American Election Discussion

1121315171833

Comments

  • Mike Pence is right wing side of the Tea Party, I get even more depressed
  • Sanders will landslide next election if he goes again
  • So, the Trump presidency begins with lies, inaccuracies, aggression towards the media, and self-aggrandisement.

    #startasyoumeantogoon
  • So, the Trump presidency begins with lies, inaccuracies, aggression towards the media, and self-aggrandisement.

    #startasyoumeantogoon

    And poor judgement, there really was no need to attack the media over a couple of pictures that were out there comparing attendance at the past couple of presidential inaugurations.

    He would have much been better served to just ignore the issue as it really is not an important issue, unfortunately, he could not help himself and he felt the need to fight back at what he saw as a slight against him.

    #poorjudgement

    Frankly the very first White House press secretary briefing was simply jaw dropping.

    The essence was that Trump wants the history books to record that more people were at his inauguration than any other, he then expects a line to be drawn under the issue believing that if he says something is true then we should all simply accept that it is true and move on.

    #ithinkheismistaken



  • Already, almost all of my work is involving Trump and I'm not even in the US ;weep
  • edited January 2017
    ;weep ;hug

    But what you are doing is so important.

    It seems to me that he sees the media (or at least an unbiased media, interested in the facts, and unaccountable to him) as a threat.

    So he is trying to neutralise that threat by both discrediting and marginalising such media.

    He is trying to disempower the reputable media, manipulate the news, and embed a worldview that facts are irrelevant, anyone who disagrees is lying, and the truth what he says it is.

    That, imo, is why the first presser of his newly appointed Press Secretary took no questions, and made claims that were easily disproved. And why he is (apparently) considering removing credentials from reputable media outlets, or those that are critical, and inviting selected 'bloggers,' sycophants and non-mainstream to be part of the press corps.

  • Alternative facts ;doh
  • Unbiased Reputable Media "Laughable"..

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/07/donna-brazile-is-totally-not-sorry-for-leaking-cnn-debate-questions-to-hillary-clinton/?utm_term=.646d85f05c7b

    Many elements of the liberal media will do and say anything to create controversy and confusion. Unfortunately Trump bites at much of the proverbial taking the focus off the issues which the media cannot defend.
    TV Media hosts are interviewing with an obvious axe to grind, they are not interested in any way to learn, what, how, or if, they simply fish for new controversial headlines and call it investigative reporting.

    Time will tell, Trump may very well turn out to be a breath of fresh air, certainly beats 4 more years of Obamas failed domestic and foreign policies.
  • MrsGrey said:

    ;weep ;hug



    That, imo, is why the first presser of his newly appointed Press Secretary took no questions, and made claims that were easily disproved. And why he is (apparently) considering removing credentials from reputable media outlets, or those that are critical, and inviting selected 'bloggers,' sycophants and non-mainstream to be part of the press corps.

    This is becoming quite common. Spokespeople running WhatsApp groups that are convenient for all involved but actually give all the power to the officials. They don't have to run press conferences that will be put on camera when they don't answer Qs, they can just ignore the messages while disseminating info as they like. Netanyahu almost never does proper press conferences where you get to answer the Qs.

    Social media has allowed them to increase the flow of 'info' but completely control what that consists of and prevent it being questioned.
  • The Emperor's New Clothes
  • simon, what do you think about the blatant lies about the inauguration attendance figures then? Just completely false and easily disprovable - no secret info or data needed, just look at what is already in the public domain.

    Is that 'a breath of fresh air' in your view?



  • That article you posted, simon. I'm not sure what point you are making or what argument you think it supports.


  • I think the most worrying aspect of Trump is his capacity to take things personally and his speed of reaction (albeit mainly through twitter). I have long held that one of the key traits of effective strategists and leaders is their ability to not take things personally, generally the higher intelligence in anyone the less they take things personally because when someone attacks you personally the strategist is more interested in what that reveals about you and how best to use that within their strategy of dealing with you, rather than what they are saying about you.

    Traditionally Presidents would appear professional to avoid providing too many psychological reads to potential adversaries. As president you never know when a bay of pigs will arise. Once Obama gave his game away with regard Russia they just went for it, their aims will now have shifted from sphere of influence for now to sanctions removal. They will recognise Trump as a narcissist and so will be sure to make him feel good about himself and treat him as an intelligent person who is coming up with the ideas they wish him to move forward with, give him something early so he can gain approval at home for striking a rapport with you that gains him reward, let him feel you trust him and then seek your aim, he will not want to refuse you and will create a context to give you what you want.

    To fair however him behaving professionally so as not to reveal his personal make up too soon is pretty pointless when you have appeared on the apprentice. Putin is still putting on re runs, looking at Lavrov and going 'really' whilst chuckling.
  • Meant to use example of Cuban missile crisis rather than Bay of pigs, same country wrong event ;doh
  • edited January 2017
    MrsGrey said:

    That article you posted, simon. I'm not sure what point you are making or what argument you think it supports.


    It seems very clear to me - I assume you think it is ok then to hire the head of the DNC as an analyst and give her the questions? As the article says her actions were predictable so why did CNN put her in that position ;hmm combine that with their very liberal reporting 2 + 2 = 4, I used that article on purpose as even the Washington Post could not excuse it.

    We agree on the inauguration attendance, its a non issue, funny that the media brought it up in the first place ;hmm maybe to get a reaction?

    Funny they stirred people up by claiming the bust of MLK had been removed when it hadn't, are they blind or just trying to make up a good story "Alternative Fact" it was retracted but was already out there and shared 1,000's of times I am sure the retraction was shared just as many times "NOT"

  • Retracting it doesn't mean it didn't happen.

    Feghouli's red against Utd was retracted but we still played with 10 for 75 minutes. Damage already done.

    It appears to me that Trump and his supporters choose to change the subject rather than answer any of the questions posed.
  • edited January 2017
    Spending his first days arguing about how many people come to watch him. Not like there is more important thing going on, either Foreign or Domestic...

    Controlling and Criticizing the press, indicating their will be punishment for stories they don't like...

    Next step he will be pointing fingers at minorities, telling people it will all be ok if we can get rid of them, O wait a minute his done that already...

    "If you say is fast enough"

    16194934_1667954933499113_2793783704049904919_n
  • edited January 2017
    simonc said:

    Unbiased Reputable Media "Laughable"..

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/07/donna-brazile-is-totally-not-sorry-for-leaking-cnn-debate-questions-to-hillary-clinton/?utm_term=.646d85f05c7b

    Many elements of the liberal media will do and say anything to create controversy and confusion. Unfortunately Trump bites at much of the proverbial taking the focus off the issues which the media cannot defend.
    TV Media hosts are interviewing with an obvious axe to grind, they are not interested in any way to learn, what, how, or if, they simply fish for new controversial headlines and call it investigative reporting.

    Simon
    The so called liberal media use investigative Journalism to probe the background and plans of a new president to hold him to account.
    Fox news (Liberal media ??) did this to Obama at every opportunity.
    If they find anything untoward, and they have real evidence that looks like their findings are true or can be backed up, they may or may not publish. This may or may not create a sensational headline.
    See Watergate for a very good example.

    You dont think up a sensational headline, and then do some Investigative reporting to try and back it up.

    It does not happen this way around matey

    ;ok
  • There's an interesting discussion happening now about replacing DC journalists with senior foreign correspondents because the nature of dealing with the White House has completely changed. And this also already appears to be happening - quite a few Middle East reporters have been drafted into DC.
  • edited January 2017
    simonc

    We agree on the inauguration attendance, its a non issue,
    I don't think so.

    The issue itself should be irrelevant, but the fact that Trump feels it's OK to pull a number out of his POTUS and declare it with no supporting evidence, and the fact that his press secretary deliberately provided a distorted figure is NOT irrelevant. Nor is it irrelevant that in the 'land of the free' the first day of the presidency should involve threatening the press, and making false statements about their actions and intentions.

    Nor is it it irrelevant that despite your forensic examination of Obama and Clinton, you are prepared to give Trump a pass at every turn.
  • edited January 2017
    simonc said:


    It seems very clear to me - I assume you think it is ok then to hire the head of the DNC as an analyst and give her the questions?

    Yes - to the extent that all the main news programmes hire analysts with link to the 2 political parties. It would probably be better NOT to do t, and get independent analysts in place. But I think it is also reasonable to expect people to behave professionally and not 'cheat' the system.
    simonc said:

    As the article says her actions were predictable so why did CNN put her in that position .

    article doesn't say it. It is quoting the opinion of a radio interviewer.
    simonc said:

    We agree on the inauguration attendance, its a non issue, funny that the media brought it up in the first place ;hmm maybe to get a reaction?

    Well, the media have to 'bring things up' It's called reporting what has happened.
    simonc said:

    Funny they stirred people up by claiming the bust of MLK had been removed when it hadn't, are they blind or just trying to make up a good story "Alternative Fact" it was retracted but was already out there and shared 1,000's of times I am sure the retraction was shared just as many times "NOT"

    No, They REPORTED what a journalist who was in the room had tweeted. They didn't make anything up.
    A retraction was made, more than once.
    So the TRUE fact is out there for anyone who wants to look for it.

    That is very different from attempting to continue to lie about it. Which is what Trump's team did, did again, and continue to defend (rather than retract with an apology).

    ----

    My understanding (now) is that you posted the article because you are arguing that two wrongs make a right. ;hmm
  • alderz said:



    It appears to me that Trump and his supporters choose to change the subject rather than answer any of the questions posed.

    I think this is exactly right.

    Latest thing: the tax returns.

    He promised over and over again, to release them when they were no longer 'under audit*'. Now it has been confirmed that he won't.

    When pressed and questioned about this broken promise (let's be generous and call it a change of heart rather than a calculated lie), his representative said 'people don't care'. Basically saying he's elected now, so let's change the subject.



    *Note: there was never any evidence that they were 'under audit' apart from his say-so. And even if they were , he could still have released them
  • I`m not the biggest fan of the press/media in its general popular form, unfortunately it seems to pander to and has become a victim of the lowest common denominator and is ALL about sales, sensationalism and ultimately profit. It is becoming harder and harder to differentiate between fact and fiction. However, there seems to be just about enough credible journalism out there to "worry" the politicians which is why all politicians, and particularly those of a dictatorial bent, look to suppress and ultimately control the media, and as a result suppress and control us. A "free" uncensored press is absolutely essential to maintain any semblance of democracy, liberty and freedom. The press/media, despite all its faults, is the only institution left that is strong and powerful enough to provide any form of checks and balances against poor government. I mentioned Jefferson earlier, and if you are in any doubt as to the importance he placed on a free press he once said: "Were it left to me to decide whether we should have government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter"

    Keep up the good work Outcast. ;ok
  • NHL Dallas Stars announce their attendance:

    image


  • "No, They REPORTED what a journalist who was in the room had tweeted."

    Mrs G this strikes at the heart of my argument, a biased reporter posts without confirming the facts and the gang of wolves chew at the meat republishing again without confirming. But of course they did not post the news they posted that someone else posted the news. This is transparent & biased.

    Mrs G we do agree on the attendance issue, I do not understand the motivation for saying so, so cannot defend why it was said, stupid imo, as i said it just diverts attention from the facts & will be regurgitated again and again by the media when it has no relevance to the main agenda,

    As for Obama and Clinton they have allot to answer for, Trump has been in office for 2 days.

    As for Tax returns they are obviously not relevant to the general public, if they were he would not be President. Just another piece of meat for the press to chew on. I don't blame him for keeping them private.




  • simonc said:



    As for Tax returns they are obviously not relevant to the general public, if they were he would not be President.

    How do you work this out? Your statement is contradicted by the (actual) fact that in surveys of opinion, between 65 and 75% of voters (depending on which survey you look at) said he should release his tax records.

    He was (in relation to tax data, anyway) voted for on the basis of a promise which he has now reneged on.

    Will you say, about any other promises he breaks - well it's an issue that doesn't matter to the public, if it did they wouldn't have voted for him?

  • edited January 2017
    simonc said:



    "No, They REPORTED what a journalist who was in the room had tweeted."

    Mrs G this strikes at the heart of my argument, a biased reporter posts without confirming the facts and the gang of wolves chew at the meat republishing again without confirming.

    I have been checking my facts. ;biggrin

    Apparently, the original tweet was NEVER covered in the media before the correction was issued.

    The 'correction' tweet was made within an hour of the first one. No media picked it up during that time.

    All press coverage of the story mentioned BOTH tweets, ie the wrong story about the bust removal, and the subsequent hoo-ha.

    The story was given legs by Spicer and Trump.

    They promoted the story because it serves their agenda.

    So, what does that do to the heart of your argument again?

  • Re taxes, I for one am relieved that he has not released them, IMO someone's tax returns should not be put in public display.

    I think that for someone in such a public office, they should be audited and a summary report given to a responsible ethics committee to ensure Compliance with all laws and that any potential conflicts of interest can be adequately addressed.

    The releasing of tax returns has become routine but for someone like Trump, I refuse to believe that there is anything actually illegal within them but I would not expect them to be straight forward and If he did release them, I fear that it would create a media feeding frenzy that would eclipse all prior feeding frenzy's

    I get that he promised to release them and it now looks like he is going to renage in that promise, but is that just yet another example of poor judgement, he should have foreseen the firestorm and just come right out and said that he will not release his returns publicly but will present them to the so and so and such and such ethics committee for an independent review by White House and RNC representatives, he was after all the nominee of the RNC.




Sign In or Register to comment.