• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

The Race For 2024

bilby said:
ZiprHead said:
In the annual public surveys about trust and reputation, journalists and the media have regularly fallen near the very bottom, often just above Congress. But in this year’s Gallup poll, we have managed to fall below Congress. Our profession is now the least trusted of all. Something we are doing is clearly not working.

Let me give an analogy. Voting machines must meet two requirements. They must count the vote accurately, and people must believe they count the vote accurately. The second requirement is distinct from and just as important as the first.

Likewise with newspapers. We must be accurate, and we must be believed to be accurate. It’s a bitter pill to swallow, but we are failing on the second requirement. Most people believe the media is biased. Anyone who doesn’t see this is paying scant attention to reality, and those who fight reality lose. Reality is an undefeated champion. It would be easy to blame others for our long and continuing fall in credibility (and, therefore, decline in impact), but a victim mentality will not help. Complaining is not a strategy. We must work harder to control what we can control to increase our credibility.
Click to expand...
No, Jeff. It's crazy ass right wingers who no longer trust real journalism. And being even more accurate isn't going to change that. They want their beliefs validated, not challenged.
Click to expand...
Does this fool genuinely believe that by intervening and ordering his editorial staff not to publish as they normally would, he is going to increase his newspaper's credibility?
Click to expand...
The word is that the WashPo owner's company Blue Origin had just met with Trump. Rumor is that is why Bezos pulled this shit. Which is odd because he helped WashPo stay on its feet.

Obviously, with the guy who refused to concede an election loss, it would seem easy to push for the other candidate by default. But WashPo joined the LA Times and the USA Today in chopping off their balls (or pulling out their ovaries). This means a bit more than it sounds like as we don't have many newspaper companies left. The Boston Globe is one of the few that have maintained possession of their balls/ovaries.
The Boston Globe said:
Vote for Trump?! Are you fucking nuts?! What part of 2017 to 2020 did you want to relive? The only President in modern history that had a net loss in jobs. Oh yeah... really wanna do that again. Seriously, this isn't a fucking question. This is like being asked "Cake or Death?"! Vote for Kamala Harris. Seriously! Dick fucking Cheney is voting for her. Do you realize how fucked up the GOP candidate has to be to get Dick Fucking Cheney to support the Democrat? REALLY REALLY REALLY FUCKED UP!!! (<--- note the ALL CAPS). So the Boston Globe will do what the other sad mofo papers are refusing to do, and that is say the fucking obvious! Vote for Harris! If you don't, don't come whining to us because shit went down that you didn't like. We fucking warned you in 2016! Warned you about W too! So ignore the Boston Globe at your own peril!
Click to expand...

Okay... I might have made that up entirely. Though, I imagine it isn't much of a paraphrase.
 
ZiprHead said:
ZiprHead said:
ZiprHead said:
Jimmy Higgins said:
Meanwhile Washington Post won't endorse candidate.
Click to expand...
The editorial board wants to but the Beez is afraid of the Orange Meany.
Click to expand...
For The Post, more outrage from readers who say they’ve canceled After Friday’s announcement that The Washington Post was no longer going to endorse a presidential candidate, subscribers and journalists are responding with anger and dismay.

And, crucially, subscription numbers, which had tumbled since the end of the Trump administration, were ticking up ever so slightly.

That momentum came to a halt over the weekend, after Friday’s surprise announcement by Publisher William Lewis that The Post’s editorial section would cease its long tradition of endorsing a presidential candidate — a decision he made public just 11 days before Election Day.

The outrage at the decision has been swift — from Post readers, journalism leaders, politicians and dismayed employees. A cancellation movement swept through social networks. Instead of using an internal analytics tool to check traffic to their own stories, some Post journalists used it to chart the soaring number of subscribers visiting the customer account page that allows them to cancel their subscriptions. (A Post spokeswoman declined to provide cancellation numbers Sunday, and Lewis did not respond to an interview request.)

On social media, sharing screenshots of Post subscription cancellation confirmations became more than just a thing. It was a political statement primarily coming from the American left, enraged by reports in The Post and elsewhere that the newspaper’s editorial writers had drafted an endorsement of the Democratic nominee, Vice President Kamala Harris, over her Republican opponent, former president Donald Trump.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Jeff Bezos responds to the lack of endorsement kerfluffle.

Opinion The hard truth: Americans don’t trust the news media A note from our owner.

In the annual public surveys about trust and reputation, journalists and the media have regularly fallen near the very bottom, often just above Congress. But in this year’s Gallup poll, we have managed to fall below Congress. Our profession is now the least trusted of all. Something we are doing is clearly not working.

Let me give an analogy. Voting machines must meet two requirements. They must count the vote accurately, and people must believe they count the vote accurately. The second requirement is distinct from and just as important as the first.

Likewise with newspapers. We must be accurate, and we must be believed to be accurate. It’s a bitter pill to swallow, but we are failing on the second requirement. Most people believe the media is biased. Anyone who doesn’t see this is paying scant attention to reality, and those who fight reality lose. Reality is an undefeated champion. It would be easy to blame others for our long and continuing fall in credibility (and, therefore, decline in impact), but a victim mentality will not help. Complaining is not a strategy. We must work harder to control what we can control to increase our credibility.
Click to expand...
No, Jeff. It's crazy ass right wingers who no longer trust real journalism. And being even more accurate isn't going to change that. They want their beliefs validated, not challenged.
Click to expand...
The right has lost trust in the media because over the decades, conservative propaganda, largely starting with Rush Fucking Limbaugh, has convinced them that anything the "mainstream" media tells them cannot be believed. This is evident by the fact that they'll believe any lie, no matter how ridiculous or provably wrong.

I consider myself well left of center, but I've lost trust in the media for different reasons, primarily due to their spineless coverage of the GOP. They have treated Trump and the rest of his political supporters as normal and viable. Rather than shouting from the rooftops that our democracy is in serious danger, they've fiddled under their bullshit version of journalistic professionalism. Ethics and integrity are a necessary part of professionalism, not a convenience to be exchanged for Trump-fueled ratings and website clicks.

This hollowed out version of the self-exalted 4th Estate has disgraced itself. Its neglect and greed has aided authoritarianism. If our current, most dangerous problems ever do get resolved, it's going to take decades, and the current non-right wing propaganda American media should be held to account for their contribution to the destruction of institutional norms.
 
Swammerdami said:
Tigers! said:
A question about the process after the election.
Why is there such a long time between the election and the coronation (early Nov - late Jan)?
In Aust. the new government is sworn in a couple of days after the election count is completed. Usually we have a new government in less than a week.
It that an historical reason?
Click to expand...

It is NOT an answer to your question, but the U.S. Government has 4000 political appointees selected by POTUS. How many does Australia or the U.K. have?

During Trump's previous regime, federal law was changed to make it easier for POTUS to fire employees. In addition to the 4000 appointments, Trump allegedly plans to fire and replace tens of thousands of other "disloyal" workers.

During that first regime many of Trump's appointees were intelligent right-wingers who turned against Trump sooner or later. Don't expect him to make that "mistake" again.
Click to expand...
Fortunately we have no where near that many appointments.

Just another reason why your system of governance is not fit for the 21st C.
 
TomC said:
Derec said:
I fear he will win the election fair and square like he did in 2016.
Click to expand...
What does "win" mean in that sentence?
Are you aware that Hillary Clinton got millions more votes than he did?
Tom
Click to expand...
We all know that is not how Presidential elections are won so it doesn’t really matter. Whether the electoral college is “fair and square” is another issue but as long as it is the law of the land we must abide.
 
Derec said:
ZiprHead said:
Those righties are such nice people.
Click to expand...
What's so wrong with joking that a well-known Israel hater like Mehdi Hassan might have a Hezbollah pager?
Click to expand...

Are we talking at a comedy club or on a panel on a news network?

Are you simply being contrarian or do you truly not understand the issue with the “joke”?

 
Shadowy Man said:
We all know that is not how Presidential elections are won so it doesn’t really matter.
Click to expand...
We don't elect presidents, that's my point. They are appointed by state legislatures.
And I definitely do think that matters.

Saying that a candidate "won" the election when they were 2nd place in the election, but got appointed anyways, gives them a lot of credibility that they don't really have.
Tom
 
TomC said:
Shadowy Man said:
We all know that is not how Presidential elections are won so it doesn’t really matter.
Click to expand...
We don't elect presidents, that's my point. They are appointed by state legislatures.
And I definitely do think that matters.

Saying that a candidate "won" the election when they were 2nd place in the election, but got appointed anyways, gives them a lot of credibility that they don't really have.
Tom
Click to expand...
The popular vote total is not the “election” though, as you yourself point out in your first sentence. I agree with you that I would rather live in a democracy and not a federation of states. The system we have is archaic and unsuited for the modern world and I hope one day it can be fixed.
 
Shadowy Man said:
Derec said:
ZiprHead said:
Those righties are such nice people.
Click to expand...
What's so wrong with joking that a well-known Israel hater like Mehdi Hassan might have a Hezbollah pager?
Click to expand...

Are we talking at a comedy club or on a panel on a news network?

Are you simply being contrarian or do you truly not understand the issue with the “joke”?

Click to expand...
And even if I conceded that Hassan were an “Israel hater” does that make it ok to joke about him being killed by Israelis? Is that the morality that Trump supporters wish to be portraying? Is that how you feel?
 
Derec said:
Toni said:
However they are willing to use him as a cult leader/figurehead long enough to steal the election at which point I am confident they will Section 25 him and install JD Vance, who is many things but not in declining physical health or declining cognitively.
Click to expand...
Why do you think he would have to "steal" the election? Right now, the polls are in his favor. He is leading in most battleground states, and even nationwide, he has narrowed the gap with Kamala Harris. In some polls (like the recent NY Times/Sienna) he is even with her, and at least one has Trump ahead.
I fear he will win the election fair and square like he did in 2016. And Democrats yet again have no one else to blame but themselves, nominating a flawed candidate.
Click to expand...
I am afraid he might win but I think he has shoot himself in the foot pretty badly recently with Hispanic voters, particularly those of Puerto Rican heritage. Hopefully that will be enough.
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
Vote for Trump?! Are you fucking nuts?! What part of 2017 to 2020 did you want to relive? The only President in modern history that had a net loss in jobs. Oh yeah... really wanna do that again. Seriously, this isn't a fucking question. This is like being asked "Cake or Death?"! Vote for Kamala Harris. Seriously! Dick fucking Cheney is voting for her. Do you realize how fucked up the GOP candidate has to be to get Dick Fucking Cheney to support the Democrat? REALLY REALLY REALLY FUCKED UP!!! (<--- note the ALL CAPS). So the Boston Globe will do what the other sad mofo papers are refusing to do, and that is say the fucking obvious! Vote for Harris! If you don't, don't come whining to us because shit went down that you didn't like. We fucking warned you in 2016! Warned you about W too! So ignore the Boston Globe at your own peril!
Click to expand...
Okay... I might have made that up entirely. Though, I imagine it isn't much of a paraphrase
Click to expand...
You almost nailed it.

Their actual editorial (for comparison):

Vote for Trump?! Are you freaking nuts?! What part of 2017 to 2020 did you want to relive? The only President in modern history that had a net loss in jobs. Oh yeah... really wanna do that again. Seriously, this isn't a freaking question. This is like being asked "Cake or Death?"! Vote for Kamala Harris. Seriously! Dick freaking Cheney is voting for her. Do you realize how freaked up the GOP candidate has to be to get Dick Freaking Cheney to support the Democrat? REALLY REALLY REALLY FREAKED UP!!! (<--- note the ALL CAPS). So the Boston Globe will do what the other sad melon farmer papers are refusing to do, and that is say the freaking obvious! Vote for Harris! If you don't, don't come whining to us because stuff went down that you didn't like. We freaking warned you in 2016! Warned you about W too! So ignore the Boston Globe at your own peril, you motherfucking cunts!
Click to expand...
 
TomC said:
Derec said:
I fear he will win the election fair and square like he did in 2016.
Click to expand...
What does "win" mean in that sentence?
Are you aware that Hillary Clinton got millions more votes than he did?
Tom
Click to expand...
"Win" means "Be declared President in accordance with the constitution and laws of the United States".

Nothing in that constitution or those laws says anything about giving the Presidency to the candidate with the largest plurality of votes nationwide.

If your horse crosses the line first in the Kentucky Derby, you don't win if it does so without its jockey; Or if it took a shortcut across the centre of the track.

There are rules, and the rules define what it means to "win", regardless of what disappointed punters might feel would be more just.

There is no real doubt that Trump won the 2016 election fair and square. The victory condition was to get more than 270 EC votes, and he achieved that, with 304. So he won.

I think the rules are bloody stupid. But under the rules, Trump was the victor. And without the rules, nobody could ever be the victor - whoever got whatever votes, a shitload of morons would demand that their candidate be declared winner.

You can change the rules for future elections - and you probably should - but you cannot change what the rules were in 2016.
 
Last edited:
Jimmy Higgins said:
bilby said:
ZiprHead said:
In the annual public surveys about trust and reputation, journalists and the media have regularly fallen near the very bottom, often just above Congress. But in this year’s Gallup poll, we have managed to fall below Congress. Our profession is now the least trusted of all. Something we are doing is clearly not working.

Let me give an analogy. Voting machines must meet two requirements. They must count the vote accurately, and people must believe they count the vote accurately. The second requirement is distinct from and just as important as the first.

Likewise with newspapers. We must be accurate, and we must be believed to be accurate. It’s a bitter pill to swallow, but we are failing on the second requirement. Most people believe the media is biased. Anyone who doesn’t see this is paying scant attention to reality, and those who fight reality lose. Reality is an undefeated champion. It would be easy to blame others for our long and continuing fall in credibility (and, therefore, decline in impact), but a victim mentality will not help. Complaining is not a strategy. We must work harder to control what we can control to increase our credibility.
Click to expand...
No, Jeff. It's crazy ass right wingers who no longer trust real journalism. And being even more accurate isn't going to change that. They want their beliefs validated, not challenged.
Click to expand...
Does this fool genuinely believe that by intervening and ordering his editorial staff not to publish as they normally would, he is going to increase his newspaper's credibility?
Click to expand...
The word is that the WashPo owner's company Blue Origin had just met with Trump. Rumor is that is why Bezos pulled this shit. Which is odd because he helped WashPo stay on its feet.

Obviously, with the guy who refused to concede an election loss, it would seem easy to push for the other candidate by default. But WashPo joined the LA Times and the USA Today in chopping off their balls (or pulling out their ovaries). This means a bit more than it sounds like as we don't have many newspaper companies left. The Boston Globe is one of the few that have maintained possession of their balls/ovaries.
The Boston Globe said:
Vote for Trump?! Are you fucking nuts?! What part of 2017 to 2020 did you want to relive? The only President in modern history that had a net loss in jobs. Oh yeah... really wanna do that again. Seriously, this isn't a fucking question. This is like being asked "Cake or Death?"! Vote for Kamala Harris. Seriously! Dick fucking Cheney is voting for her. Do you realize how fucked up the GOP candidate has to be to get Dick Fucking Cheney to support the Democrat? REALLY REALLY REALLY FUCKED UP!!! (<--- note the ALL CAPS). So the Boston Globe will do what the other sad mofo papers are refusing to do, and that is say the fucking obvious! Vote for Harris! If you don't, don't come whining to us because shit went down that you didn't like. We fucking warned you in 2016! Warned you about W too! So ignore the Boston Globe at your own peril!
Click to expand...

Okay... I might have made that up entirely. Though, I imagine it isn't much of a paraphrase.
Click to expand...
Damn, you had me cheering for the Globe right up until the end. Bad Jimmy. Bad Bad Jimmy. :LOL:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom