragePlz

Leroy42 wrote: »

You already know a bias exists, you happen to have made up a figure of 10%.

But what 10%? And which stories?

And does that include the omission of stories?

The previous poster asked how I distinguish between the 90% and the 10% that's how I do it.

Don't really know what your asking me.

Not it doesn't include the omission of stories especially MSM stories.

duploelabs

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

See what other news sources are saying in relation to the event/story being reported and decide whether a bias may or may not exist.

Decide? On what parameters? What makes you adjudicate whether there is bias or not?

LessOutragePlz

duploelabs wrote: »

Decide? On what parameters? What makes you adjudicate whether there is bias or not?

My own personal judgement and also Twitter sometimes helps me in adjudicating whether there is bias or not.

mcmoustache

Hector Savage wrote: »

I see the media are reporting that Trump is encouraging voter fraud .... a felony.

Oh no wait, he's proving a point how unreliable the mail in voting system is ...

I get that you like Trump but read what you wrote out loud and tell me that it doesn't sound stupid.

Leroy42

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

The previous poster asked how I distinguish between the 90% and the 10% that's how I do it.

Don't really know what your asking me.

Not it doesn't include the omission of stories especially MSM stories.

But if you already think the MSM is biased then anything that disagrees with your usual channels will simply be classed as fake. Not sure how you can use such a system to determine if your 'real' sources are telling the truth.

Omission is another major item. Failing to detail out the growing deficit, whilst telling you all about the growing economy will of course lead you to believe that Trump is doing a wonderful job.

Telling you that positive cases are going down, but failing to tell you that testing has also been massively reduced is not telling you the full story.

duploelabs

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

My own personal judgement and also Twitter sometimes helps me in adjudicating whether there is bias or not.

You literally are describing what could be a case study of Cognitive bias?

LessOutragePlz

duploelabs wrote: »

You literally are describing what could be a case study of Cognitive bias?

If it means that I don't get exposed to the fake news of the MSM then I'm happy.

LessOutragePlz

Leroy42 wrote: »

But if you already think the MSM is biased then anything that disagrees with your usual channels will simply be classed as fake. Not sure how you can use such a system to determine if your 'real' sources are telling the truth.

Omission is another major item. Failing to detail out the growing deficit, whilst telling you all about the growing economy will of course lead you to believe that Trump is doing a wonderful job.

Telling you that positive cases are going down, but failing to tell you that testing has also been massively reduced is not telling you the full story.

Who decides what stories should or shouldn't be omitted?

Who decides if a story is unbiased or not?

And who facts check the fact checkers?

namloc1980

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

If it means that I don't get exposed to the fake news of the MSM then I'm happy.

Spoken like a true MAGA devotee.

Cody montana

Cody montana wrote: »

The Congressional Budget Office projects the federal deficit will reach $3.3 trillion in 2020 under Trump’s mismanagement.

The federal deficit was $597 billion in 2016.

Tis going well.

The U.S. trade deficit surged in July to $63.6 billion, the highest level in 12 years, as imports jumped by a record amount. The Commerce Department reported that the July deficit was 18.9% higher than the June deficit.

Didn't he promise something different?

Quin_Dub

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

If it means that I don't get exposed to the fake news of the MSM then I'm happy.

Otherwise described as "As long as I stay in my bubble , I'm happy"

Basically sticking your fingers in your ears and saying "lalalalalala"

namloc1980

Cody montana wrote: »

The U.S. trade deficit surged in July to $63.6 billion, the highest level in 12 years, as imports jumped by a record amount. The Commerce Department reported that the July deficit was 18.9% higher than the June deficit.

Didn't he promise something different?

Been running large monthly trade deficits for years:



Trump promised to eliminate it. Another Trump failure to deliver a key campaign promise from his 1st term.

salmocab

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

If it means that I don't get exposed to the fake news of the MSM then I'm happy.

How do you know it’s fake if your getting no exposure to it? Are you just believing other sources that tell you it’s fake?

LessOutragePlz

salmocab wrote: »

How do you know it’s fake if your getting no exposure to it? Are you just believing other sources that tell you it’s fake?

Pretty much if I'm told it's fake news then I'm going to believe that it's fake news.

Cody montana

namloc1980 wrote: »

Been running large monthly trade deficits for years:



Trump promised to eliminate it. Another Trump failure to deliver a key campaign promise from his 1st term.

"You will see a drop [in the trade deficit] like you’ve never seen before.”
Trump 30/06/16

salmocab

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

Pretty much if I'm told it's fake news then I'm going to believe that it's fake news.

Now I certainly believe that of you

Timberrrrrrrr

namloc1980 wrote: »

Spoken like a true MAGA devotee.

Who is probably glued to FOX "news" 24/7 365 :pac:

mcmoustache

It's hard to believe that with all this access to information at our fingertips, so many people choose to "inform" themselves by getting their "information" from talking heads with no regard for the truth. It's even got to a point in the US that over half of self-described Republicans think that QAnon is at least partly true.

Whatever happened to judging publications and journalists on their record for accuracy?

namloc1980

Mike Pence is being very dishonest about North Carolina numbers, not surprisingly. I mean sure if you ignore the whole Covid thing and the 190k dead people then everything is rosy!

.

In reality it's:

- 80,000 jobs lost since election Day
- 8.5% unemployment
- 6% increase in hourly earnings over 4 years (1.5% pa) when adjusted for inflation.

https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/SMS37000000000000001?amp%253bdata_tool=XGtable&output_view=data&include_graphs=true

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/SMU37000000500000003