Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiffCo99
Trump drew first blood, respectfully. There is a social contract at bar and he violated it. The main stream press drew between the lines until he went full dictator.
Your argument is tantamount to saying 'they should let him slit their throats for telling the truth' and thats not something a sane, intelligent person would consider realistic.
Additionally, and this was one of the first post-election realities the press confronted, they actually said point blank that they were responsible for this debacle by never once taking him seriously or honestly covering his festival of xenophobic madness in real time.
They made a joke of him and it went over middle america's heads.
And they accepted a measure of responsibility for that.
Obviously anyone who views Trump in a positive light is not going to agree with that agenda, but "finally someone is in power who is as simple minded as I am" isnt a functional social mandate and as such, cannot be considered a valid argument against the press defending itself from someone who has no business molding the future of a democracy.
Also the MSM is the new Fox, is the analogy youre looking for, and the fact that Fox itself is on their side should tell you exactly how indoctrinated you.
Trump originally had no agenda against the media. If they had buttered his ass he would have loved them in kind. But they were super critical of him in unprecedented fashionand he verbally attacked them in reply.Quote:
Originally Posted by sonatineQuote:
Originally Posted by BiffCo99
Trump drew first blood, respectfully. There is a social contract at bar and he violated it. The main stream press drew between the lines until he went full dictator.
Your argument is tantamount to saying 'they should let him slit their throats for telling the truth' and thats not something a sane, intelligent person would consider realistic.
I personally think the MSM went too far going after him in an obvious partisan fashion. That being said, he is also clearly a crook who has no business being President, but I do think the media took it a little too much upon themselves to make it their mission to thwart the will of the American people, with a partisan full court press agains their elected president.
I think this is going to set a very bad precedent where next time there is a Democrat president the right wing entertainment/media is going to have a field day going after them, and justify it by saying they are just doing the same thing as the MSM did with Trump.
Whether they were responsible for the debacle, I think they are going way too far to try to "fix things" by trying to push him out of office, which they have been doing since day 1. I think their "solution" is just making things worse.Quote:
Originally Posted by sonatine
He made a written reply to the article, in the NYT, I'm assuming? If they printed his reply, that is all that is required of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by verminaardWell, in this case it is pretty cut and dry. Jordan Peterson made a written reply to the article. He basically said the reporter knew exactly what he meant and purposefully twisted his words to fit her narrative. I listen to Jordan Peterson a lot, and he kinda just repeats the same stuff over and over, and his version (which doesn't match what the reporter wrote) is consistent with what he always says, so I am inclined to believe him.Quote:
Originally Posted by limitles
Also, one thing you will not find is the NYT acknowledging that Peterson wrote a concise, articulate reply saying the reporter was being dishonest. Because they aren't in the business of reporting the truth. They are in the business of pushing their own narrative.
He also said the entire 2 days they were together the reporter was very cordial with him and they talked about a lot of stuff in a respectful fashion. He said when she wrote the article she completely changed and got very confrontational and judgmental, and on top of that she ignored 95% of what he said and just focused on pushing her own narrative, which covered about 5 minutes of their 2 day conversation. Basically a straight ambush.
Beyond that it's a he says she says debate.
If you haven't heard the reporters side of things you can't just assume Peterson is telling the truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by verminaardWhether they were responsible for the debacle, I think they are going way too far to try to "fix things" by trying to push him out of office, which they have been doing since day 1. I think their "solution" is just making things worse.Quote:
Originally Posted by sonatine
For a bit, yes. The alternative is morally/ethically unacceptable however.
Also lets be honest when they Article 25 him, its not going to be the press who gets blamed.
The only problem with your thinking is that Jordan Peterson spends about 50 hours a week doing various podcasts, interviews and speaking gigs saying exactly what he thinks. So if you listen to him (which I do) it is pretty clear and unambiguous what he thinks and it is very obvious when someone is mischaracterizing him, which is exactly what happened in this case, and most other cases when the MSM goes after him.Quote:
Originally Posted by limitlesHe made a written reply to the article, in the NYT, I'm assuming? If they printed his reply, that is all that is required of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by verminaard
Beyond that it's a he says she says debate.
If you haven't heard the reporters side of things you can't just assume Peterson is telling the truth.
I don’t rely upon the “MSM” to learn how Jordan Peterson lies to advance his agenda.Quote:
Originally Posted by verminaardThe only problem with your thinking is that Jordan Peterson spends about 50 hours a week doing various podcasts, interviews and speaking gigs saying exactly what he thinks. So if you listen to him (which I do) it is pretty clear and unambiguous what he thinks and it is very obvious when someone is mischaracterizing him, which is exactly what happened in this case, and most other cases when the MSM goes after him.Quote:
Originally Posted by limitles
https://youtu.be/xb3oh3dhnoM
https://youtu.be/9NGkZeIFSu0
And when he doesn’t outright lie, he dissembles in some pretty shady and dishonest ways.
‘What I’m Doing Is Not Political. It’s Psychological … And It’s Working’
https://www.politico.com/magazine/st...tico-50-219620
Which is utter bullshit. Peterson knows that Trump is authoritarian but doesn’t want to alienate any of his Trumptard fans who might get pissed at him for saying so.Quote:
Robertson: What is the key difference between a personality that is self-actualized and assertive in the way in which you hope to lead your readers, and an overly authoritarian personality like Trump’s? Where does a man’s psyche—
Peterson: Well, first of all, it’s not clear that Trump has an authoritarian personality. I would say that he has the personality of a salesman. He’s extremely extroverted and assertive, and somewhat disagreeable. But that isn’t the hallmark of a classic authoritarian, because classic authoritarians tend to be extremely orderly. So whatever Trump might be, it’s not obvious that he’s a classic authoritarian.
...
Robertson: How would you characterize his illiberal tendencies, if not as authoritarian? What do you think would be a better word for that?
Peterson: Which tendencies?
Robertson: To dispense with court rulings, et cetera ...
Peterson: Well, you know, I’m really not that interested in addressing Trump’s idiosyncrasies and peculiarities. I’m not a domain expert in American politics, and I don’t think what I have to say about Trump, apart from what I can observe psychologically—which is that criticisms of him as a classic authoritarian are misguided—I don’t think I have many things to say that are interesting about him.
And the there’s the “What is true” debate with Sam Harris in which Peterson puts forward an utterly flawed argument for what constitutes what is true in order to promote his claim that Christianity is the best belief system that human beings should have.
https://youtu.be/AwXAB6cICG0
https://youtu.be/Wd6FgYbMffk
i hate trump but love jordan peterson. his fan base is a lot more than just right wingers
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wLCmDtCDAM&t=362s
did you not have access to tv or the internet when obama was in office? you don't think fox or breitbart was similarly negative in their coverage?Quote:
Originally Posted by verminaardTrump originally had no agenda against the media. If they had buttered his ass he would have loved them in kind. But they were super critical of him in unprecedented fashionand he verbally attacked them in reply.Quote:
Originally Posted by sonatine
I personally think the MSM went too far going after him in an obvious partisan fashion. That being said, he is also clearly a crook who has no business being President, but I do think the media took it a little too much upon themselves to make it their mission to thwart the will of the American people, with a partisan full court press agains their elected president.
I think this is going to set a very bad precedent where next time there is a Democrat president the right wing entertainment/media is going to have a field day going after them, and justify it by saying they are just doing the same thing as the MSM did with Trump.
if your response is that the MSM is even more negative than fox or breitbart was during obama's term, i'm not sure that's true. but that assessment would also imply that trump is not more deserving of negative coverage, which he is.
the MSM hammers trump cause he appears to be a genuinely retarded person every time he speaks/tweets. how should the press cover that? it's not the MSM that drafted the NYTimes op ed saying that his cabinet considered the 25th Amendment.
So your main gripe is you don’t like the way he speaks in public? I’ve seen you take bits and pieces of his speeches and rip them to shreds. That was the favored tactic when W Bush was in office too. Yeah Trump rambles a lot but that’s what makes him awesome, he just don’t care.Quote:
Originally Posted by blakedid you not have access to tv or the internet when obama was in office? you don't think fox or breitbart was similarly negative in their coverage?Quote:
Originally Posted by verminaard
if your response is that the MSM is even more negative than fox or breitbart was during obama's term, i'm not sure that's true. but that assessment would also imply that trump is not more deserving of negative coverage, which he is.
the MSM hammers trump cause he appears to be a genuinely retarded person every time he speaks/tweets. how should the press cover that? it's not the MSM that drafted the NYTimes op ed saying that his cabinet considered the 25th Amendment.
And you can’t compare what Fox and Breitbart did to Obama to what’s happening right now. Trump is taking on the entirety of Network News on a national and LOCAL level, plus the entirety of social media which is a different animal these days than what Obama dealt with and is owned and operated by liberals, and the entire entertainment industry which includes star athletes!
What Obama faced from the media was nothing, they fawned over him. And when he did face any opposition he bristled just as hard as Trump does.
This just sums it all up
Quote:
Originally Posted by verminaard
i mean..... ok druffs radio show, breitbart, fox news, and what else exactly?
you have no obligation to respond to this guy who literally gets SHRIMP POKE LIKE AAAAAN IIIIDIOT
shut up lol wow you suck.
I'm hoping Trump just makes it the 4 years and then we can elect someone but I do not want this fuck head Pence just stepping into office cus the current president quit or gets impeached
awww what a great story
I was expecting something a little more homoerotic.Quote:
Originally Posted by lol wow
great writing tho almost like it really happened.
it's not so much what he says, as much as it is that only a person with a sub-80 IQ would say them. with this economy and his nationalist message, if he was even semi-literate, his approval rating would be over 60%+Quote:
Originally Posted by BiffCo99So your main gripe is you don’t like the way he speaks in public? I’ve seen you take bits and pieces of his speeches and rip them to shreds. That was the favored tactic when W Bush was in office too. Yeah Trump rambles a lot but that’s what makes him awesome, he just don’t care.Quote:
Originally Posted by blake
apparently his staffers send out texts with the hashtag #TFA (for the Twenty-Fifth Amendment) so that's normal.
Perfect example of Trumps fatal flaw. He is incapable of admitting he was wrong. Even convinced the show that 17 times 6 was 112. He is that stubborn people will believe anything he says. That is what makes him so scary. Guy would literally lead america into world war 3 convinced he wasn;t
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMIKzUAY8n4
As much as I despise Trump, I’m gonna give him a pass on this one, because he might have been transposing the 6 and 7 in the problem, meaning he was thinking 16 times 7, which is 112. And making that kind of mistake when *hearing* a question is not that uncommon.Quote:
Originally Posted by BetCheckBet
Also he was obviously distracted by that pretty girl next to him.Quote:
Originally Posted by MumblesBadlyAs much as I despise Trump, I’m gonna give him a pass on this one, because he might have been transposing the 6 and 7 in the problem, meaning he was thinking 16 times 7, which is 112. And making that kind of mistake when *hearing* a question is not that uncommon.Quote:
Originally Posted by BetCheckBet
it took me less than 5 seconds. How hard is it? 17x3=51x2=102
:wrongQuote:
Originally Posted by big dick
For the bolded part to be a proper equation, both parts on each side of the equal sign must be the same value. But your method and answer hint at the astounding power of the associative rule, as show here:
17 x 6 = 17 x (3 x 2) = (17 x 3) x 2 = 51 x 2 = 102.
And if Trump had mistakenly calculated the answer for 16 x 7 due to aural transposition of the 7 and 6, which isn’t an unusual mistake when being given a math problem verbally, then we can see why he answered the way he did:
16 x 7 = (2 x 8) x 7 = 2 x (8 x 7) = 2 x 56 = 112.
you know I am having trouble believing anything media has to say nowadays. after watching this i nsnot sure if Canada is going about NAFTA in the citizens best interest, very interesting video with some hard truths in it.
maybe we should let the baby have his bottle... like the Mexicans did.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jT8c2INpC4k&feature=share
no, please not you, do not watch American internet op ed'sQuote:
Originally Posted by Baron Von Strucker
this is how so many people below the 49th parallel have basically lost it.
Canadian media is a strong hold compared to the U.S. best teeth show.
The media in Canada is not considered a fake system.
It is held in high regard for a reason.
I'm a bit sick. You are suggesting the Canadian media is in line with American media
in that they are fake. Nothing could be more incorrect, on both sides of the border. You've bought into Trump's hyper scare tactics bullshit
Criticism[edit]
The New York Post has been criticized since the beginning of Murdoch's ownership for sensationalism, blatant advocacy, and conservative bias. In 1980, the Columbia Journalism Review stated "New York Post is no longer merely a journalistic problem. It is a social problem – a force for evil."[42]
Perhaps the most serious allegation against the Post is that it is willing to contort its news coverage to suit Murdoch's business needs, in particular that the paper has avoided reporting anything that is unflattering to the government of the People's Republic of China, where Murdoch has invested heavily in satellite television.[43]
Critics say that the Post allows its editorial positions to shape its story selection and news coverage. Former Post executive editor Steven D. Cuozzo has responded that the Post "broke the elitist media stranglehold on the national agenda."
According to a survey conducted by Pace University in 2004, the Post was rated the least-credible major news outlet in New York, and the only news outlet to receive more responses calling it "not credible" than credible (44% not credible to 39% credible).[44
Fmr Trump Lawyer John Dowd Told POTUS He’s ‘Disabled’
https://www.mediaite.com/tv/bob-wood...-hes-disabled/
this is normal
GDP (4.2) is now higher than unemployment (3.9). That hasn't happened in over 100 years.
God. King.
(((With a magic wand)))
I don't think the state of the economy is a referendum on Trump one way or another. That being said, my understanding is the unemployment rate numbers he keeps touting are pretty useless as an indicator of the strength of the economy. From what I understand, it only takes into account estimated number of people looking for jobs, so there are large swaths of the population that are unemployed and not even being counted. And it doesn't take into account underemployment, that is employment with no health insurance that lands you around or below the poverty line, which is what a lot of jobs are now, as we increasingly become a country of a small # of haves and a large number of have nots.Quote:
Originally Posted by devidee
Like I said, this trend started long before Trump and probably would be the same if Clinton was elected, so not a referendum on him one way or another.
You are assuming that Trump actually wants to make a deal with Canada. Frankly, that isn't part of his plan, as...Quote:
Originally Posted by Baron Von Strucker
(1) Hardly anyone was complaining about losing jobs to Canada (They tend to 'white like us') versus Mexico (They tend to NOT be 'white like us' and will work for 1/3 the wages), and
(2) Trump is likely following the Russian's covert directive to break the strong traditional ties with it's Western democratic allies and trading partners. And it also helps Trump make points with Saudi Arabia, who is a oil-producing competitor of Canada, as well as a target of Canada's civil rights crimes allegations.
(3) By making a marginally-better-than-NAFTA deal with Mexico but holding out for an even better deal with Canada, Trump builds his credibility as a savvy trade deal negotiator even his base. And the longer he lets Canada apparently twist in the wind, the better he will be able to laud his deal-negotiating skills to that base even if doing so ends up materially hurting US businesses that export a lot to Canada or rely upon imports from Canada-based suppliers at a high cost to change suppliers, before he can capitalize on that added cred in 2020.
also trump’s lawyer told him he was literally disabled so there’s that
Neither do the Obama-turned-Trump voters from Canton, Ohio, who recently participated in the focus group discussion mentioned in this report by Axios:Quote:
Originally Posted by verminaardI don't think the state of the economy is a referendum on Trump one way or another. That being said, my understanding is the unemployment rate numbers he keeps touting are pretty useless as an indicator of the strength of the economy. From what I understand, it only takes into account estimated number of people looking for jobs, so there are large swaths of the population that are unemployed and not even being counted. And it doesn't take into account underemployment, that is employment with no health insurance that lands you around or below the poverty line, which is what a lot of jobs are now, as we increasingly become a country of a small # of haves and a large number of have nots.Quote:
Originally Posted by devidee
Like I said, this trend started long before Trump and probably would be the same if Clinton was elected, so not a referendum on him one way or another.
https://youtu.be/rg48Q-E2j6g
In Ohio, voters who switched from Obama to Trump keep holding out for change - Axios
https://www.axios.com/ohio-focus-gro...ea1350139.html
The article has some more interesting political tidbits to digest. I’ll let you explore them on your own.Quote:
Between the lines: On paper, Obama-Trump voters think America is moving in the right direction, citing things like new trade agreements and low unemployment rates. But they told a different story when asked to elaborate:
They think President Trump has failed at "draining the swamp." They think the Trump administration is corrupt. They don't think the GOP tax law has helped them and their families. And they're not feeling the "booming" economy.
Take Dustin Gardner, a 30-year-old Obama-Trump voter who said he's still living paycheck-to-paycheck and would vote for Clinton if given a do-over.
"He's backed out on so many of his promises," Gardner, who works at O'Reilly Auto Parts, told me. "Like trying to bring back the jobs to America, that would've been fantastic. There's a lot of manufacturing jobs, but the wages just aren't there."
No shit this is strange, and significant to his mental state.Quote:
Originally Posted by sonatine
Why would you fist pump like that getting off a plane at such a somber ceremony?
Even the fanboys must find this kinda weird.
melania looks like she literally wants to vanish.
That is literally one of the greatest photos of all time
The god king needs to get his jackets hemmed up a little more that thing is halfway down his thighs but otherwise iconic
Quote:
Originally Posted by lol wow
there was an article about how he has to wear weirdly tailored clothes now because a) he has to wear a bullet proof vest 24/7 and b) he's way past morbidly obese.
I am genuinely curious what he was thinking about to cause that face.
I seriously doubt it had anything to do with 9/11 so let’s not get sanctimonious about that.