US Politics

[T-72]

https://newrepublic.com/

totally not biased, go ahead, post some Vox and Salon 'analyses' next.









===========================

 

[RabzonKhan]

Kellyanne Conway by profession is a pollster, she knows what she's talking about, and those of you claiming polls are rigged, please, stop living in lala land.



Trump campaign admits he is lagging in race as Hillary Clinton aims to build on lead: US election briefing and polls

A top adviser to Donald Trump acknowledged on Sunday the Republican presidential candidate was lagging in the race to be president as polls put his rival Hillary Clinton further into the lead.

Even as his campaign manager Kellyanne Conway was admitting Mrs Clinton was ahead, the Republican nominee was blasting the media and boasting of "phenomenal" numbers.

"We are behind," Mr Trump's campaign manager Kellyanne Conway told NBC's "Meet the Press". But she added the Trump campaign was looking to sway undecided voters not ready to support Clinton.

An ABC News/Washington Post poll released on Sunday corroborated the findings of a study published earlier this week by the Monmouth University Polling Institute which showed Mrs Clinton leading Mr Trump 50 percent to 38 percent in a four-way contest with two minor party candidates. Link

@RabzonKhan :- I told you a long time back that North Carolina would be a swing state in this election Way before the Media started polling there.

If Arizona & Georgia can become Tossups,then North Carolina would have been one a long,long time back.

Frankly speaking,I think there is a chance that Trump could win Ohio & Florida. But still lose North Carolina!

I agree with you, check this out: Link

 

[anon45]

totally not biased, go ahead, post some Vox and Salon 'analyses' next.









===========================

Have you ever heard of the phrase 'Pot calling the kettle black'?

I look forward to November 4th. If I recall correctly you were predicting a Trump landslide on your banned account.

Since you don't trust the polls, the reality of it is gonna hit you like a freight train.



http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

 

[RabzonKhan]

Meanwhile Hillary keeps larping on about "it's the Russians, it's the Russians" without providing any proof but yet Trump is the conspiracy theorist?

Proof, here you go:


Joint DHS and ODNI Election Security Statement

Friday, October 07, 2016The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed therecent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations. The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process. Such activity is not new to Moscow—the Russians have used similar tactics and techniques across Europe and Eurasia, for example, to influence public opinion there. We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia's senior-most officials could have authorized these activities. Link
​

 

[Desert Fox]

Proof, here you go:


Joint DHS and ODNI Election Security Statement

Friday, October 07, 2016The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed therecent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations. The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process. Such activity is not new to Moscow—the Russians have used similar tactics and techniques across Europe and Eurasia, for example, to influence public opinion there. We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia's senior-most officials could have authorized these activities. Link
​

That's not proof, only speculation.

The same intelligence that said Saddam Hussein had WMD's . Not credible.

 

[T-72]

Have you ever heard of the phrase 'Pot calling the kettle black'?

Yes I have, what does that have to do with anything when I haven't been posting anything from Brietbart, Infowars or Hannity etc who are partisan and in the the tank for Trump whereas you have been posting articles from Vox etc

I look forward to November 4th.

What for ? You guys go to the polls on November 8th

If I recall correctly you were predicting a Trump landslide on your banned account.

Since you don't trust the polls, the reality of it is gonna hit you like a freight train.



http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

I am hoping for a Trump win, and am skeptical of polls that show her ahead by 10 or 12+ points, yes.

and while no freight train will hit me, it will, however, be sad to get off the Trump train if it runs out of fuel just short of the final destination.

 

[T-72]

Full Speech: Donald Trump Holds Rally in Tampa, FL

Full Speech: Donald Trump Rally in St. Augustine

 

[gambit]

That's not proof, only speculation.

The same intelligence that said Saddam Hussein had WMD's . Not credible.

The same intelligence that ALL the major nuclear powers AGREED regarding WMD in Iraq.

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=555

The National Intelligence Estimate of 2002, where their collective views were summarized, asserted with “high confidence” that "Iraq is continuing, and in some areas expanding its chemical, biological, nuclear, and missile programs contrary to UN resolutions.

The intelligence agencies of Britain, Germany, Russia, China, Israel, and France all agreed with this judgment.

Why is it that people continues to believe that Iraq's WMD intelligence were solely from the US ? Do they not know how to use the Internet ?

 

[T-72]

 

[LA se Karachi]

What I want is a media free from constraints of political issues. But at the same time, I want a responsible media as well. Just like how I want a President of the highest moral virtues, I want a media that is adversarial or even hostile to the government but is balanced in presenting all sides of an issue, including the government's side.

Again, I completely agree with you. Unfortunately, however, this seems to be an unrealistic goal. At the end of the day, media sources are corporations looking to make a profit. They will do whatever they believe will generate the highest ratings and the most revenue. It comes down to what people's preferences are. They aren't necessarily trying to be objective or responsible. They aren't incentivized to do that. They will tell the people what they want to hear, most of the time.

Why else do you think that Fox News continues to push its nonsense, even though it's clear to everyone that it is about as far removed from an honest and balanced media source as possible? They have cornered a particular demographic: old, white, and conservative. And as long as they continue to generate a healthy profit, they will never change.

Not to mention that some media sources accept private donations. And it also doesn't help that the FCC does very little to actually regulate the accuracy of American media.

There are those in the media who takes ethics beyond the acceptable...

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/should-journalists-abstain-from-voting/
Halperin is neither the first nor unique to abstain from voting while being an active journalist.

http://www.politico.com/story/2008/02/should-journalists-vote-yes-no-sometimes-008470

My take is that if an individual journalist can take his ethics to the extreme, that of self restraint from exercising his Constitutional right, surely a media corporation or even the larger media community can be objective with the same kind of self restraint from being overtly biased.

I have to disagree with you here. Abstaining from voting does not make a journalist unbiased. It doesn't help much either. I certainly don't think that he is taking "his ethics to the extreme" by doing this. Halperin is an airhead, in my opinion. Very little of what he says has any substance to it. He just gives very simple analysis on complex political issues.

And he has so much respect for what he does, and gives such substantive analysis, that he once said that President Obama was being "Kind of a d*ck...". Is that what you believe is a journalist of high ethical standards?

But that is not what we are seeing today. What Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee did were beyond Watergate but no reporter and newspaper dared, or more accurately, WANTED to prosecute them in the court of public opinion. The lack of that 'want' is troubling.

Agreed. It's been a problem since the primaries. Her Majesty is above such scrutiny. However, it is also troubling what Fox News and other right-leaning sources do on a daily basis. It cuts both ways. Perhaps more to the benefit of one side than the other, but it's troubling all around nonetheless.

This is why I am convinced that the media is indeed out to get Trump, not that I have the man in any regard higher than a snake's belly.

Some might be, some aren't. It depends on what source you're referring to. With that said, Trump is a special one. The things he's said and done far exceed what other candidates have in the past. The media wasn't anywhere near as harsh on Mitt Romney and John McCain or other Republicans. I maintain my position that Trump deserves the full glare of the media.

Though they don't seem to give as much attention to Clinton's indiscretions as they should, and that is indeed troubling.

 

[gambit]

...it also doesn't help that the FCC does very little to actually regulate the accuracy of American media.

I do not want the government to regulate the accuracy of any reportage.

If I say " 2 + 2 = 4 " that is the law of nature. It is non-negotiable and available to all. When a fact is well known, it is essentially self enforced. If a claimed mathematician says " 1 + 1 = 3 ", people will look askance at what he claimed about himself and whether he knows what he is talking about. But if a comedian say " 1 + 1 = 3 ", people will immediately know that it has nothing to do with mathematics but with human relations -- sex.

The point here is that when it comes issues that have great variations in perspectives and interpretations, such as ideologies, politics, and assorted 'soft sciences', dangers increases when we try to impose a 'universal' standard and assign an enforcement authority.

I have a tattoo on my left shoulder. It has a scroll of paper, a compass, and runs of red that drips from the North compass blade. The scroll represents knowledge, the compass is a navigation device, and the red is blood. The whole design means that in navigating thru knowledge, blood will be spilled. If you look at the history of mankind, my tat sums it up nicely.

Just as the people get the politicians they deserve, so do the people get the kind of media they deserve. In a functional democracy like ours, the people have no one to blame but themselves if they do not perform due diligence and fact check the media, the same media that their ancestors fought to make free from government restraints and that the people insisted today, even to the point of bearing arms, to remain so. What was the old Latin saying: " Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? " Who guards the guardians ? The answer is the people.

I feel that strongly about my freedom to knowledge and information that the idea is permanently etched on my body.

I have to disagree with you here. Abstaining from voting does not make a journalist unbiased. It doesn't help much either. I certainly don't think that he is taking "his ethics to the extreme" by doing this. Halperin is an airhead, in my opinion. Very little of what he says has any substance to it. He just gives very simple analysis on complex political issues.

And he has so much respect for what he does, and gives such substantive analysis, that he once said that President Obama was being "Kind of a d*ck...". Is that what you believe is a journalist of high ethical standards?

No, abstention from voting does not automagically make a reporter honest and fair.

If I tell you that I am not a liar, then commended you on your choice of tie to go with your suit, how do you know I am not lying ? You could be looking like a 1970s Harlem leftover. I grew up in that era, buddy.

We fought to keep the media free because we are willing to take the media at its words that it will be 'fair and balanced', to quote Fox News of itself again. My point was that if a reporter like Halperin, regardless of his intelligence or biases, is willing to make a public declaration as to why he does not vote, even though the chance exist that he could be lying about it, we should take Halperin and the media at their words and hold them against what they publicly claimed to be.

 

[Darmashkian]

Micheal Moore(a liberal,leftwing documentary maker) gets why Trump could win

[Yes,he is a conspiracy theorist & I absolutely do NOT support his views at all.But once in a while he gets something right! & this year,it seems to be this]

He hates Trump & is a fervent Bernie fanboy.

https://twitter.com/x/status/790684875258986496

"Trump's election is going to be the biggest "F—ck You ever recorded in human history" - Michael Moore


@T-72 @RabzonKhan

You don't need to like Trump to vote for him. He's the grenade, the molotov cocktail you can throw at the Elite(Wallstreet,media,Establishment,etc) & the System who have failed you & don't care about you!!

 

[T-72]

You don't need to like Trump to vote for him. He's the grenade, the molotov cocktail you can throw at the Elite(Wallstreet,media,Establishment,etc) & the System who have failed you & don't care about you!!

exactly what I've been saying for a while, apart from his rabid following, and the ones who are keeping quiet about their support for him, a lot of people will also vote him in as a wrecking-ball directed at D.C

 

[Desert Fox]

The same intelligence that ALL the major nuclear powers AGREED regarding WMD in Iraq.

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=555

Why is it that people continues to believe that Iraq's WMD intelligence were solely from the US ? Do they not know how to use the Internet ?

But does that still negate the fact that US intel was wrong? Which is my point. This whole claim that Russia hacked into emails is based on no concrete evidence. Just another way for the Dems to shift attention away from their corruption (thankfully nobody's buying it despite how hard the Media is pushing this narrative).

 

[T-72]