Confirmation Bias

[Juror#8]

Confirmation bias. 
 

I am completely politically independent. It took some time to get here but it’s a good place to be. I try to take in as much data as I can and then make a decision based on what candidate I feel represents the most of what I want. I don’t restrictively align with party because I think that misses an opportunity to learn. I don’t demonize the other party who I didn’t vote for because I think that’s stupid. 
 

I remember here during Obama days the usual suspects who hated him found every story - as unvetted and fledging as it might have been - and posted it (and supported it) as gospel. 
 

The Obama lovers refuted every negative Obama story with their own “support.” They wouldn’t believe anything no matter what. 
 

No one (not even the self-proclaim investigative journalists here) really dug into anything besides the most cursory research to verify what they wanted to believe anyway. 
 

Fast-forward to Trump and it’s the same thing all over again. Those who hate him post every freakin thing as if it’s gospel. Those who love Trump won’t believe anything negative - any reporting or negative news story period. 
 

Fox News is so badly slanted. It’s pathetic. 
 

I get it Fox - the world is coming apart at the seems because of the “Libs” and Trump is going to save it.
 

cnn is so badly slanted. It’s pathetic. 

I get it cnn, Trump is going to send us into the depths of humanity and wipe out minorities from North America. 
 

What happened to non-editorial journalism? 

Everyone finds everything to support what they already believe or want to believe. And there is support for every branch of opinion.
 

Maybe it’s comforting.

 

Maybe it’s re-affirmation. 

 

I wish I could stop everyone mid-argument in a sort of freeze frame soliloquy style and ask: does anyone care about the truth? 
 

Is anyone really comfortable thinking that there side is always right and the other side is always wrong? 

 

Does anyone want to know (or are do they have the capacity to believe) something different than what they already think?

 

Or better, what would it take to believe something different than what you already believe about Trump, Obama, Bush, the Clintons? 
 

Every question in here but the last is truly rhetorical. This thread is probably self-righteous and I’m ok with that. I don’t imagine much discussion on this topic anyway and that’s ok. It’s not salacious. There’s no red meat or slant in here. 
 

Maybe just think about it huh. 
 

Happy 2020. 

Edited September 6, 2020 by Juror#8

[Tiberius]

What does your independence lead you to think about the Presidency of Donald J Trump? 

[Chef Jim]

10 minutes ago, Juror#8 said:

Confirmation bias. 
 

It’s real in these forums. 
 

I am completely politically independent. It took some time to get here but it’s a good place to be. I try to take in as much data as I can and then make a decision based on what candidate I feel represents the most of what I want. I don’t restrictively align with party because I think that misses an opportunity to learn. I don’t demonize the other party who I didn’t vote for because I think that’s stupid. 
 

I remember here during Obama days the usual suspects who hated him found every story - as unvetted and fledging as it might have been - and posted it (and supported it) as gospel. 
 

The Obama lovers refuted every negative Obama story with their own “support.” They wouldn’t believe anything no matter what. 
 

No one (not even the self-proclaim investigative journalists here) really dug into anything besides the most cursory research to verify what they wanted to believe anyway. 
 

Fast-forward to Trump and it’s the same thing all over again. Those who hate him post every freakin thing as if it’s gospel. Those who love Trump won’t believe anything negative - any reporting or negative news story period. 
 

Fox News is so badly slanted. It’s pathetic. 
 

cnn is so badly slanted. It’s pathetic. 
 

What happened to non-editorial journalism? 

Everyone finds everything to support what they already believe or want to believe. And there is support for every branch of opinion.
 

Maybe it’s comforting.

 

Maybe it’s re-affirmation. 

 

I wish I could stop everyone mid-argument in a sort of freeze frame soliloquy style and ask: does anyone care about the truth? 
 

Is anyone really comfortable thinking that there side is always right and the other side is always wrong? 

 

Does anyone want to know (or are do they have the capacity to believe) something different than what they already think?

 

Or better, what would it take to believe something different than what you already believe about Trump, Obama, Bush, the Clintons? 
 

Every question in here but the last is truly rhetorical. This thread is probably self-righteous and I’m ok with that. I don’t imagine much discussion on this topic anyway and that’s ok. It’s not salacious. There’s no red meat or slant in here. 
 

Maybe just think about it huh. 
 

Trump 2020. 

 

 

Great post but kinda weird ending. 

[Juror#8]

Just now, Tiberius said:

What does your independence lead you to think about the Presidency of Donald J Trump? 

That he is a good man trying to do what’s best for the country based on his vision of America. 

He’s made mistakes. 

He’s had some big wins!

 

Like I said with Obama, I’ll give him his full presidency before I appraise fully. I think he deserves that. 

[Tiberius]

1 minute ago, Juror#8 said:

That he is a good man trying to do what’s best for the country based on his vision of America. 

He’s made mistakes. 

He’s had some big wins!

 

Like I said with Obama, I’ll give him his full presidency before I appraise fully. I think he deserves that. 

Wow, you think he’s a good man? That’s funny. 

[Buffalo_Gal]

12 minutes ago, Juror#8 said:

Confirmation bias. 
 

I am completely politically independent. It took some time to get here but it’s a good place to be. I try to take in as much data as I can and then make a decision based on what candidate I feel represents the most of what I want. I don’t restrictively align with party because I think that misses an opportunity to learn. I don’t demonize the other party who I didn’t vote for because I think that’s stupid. 
 

I remember here during Obama days the usual suspects who hated him found every story - as unvetted and fledging as it might have been - and posted it (and supported it) as gospel. 
 

The Obama lovers refuted every negative Obama story with their own “support.” They wouldn’t believe anything no matter what. 
 

No one (not even the self-proclaim investigative journalists here) really dug into anything besides the most cursory research to verify what they wanted to believe anyway. 
 

Fast-forward to Trump and it’s the same thing all over again. Those who hate him post every freakin thing as if it’s gospel. Those who love Trump won’t believe anything negative - any reporting or negative news story period. 
 

Fox News is so badly slanted. It’s pathetic. 
 

I get it Fox - the world is coming apart at the seems because of the “Libs” and Trump is going to save it.
 

cnn is so badly slanted. It’s pathetic. 

I get it cnn, Trump is going to send us into the depths of humanity and wipe out minorities from North America. 
 

What happened to non-editorial journalism? 

Everyone finds everything to support what they already believe or want to believe. And there is support for every branch of opinion.
 

Maybe it’s comforting.

 

Maybe it’s re-affirmation. 

 

I wish I could stop everyone mid-argument in a sort of freeze frame soliloquy style and ask: does anyone care about the truth? 
 

Is anyone really comfortable thinking that there side is always right and the other side is always wrong? 

 

Does anyone want to know (or are do they have the capacity to believe) something different than what they already think?

 

Or better, what would it take to believe something different than what you already believe about Trump, Obama, Bush, the Clintons? 
 

Every question in here but the last is truly rhetorical. This thread is probably self-righteous and I’m ok with that. I don’t imagine much discussion on this topic anyway and that’s ok. It’s not salacious. There’s no red meat or slant in here. 
 

Maybe just think about it huh. 
 

Happy 2020. 

Fox runs negative Trump stories 52% of the time. Not sure how that means they are pro-Trump. (You can search this group for the link to that 52/48 number. I have posted it a few times.) You may not be as independent as you think if you consider Fox news pro-Trump.

I loved, loved, loved Bill Clinton. Over the years, I have found out more and more about him and his administration and have come to er, not love Bill Clinton. It has simply been a matter of reading information as it becomes available.

W - weapons of mass destruction. I cannot say I hated him though, nor did I admire him. He did some good, and did some bad.

I could not stand Obama from Day 1. He was running against Hillary in the Democratic primary (who I wholeheartedly supported), and I saw him as an empty suit. Nothing I have read (in supported government documents) will ever make me think well of a man who spied on Americans, sicced the IRS on his detractors, and knew fully about the soft-coup against President Trump and did nothing to stop it (I suppose that is one thing I think well about him for... I do not believe it was his idea), was a good President, or a good person.

Trump? If the media was even semi-fair to him (90%+ negative stories... and since Fox accounts for 48% positive stories, that must mean CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS are close to 100% negative) I would be willing to listen. But, since the press has been an arm of the "deep state" and Democratic party since he was elected? Nawwww. He has not been perfect, but for a political neophyte? He's been darned near close. Heck, peace in the Middle East? Whoddathunkit?  How much coverage has the "msm" given that?
 

[DFT]

6 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Wow, you think he’s a good man? That’s funny. 

First, thank you sincerely for your service.  I’m sorry I never gave you that respect before.

 

lastly, I also think there’s good with Trump, but for different reasons (knowing him before his becoming president and what he did for the Kelly’s as one example).  But I can’t stand willingly and call him a “good man”.  For me, it’s stepping back and believing that his flaws are transparent, something none of us are used to in a sitting president.  But I don’t condone his language and other things that know URL’s his opposition.  My personal beliefs dictate those feelings.  
 

all that said, in my career, with what I’ve witnessed personally, I can say for sure that the media is projecting in many cases a falsity.  How stark it contrasts is even more concerning.  So for me at least, knowing there’s tremendous dishonesty that’s beyond doubt (having seen it personally), I believe his being the person we see through Twitter is not a mistake.  It’s intentional for the purpose of showing the massive opposition he faces, that he won’t shy from it.  But I’ll never condone what we all know to be his human weaknesses.  That said (and just being human), I find myself wondering how I would react if I were him. My history on this forum has shown that when I am faced with an opposing view and I lose my own composure, I tend to stray from the person I want to be.

 

 

just my thoughts on the matter though.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

42 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

Fox runs negative Trump stories 52% of the time. Not sure how that means they are pro-Trump. (You can search this group for the link to that 52/48 number. I have posted it a few times.) You may not be as independent as you think if you consider Fox news pro-Trump.

I loved, loved, loved Bill Clinton. Over the years, I have found out more and more about him and his administration and have come to er, not love Bill Clinton. It has simply been a matter of reading information as it becomes available.

W - weapons of mass destruction. I cannot say I hated him though, nor did I admire him. He did some good, and did some bad.

I could not stand Obama from Day 1. He was running against Hillary in the Democratic primary (who I wholeheartedly supported), and I saw him as an empty suit. Nothing I have read (in supported government documents) will ever make me think well of a man who spied on Americans, sicced the IRS on his detractors, and knew fully about the soft-coup against President Trump and did nothing to stop it (I suppose that is one thing I think well about him for... I do not believe it was his idea), was a good President, or a good person.

Trump? If the media was even semi-fair to him (90%+ negative stories... and since Fox accounts for 48% positive stories, that must mean CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS are close to 100% negative) I would be willing to listen. But, since the press has been an arm of the "deep state" and Democratic party since he was elected? Nawwww. He has not been perfect, but for a political neophyte? He's been darned near close. Heck, peace in the Middle East? Whoddathunkit?  How much coverage has the "msm" given that?
 

 

 

 

...nicely done BG......makes getting up today worthwhile before tackling all of last night's "peaceful updates"........BTW,, sad that "W" took the bait hook, line and sinker from Wolfowicz and Pearle regarding Iraq.....he wasn't smart enough to realize these two "King Putzes" wanted the US to protect THEIR motherland.....and then disappeared from the landscape of criticism......

Edited September 6, 2020 by OldTimeAFLGuy

[Westside]

51 minutes ago, Juror#8 said:

Confirmation bias. 
 

I am completely politically independent. It took some time to get here but it’s a good place to be. I try to take in as much data as I can and then make a decision based on what candidate I feel represents the most of what I want. I don’t restrictively align with party because I think that misses an opportunity to learn. I don’t demonize the other party who I didn’t vote for because I think that’s stupid. 
 

I remember here during Obama days the usual suspects who hated him found every story - as unvetted and fledging as it might have been - and posted it (and supported it) as gospel. 
 

The Obama lovers refuted every negative Obama story with their own “support.” They wouldn’t believe anything no matter what. 
 

No one (not even the self-proclaim investigative journalists here) really dug into anything besides the most cursory research to verify what they wanted to believe anyway. 
 

Fast-forward to Trump and it’s the same thing all over again. Those who hate him post every freakin thing as if it’s gospel. Those who love Trump won’t believe anything negative - any reporting or negative news story period. 
 

Fox News is so badly slanted. It’s pathetic. 
 

I get it Fox - the world is coming apart at the seems because of the “Libs” and Trump is going to save it.
 

cnn is so badly slanted. It’s pathetic. 

I get it cnn, Trump is going to send us into the depths of humanity and wipe out minorities from North America. 
 

What happened to non-editorial journalism? 

Everyone finds everything to support what they already believe or want to believe. And there is support for every branch of opinion.
 

Maybe it’s comforting.

 

Maybe it’s re-affirmation. 

 

I wish I could stop everyone mid-argument in a sort of freeze frame soliloquy style and ask: does anyone care about the truth? 
 

Is anyone really comfortable thinking that there side is always right and the other side is always wrong? 

 

Does anyone want to know (or are do they have the capacity to believe) something different than what they already think?

 

Or better, what would it take to believe something different than what you already believe about Trump, Obama, Bush, the Clintons? 
 

Every question in here but the last is truly rhetorical. This thread is probably self-righteous and I’m ok with that. I don’t imagine much discussion on this topic anyway and that’s ok. It’s not salacious. There’s no red meat or slant in here. 
 

Maybe just think about it huh. 
 

Happy 2020. 

I thank you for your reasonable post, which is quite uncommon around here (myself included). I come at this from a different point of view, I had been a life long Democrat up to the 2016 election. I couldn't hold my nose and vote for Hillary. So I voted for what I thought was the lesser of two evils. Few things really surprise me,I've been around the block more times than I can count. I thought I had a handle on my democratic party and for what they fought for and what they believed. Let me tell you, the last four years have been an eye opener for me. Everything I thought they believed in has been thrown out the window. The blue collar workers, the less advantaged people were the one's I thought they fought for. I do not know when the party changed into such a hateful group of people. 

I remember as a Obama fan, debating back and forth with republicans about the Obama's presidency, sure, there were some posters who made derogatory remarks about his race, but it wasn't the majority, not even close. We fought over policies, beliefs, how the country should be run. It was for the most part civil. I don't know when it changed, when the tide of emotions turned what I thought was a once proud political party into a hateful bunch of lunatics. Through my own research and the help of some really decent posters, I found out on my own that I was lied too. The party I once loved never cared about me or pretty much anyone for that matter. To be fair, I don't feel any love or compassion from the right either. Which leaves me somewhere in no mans land. Then camp Donald Trump, whom I never really cared for to be quite honest. I always thought of him as a narcissistic blowhard. But I listened to him. Did my own research and realized he really belonged to either party. He was an outsider like me. I grew to like and respect him. Those who have an ax to grind, whether real or imagined will never understand this, but this isn't for them. I believe people can change, hell look at me, I never imagined I would nor could change as much as I have in the past four years. So I know it can happen. 

I believe President Trump has done an admiral job considering everything the left has done to undermine his presidency. Can you imagine how much more he could have accomplished if he had any kind of support from the left? I am amazed at what he has been able to accomplish so far. I am excited for the next four years if he is reelected. Without the pressures of running for another term on his mind, I believe he will, let me quote the past president "Have more flexibility" to work on what's good for the country. He deserves another four years. Some politicians deserve to go to jail. Maybe by some miracle, we will get both. Hey, I never thought I would change as much as I have in the past four years. So you never Know!

[Juror#8]

1 hour ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

Fox runs negative Trump stories 52% of the time. Not sure how that means they are pro-Trump. (You can search this group for the link to that 52/48 number. I have posted it a few times.) You may not be as independent as you think if you consider Fox news pro-Trump.

I loved, loved, loved Bill Clinton. Over the years, I have found out more and more about him and his administration and have come to er, not love Bill Clinton. It has simply been a matter of reading information as it becomes available.

W - weapons of mass destruction. I cannot say I hated him though, nor did I admire him. He did some good, and did some bad.

I could not stand Obama from Day 1. He was running against Hillary in the Democratic primary (who I wholeheartedly supported), and I saw him as an empty suit. Nothing I have read (in supported government documents) will ever make me think well of a man who spied on Americans, sicced the IRS on his detractors, and knew fully about the soft-coup against President Trump and did nothing to stop it (I suppose that is one thing I think well about him for... I do not believe it was his idea), was a good President, or a good person.

Trump? If the media was even semi-fair to him (90%+ negative stories... and since Fox accounts for 48% positive stories, that must mean CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS are close to 100% negative) I would be willing to listen. But, since the press has been an arm of the "deep state" and Democratic party since he was elected? Nawwww. He has not been perfect, but for a political neophyte? He's been darned near close. Heck, peace in the Middle East? Whoddathunkit?  How much coverage has the "msm" given that?
 

What I think is that Fox is very much pro-Trump narrative. 
 

‘The world is on the brink of destruction at the hands of urban baddies!’
 

Check. 
 

‘Dems trying to cancel culture in some small unknown town in the upper peninsula of Michigan’ three stories down on Fox’ front page. 
 

check. 
 

‘Suburban moms quake at the threat of Lamont and Leroy bringing blm to their doorstep. You’re next!’

 

Ok cool. 
 

White business owner in (name the battle ground state) going out of business because they refuse to mandate masks. 
 

Check. 

Cnn is pro-Biden narrative 

 

‘Vote for Trump means you’re gonna die of smallpox and Covid cocktail.’
 

‘Trump hates vets!’

 

Sure. 
 

Look at the front page(s) right now. And put the narrative puzzle together. 
 

It’s a lot of skullduggery. 
 

It’s clear where the allegiances are. 
 

But let’s see your data. And let’s vet the sources. 

Edited September 6, 2020 by Juror#8

[Chef Jim]

1 hour ago, Tiberius said:

Wow, you think he’s a good man? That’s funny. 

So you asked a true independent what his thoughts are about Trump.  He gives them to you and instead of thanking him and saying something like “fair enough” you ridicule him.   Why no one engages you in serious conversation/debate because you’re incapable of it. 

[Westside]

5 minutes ago, Juror#8 said:

What I think is that Fox is very much pro-Trump narrative. 
 

The world is on the brink of destruction at the hands of urban baddies!
 

Check. 
 

‘Dems trying to cancel culture in some small unknown town in the upper peninsula of Michigan’ three stories down on Fox’ front page. 
 

check. 
 

‘Suburban moms quake at the threat of Lamont and Leroy bringing blm to their doorstep. You’re next!’

 

Ok cool. 
 

White business owner in (name the battle ground state) going out of business because they refuse to mandate masks. 
 

Check. 

Cnn is pro-Biden narrative 

 

Vote for Trump means you’re gonna die of smallpox and Covid cocktail. 
 

Trump hates vets

 

Sure. 
 

Look at the front page(s) right now. And put the narrative puzzle together. 
 

It’s a lot of skullduggery. 
 

It’s clear where the allegiances are. 
 

But let’s see your data. And let’s vet the sources. 

I'm curious as to what you believe. I ask thus with no malice. I agree with quite a bit of what you said, now I'd like to hear what you believe in if you care to share. Thank you in advance.

[Buffalo_Gal]

16 minutes ago, Juror#8 said:

But let’s see your data. And let’s vet the sources. 

My data has been posted a number of times. Please do some digging into this forum. 🙂

[Juror#8]

4 minutes ago, westside2 said:

I'm curious as to what you believe. I ask thus with no malice. I agree with quite a bit of what you said, now I'd like to hear what you believe in if you care to share. Thank you in advance.

I think we’re in a politically vulnerable place. I think sides are entrenched and that makes for bad presidential politics and then bad legislative politics. 
 

Politicians spend news cycles talking the shittiest of the ***** about one another and then expect to work together last minute. 
 

It doesn’t work for anyone - most importantly the American people. 
 

Trump hasn’t been close to perfect. He’s struggled with consensus-building. He’s probably more of a ‘labeler’ than he should be if he really wants to get something done for the country. He’s also reactionary and indiscreet. That’s ‘cool’ and outsiderish but it also has consequences for governance that he needs to understand. 
 

But recall what I said about entrenched interests. Dems don’t want to work with the man. They really want him to fail which is bad for the country. I don’t have any data to support that but I believe it’s obvious. In that way Democrats are acting in a way contrary to what’s best for the country. 
 

‘Putting the country first’ has become a cliche but truly no one is doing it. 
 

Not Trump. Not the Republicans. Not Democrats. Everyone is trying to consolidate and institutionalize power for the sake of its own perpetuation. 
 

Not sure what the final act to that is. But it’s not to the enduring benefit of any one civilian who has to live within it. 

18 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

My data has been posted a number of times. Please do some digging into this forum. 🙂

No thank you. 
 

I figured you mentioned it so you could provide the support. 
 

I’m ok with my ask of you. 

[Westside]

7 minutes ago, Juror#8 said:

I think we’re in a politically vulnerable place. I think sides are entrenched and that makes for bad presidential politics and then bad legislative politics. 
 

Politicians spend news cycles talking the shittiest of the ***** about one another and then expect to work together last minute. 
 

It doesn’t work for anyone - most importantly the American people. 
 

Trump hasn’t been close to perfect. He’s struggled with consensus-building. He’s probably more of a ‘labeler’ than he should be if he really wants to get something done for the country. He’s also reactionary and indiscreet. That’s ‘cool’ and outsiderish but it also has consequences for governance that he needs to understand. 
 

But recall what I said about entrenched interests. Dems don’t want to work with the man. They really want him to fail which is bad for the country. I don’t have any data to support that but I believe it’s obvious. In that way Democrats are acting in a way contrary to what’s best for the country. 
 

‘Putting the country first’ has become a cliche but truly no one is doing it. 
 

Not Trump. Not the Republicans. Not Democrats. Everyone is trying to consolidate and institutionalize power for the sake of its own perpetuation. 
 

Not sure what the final act to that is. But it’s not to the enduring benefit of any one civilian who has to live within it. 

No thank you. 
 

I figured you mentioned it so you could provide the support. 
 

I’m ok with my ask of you. 

Thank you for your response, I agree with most of what you say. My only disagreement would be that Trump doesn't care about putting the country first. The fact that we were in one of the greatest economies this country had ever seen before covid came along. The unemployment rate for minorities were lower than they ever have been. I believe he cares for and loves this country as much if not more than past presidents. I am willing to give him a pass due to the "pandemic", it's impossible to get the economy rolling again when you have liberal governors and mayors doing everything in there power to keep everything closed.  

[bdutton]

1 hour ago, Juror#8 said:

That he is a good man trying to do what’s best for the country based on his vision of America. 

He’s made mistakes. 

He’s had some big wins!

 

Like I said with Obama, I’ll give him his full presidency before I appraise fully. I think he deserves that. 

I agree with everything said except the first line.

 

I don't think he's necessarily a good man.  He is a deeply flawed human and narcissist.

 

But you have t give credit to the man.  He was woefully unprepared to become President.  I really think he was shocked that he had won.  Never believing that he would win with the polls the way they were.  

 

The Obama administration did everything they could to undermine his candidacy, the transition of power and post inauguration Obama/Deep State holdovers coup attempt.

 

He reduced regulations and negotiated better trade deals resulting in an economy that grew at an astonishing rate and employment numbers that benefited all races.

 

He started no new wars.  Ended the endless wars.  Negotiated historic middle east peace deals.

 

All of this in the face a an overtly hostile media.

 

Cons... the tax cuts while benefited in the short term will need to be adjusted to curb the deficit.  He is an egomaniac.  If he would just stay off twitter and and allow his handlers to manage his communications he would have a 10 point lead over Biden at this point.  As far as the corona virus is concerned, its anyone's guess how things may have turned out if it was Hillary running the show.  One thing I do believe, we would be mired in foreign wars and dealing with a much worse economic crisis if she was in charge.

[New Improved DC Tom]

2 hours ago, Tiberius said:

Wow, you think he’s a good man? That’s funny. 

 

A mistake no one's ever made of a flaming shitburger like yourself.

[keepthefaith]

2 hours ago, Juror#8 said:

What I think is that Fox is very much pro-Trump narrative. 
 

‘The world is on the brink of destruction at the hands of urban baddies!’
 

Check. 
 

‘Dems trying to cancel culture in some small unknown town in the upper peninsula of Michigan’ three stories down on Fox’ front page. 
 

check. 
 

‘Suburban moms quake at the threat of Lamont and Leroy bringing blm to their doorstep. You’re next!’

 

Ok cool. 
 

White business owner in (name the battle ground state) going out of business because they refuse to mandate masks. 
 

Check. 

Cnn is pro-Biden narrative 

 

‘Vote for Trump means you’re gonna die of smallpox and Covid cocktail.’
 

‘Trump hates vets!’

 

Sure. 
 

Look at the front page(s) right now. And put the narrative puzzle together. 
 

It’s a lot of skullduggery. 
 

It’s clear where the allegiances are. 
 

But let’s see your data. And let’s vet the sources. 

 

No doubt the media biases you point out are very real.  It absolutely starts with what they choose to report.  There are many days when you can read the home pages of CNN vs Fox and wonder if they are reporting on the same country the same day.  The gaps are that large.  However since these outlets each choose to report on some things and not on others, there can be benefit from viewing both and if you have some awareness of the subject matter and the expected biases, you can extract some "news".

 

What's really concerning though is the coordinated political bias that is on display every hour every day and since the media overall is vastly left, they are the the largest offenders.  There is no veil on it at all.  An example was a couple months ago when protests/riots broke out and some pol (might have been Harris) used the phrase "Reimagine law enforcement" and literally every outlet excluding fox is running wit that phrase.  Not that they were quoting a specific person who said it but that their news people, pundit guests and interviewed pols were all using the phrase withing minutes of each other.  Total coordination, total propaganda.  That's not to say that the subject of law enforcement isn't newsworthy, it's the blatant coordinated effort in their "reporting" that is disgusting.

 

Fox of course avoids reporting plenty of Trump bad stories. 

 

I'd be a much happier person and I think same true for millions of others if political reporting was more fact based, prioritized by "how important is this really" and covered government performance based on the larger government responsibilities.  Problem is it would be somewhat boring, wouldn't sell as well and so many that actually do the work of producing news would have to check their biases at the door. 

 

Our Federal Gov IMO needs to focus on its big responsibilities and get its house in order before it involves itself in every little fire that starts at local and state levels.  A stay in your lane bro' approach. 

Edited September 6, 2020 by keepthefaith

[Koko78]

2 hours ago, Juror#8 said:

‘Suburban moms quake at the threat of Lamont and Leroy bringing blm to their doorstep. You’re next!’

 

Wait, what's wrong with Lamont? I mean, Leroy is an ####### and all, but why lump poor Lamont in with him?

[3rdnlng]

3 hours ago, New Improved DC Tom said:

 

A mistake no one's ever made of a flaming shitburger like yourself.

You newbies learn fast. 

3 hours ago, keepthefaith said:

 

No doubt the media biases you point out are very real.  It absolutely starts with what they choose to report.  There are many days when you can read the home pages of CNN vs Fox and wonder if they are reporting on the same country the same day.  The gaps are that large.  However since these outlets each choose to report on some things and not on others, there can be benefit from viewing both and if you have some awareness of the subject matter and the expected biases, you can extract some "news".

 

What's really concerning though is the coordinated political bias that is on display every hour every day and since the media overall is vastly left, they are the the largest offenders.  There is no veil on it at all.  An example was a couple months ago when protests/riots broke out and some pol (might have been Harris) used the phrase "Reimagine law enforcement" and literally every outlet excluding fox is running wit that phrase.  Not that they were quoting a specific person who said it but that their news people, pundit guests and interviewed pols were all using the phrase withing minutes of each other.  Total coordination, total propaganda.  That's not to say that the subject of law enforcement isn't newsworthy, it's the blatant coordinated effort in their "reporting" that is disgusting.

 

Fox of course avoids reporting plenty of Trump bad stories. 

 

I'd be a much happier person and I think same true for millions of others if political reporting was more fact based, prioritized by "how important is this really" and covered government performance based on the larger government responsibilities.  Problem is it would be somewhat boring, wouldn't sell as well and so many that actually do the work of producing news would have to check their biases at the door. 

 

Our Federal Gov IMO needs to focus on its big responsibilities and get its house in order before it involves itself in every little fire that starts at local and state levels.  A stay in your lane bro' approach. 

Fox has had the so called controversy regarding Trump's so called "sucker" and "loser" remarks basically on a loop for the last three days. It got worse when Trump criticized Jennifer Griffen. 

2 hours ago, Koko78 said:

 

Wait, what's wrong with Lamont? I mean, Leroy is an ####### and all, but why lump poor Lamont in with him?

Careful now, nobody ***** with Big Bad Leroy Brown.