Yeah.. but what do you know?
The Trump Presidency | Biden Inaugurated
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
Which news media outlets do you consume where a sitting President being criminally investigated for obstruction of justice is a good thing? We're that far away from reality that Trump is under personal investigation and people think that's 'fake news' or 'echo chamber'.
Yes echo chambers do exist on the left and the right but at some point we have to start recognising that facts are facts. There will be dozens, probably hundreds, of America's best lawyers investigating a billionaire with all the tact and intellect to confess to sexual assault whilst talking to a reporter wearing a fecking microphone. He admits to obstruction of justice ON TELEVISION. And this investigation will look into all aspects of Trump's business dealings, make no mistake. The investigation into Clinton that led to the Lewinsky scandal and subsequent impeachment had nothing originally to do with Monica Lewinsky The chances of them finding a thread and pulling on it and it pulling on it and destroying this man, I'd say is high.
I don't get how anyone could look at that and think "Nope, he'll be fine" and accuse others of living in an echo chamber.
Last edited:
So I'm at Cracker Barrel for breakfast, and I see this display selling a "bouquet" of bowls of cotton still on the stalk, because "farmhouse chic" is a style trend right now. I walk over to check it out because my wife likes it and what do I see on the cotton in a Cracker Barrel in South Carolina???
A "Made in China" sticker.
#MAGA
A "Made in China" sticker.
#MAGA
Word.
Just gonna leave this here:
SO what exactly are you trying to say there then? The first line may well be true, he could easily not be impeached, but that doesn't mean the second part of your post is true. The New York Times, Washington Post, CNN etc are all reporting what is going on with Trump, his family, businesses and his government. The vast majority of which has been provided from leaks inside the WH and his own administration, so unless you are using echo chamber effect as a euphemism for truth and facts, then I don't quite get which other sources you would suggest? because 90% are all reporting off the exact same page, and that is the truth, the other 10% are Breitbart and Fox and co...
That first chick is hot
Does the term 'echo chamber' mean self reinforcing? If so, aren't we all (to varying degrees) in echo chambers?
I don't understand it's use to discount opinion...
I don't understand it's use to discount opinion...
It's basically when you're in circles/forums where people constantly preach to the choir.
For me when I refer to an echo chamber I mean people who read outlets like Brietbart or the Daily Mail or the Canary not to be informed but because they seek out whichever publication affirms their own views. And they become convinced of the legitimacy of their own opinions because they're affirmed by outlets they sought out simply to affirm their opinion in the first place.
You'll never stop it but I think it's been pretty toxic for public discourse.
Friends, Russians, countrymen, lend me your ears...
Justice4Trumpy:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...-controversial-julius-caesar-play-in-new-york
Justice4Trumpy:
Guardian said:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...-controversial-julius-caesar-play-in-new-york
Last edited:
Yes, like I thought. So if a person is an echo chamber reinforcing a specific view. The fact that they are in one does not mean that the viewpoint is right or wrong. They are two separate things right? I can understand the term being used to point out that somebody is unreceptive to other views/facts/etc. Clearly this can effect the whole spectrum (left, right and everything in between). But being in an echo chamber does not on it's own make a person right/wrong, it describes the environment not the argument.
Or maybe I'm talking bollocks...
It makes me sick. The hypocrisy is unreal and what makes it worse is the point blank refusal to see any other side but their own. The US has portrayed a President as Julius Caesar for the last century at least. I think it was CNN who researched back and found that it's been going on for a seriously long time. It's hardly a revelation anyway is it? I mean what did they think really happened to Caesar? And what did they think The Bard's play was actually about in the first place?
But...but...Rasmussen
If you read the AP poll it's actually probably quite close to how the country on a whole feels. I reckon it's probably a 2/3 to 1/3 split on pretty much every single policy issue as well as his popularity. I can see there being 1/3 that would be the staunch Republicans who are climate change deniers, women's rights and LGBTQ rights deniers and the same 1/3 who argue against Universal Healthcare. Believe it or not, I actually think that's pretty good progress as I bet it would have been 50/50 not so long ago.
Unfortunately for the USA and for the rest of the world too, the 1/3 are in power and are shouting the loudest too so they are the ones being heard. It's time the majority stood up and took their country back instead of letting it be dragged back to the past by these political, moral and environmental philistines.
A trump supporting friend recently quoted the Rasmussen poll when he and I got into it over Trump. He almost certainly heard about it on Hannity, which he listens to in the car.
You can't possibly win against someone like that because in their mind that poll is right and all the others are wrong. The other polls are the MSM and elite swamp dwellers who want you to think and react a certain way where as the Rasmussen poll is for the enlightened free thinkers of the country.
The funny bit is when I told him you have to take all the polls and create an average number to get more accurate. His response - "well all the polls had it wrong on election day". Standard Drumpfian logic- use whatever numbers benefit you and if they don't then discredit them.
Yeah, I can see how that argument would be frustrating in a face to face scenario. It's bad enough reading it online, let alone having it in front of you. I bet that if you said the polls weren't actually that wrong, you would be laughed at, yet that's exactly what happened. 3 or 4 percentage points is all it took and that margin of error was always stated as a possibility, yet it's one that nobody would entertain so it was predictions that were wrong rather than the stats or the polls themselves.That's amazing. The fact that it's cheaper to ship cotton stalks from China to the US than it is from within South Carolina itself is bonkers! It reminded me of when my Afghan friend told me it was cheaper to import staple vegetables like tomatos and cucumbers from China than it was to grow it in Afghanistan.
I was dumbfounded, tbh.
Out of curiosity what did the rasmussen poll show at election time, relative to the other polls.
Hillary +2 which wound up being pretty accurate.
MAGA= Make Attorneys Get Attorneys.
Its probably scale and setup costs tbf. If you already had a giant production facility at home the difference would probably not be worth it, but why would you set up a giant rpoduction facility in a place where its much more expensive to run because of labour costs?
The rcp average was 3%, right? Final was 2%. This nonsense that the polls were wrong is fake news.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-the-hateful-rhetoric/?utm_term=.91dfe1eb8b3b
The sane voice of calm and reason
The sane voice of calm and reason
ugh
All i know is if the US stop importing cloth all their citizen will be naked.
For all the cotton they grow I've yet to see a made in USA clothing line.
For all the cotton they grow I've yet to see a made in USA clothing line.
Another funny thing is they mock sites like 538 as fake nooz when, for one thing, 538 isn't news and aside from that 538 had one of the highest chances of him winning of anyone. I think it was around 35% at the end.
But these are people that make fun of the weatherman when it doesn't rain if there's a 50% chance of precipitation, so it should not surprise anyone.
Probably the first time anyone's approval been this low with an unemployment rate < 5%. You can only imagine the pitchforks would come out if the economy shows the slightest wobble.
Who do you accredit this unemployment rate to? 8 years of the previous presidency or 3 months of the current administration?
Republicans reducing regulations always leads to good short term outlook in the economy. Someone usually gets fecked long term, like Obama inheriting the recession but a lot of optimistic hiring can be attributed to the current admin working towards eliminating a lot of red tape.
Any change to the unemployment numbers since Jan 20th are down to Trump. An argument could be made that it should be since the election. He can't take any credit for anything before his time.
- Status