The Trump Presidency

[Joust Williams]

I normally don't. Honestly, I don't watch much non-sports TV unless I am visiting relatives (which I was this weekend) and they're watching it.

I just honestly think that if even after five minutes, you find Maddow to be "the same" as the talking heads on Fox then you either:

a) have the sound on mute
b) are lying to yourself

The proportion of facts alone is enough to make me believe this.

[Satsuki]

Wait, are you kidding? She’s the Glenn Beck of the left, or the closest approximation. It’s not gonna be long before she’s employing the chalk board of shame and drawing conclusions from one ridiculous point to the other. She is no more news than Fox is, seriously. She’s not Hannity or O’Reilly level sensational (yet), but if Trump makes it to a second term she will be naturally pushed there. These networks are complete jokes.

[Calliander]

The “liberal” media, say MSNBC, is 100% reactionary TO Fox News at this point.

Someone in there (I lost the post) said something about liberals not being dumb and believing fake news. But even if they aren't falling for fake news, they're definitely buying into the false hope that MSNBC et. al are peddling with every reaction to Fox News. Comparison below.

His biggest mistake was not pulling the trigger on a new justice

I'm interested in the meaning here. Like somehow forcing Garland in?

I just honestly think that if even after five minutes, you find Maddow to be "the same" as the talking heads on Fox then you either:

a) have the sound on mute
b) are lying to yourself

The proportion of facts alone is enough to make me believe this.

You're comparing the content to what the "news" person is trying to make people infer, which is not the comparison you need to make. What you should focus on is the reaction to what the "news" person says.

- A conservative will hear a Fox News segment and its poor excuse for journalism/lack of facts/etc., disregard those flaws, and eat the whole package up. (They'll regurgitate it to anyone they please, too.)
- A liberal will hear an MSNBC segment and its reactionary/incendiary/etc. content, disregard those flaws, and slide a bead on their abacus for "Impeach 45."

In both situations, it's still cloying. It's still manipulative. The viewers are still mislead, even if the information is factual.

[Joust Williams]

Why should I focus on the reaction to the news? One's largely fact-based and the other is total bullshit, that isn't my fault that one audience is pretty much solely dumbass clowns

Everything everywhere is manipulative, this isn't mathematics

[Satsuki]

I just don’t think you can have a 24 hour news network with out a healthy amount of spin. Every media outlet is manipulative n some way, that’s true. I mean, i listen to The Daily once a day, and watch about 10-15 mins of the local news if I’m curious about the weather and like, fires. I’m sure both of those outlets have some sort of spin as well but I interact with them very minimally. On networks especially meant for news, and news all day, there HAS to be hyperbole in order to contend with what people get on Facebook and other internet outlets. It’s gotta be loud, obnoxious, taking a stance. They wouldn’t have a product to sell otherwise.

[Doc Holliday]

I think I switched over into the Berenstain universe. Sats’ last dozen posts are things I would say and NPR this week went from it’s 2014-2017 era tumblr territory to making classically liberal arguments as seen here —> https://www.npr.org/2018/07/06/62666...ransgender-man

[Melf]

Wait, are you kidding? She’s the Glenn Beck of the left, or the closest approximation. It’s not gonna be long before she’s employing the chalk board of shame and drawing conclusions from one ridiculous point to the other.

[Satsuki]

fsgfhshdhsgdsfsgdhsfshdxgs

Doc - full disclosure, NPR gets on my nerves sometimes. It's the least offensive to my senses, but I don't listen to it every day. I think my brain is a little fried from reading a ton of current sociological literature - stuff that lacks data and numbers (in news media) just sounds like reddit posts to me. It's like, oh, that's a nice opinion, but does it come with a follow up? Is there some sort of table or flow chart I can follow along with?

[Doc Holliday]

I need to find some other podcasts to listen to. I’m so burned out of politics and it’s crept into everything. And it’s not that politics don’t matter. It’s that every political argument is a personal attack or the assumption politics is a 0 sum game where every gain, takes from the other side. Which if that were the case, how would we ever progress beyond hunter-gather status? It would just be millennia after millennia of one generation taking a horde of food from another without ever coming together to build anything.

[gameoverDude]

No I think Obama was a great pres. His biggest mistake was not pulling the trigger on a new justice and not running to get stuff done while Democrats had most of the seats of power. He also didn’t start trade wars.

Obama did nominate Merrick Garland on 3/16/16, right after Scalia passed away in office. The Republican majority refused to vote on a new justice until the next presidency. The Republicans' move was a damn cheap shot, which paid off for them- since Trump would end up nominating Gorsuch. It's the art of the steal.