|
|
Post by aardvark on May 24, 2024 5:29:21 GMT -5
I am surprised that the viewing options in the part of Maryland where you live are so limited. Is there no way of changing the channels in your exercise room and is there no way to get a basic cable package that includes all of the big four Networks? Are you also suggesting that CNN and MSNBC don’t create an echo chamber of their own? You have to consider the situation. To get tenants, the owners of the apartment complex want a spiffy exercise room with lots of TVs. But people coming in to evaluate whether to go to that apartment versus some other aren't going to pay close attention to what programs are running on what channels beyond "two sports, one news, one spanish, etc". Combine that with the fact that channel setups are packaged and it's easy to understand how the package deal people end up with is very limited in its selection. As for me, I spend far too much time on this stupid forum and not nearly enough time exercizing, so the impact of which channels are on during my daily run is... limited. But I do find it mildly irritating that the one news channel is a bit slanted. I tend to watch the sports channels. Note that this TV package for the exercize room is not the same as the TV package for residents in their apartments. The latter has options. The difference is that the CNN/MSNBC "echo chamber" covers the real news in a pretty balanced manner. As I said before, I invite you to compare online, where it is easiest to analyze the differences. Pay close attention to stories that are bad for each group. How much display do they get? Is that display timely? How exactly is that news presented? If a story begins with an emotional summary before the content is stated, that should be taken as a red flag. Also bad if stories are non-stop opinion pieces with no supporting data. |
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on May 24, 2024 5:42:20 GMT -5
And then there's the abyss of Trump's moral character. Again, your critique lands on Trump as a person. A critique of his character is valid but shouldn’t be conflated with what he did as president. If moral character was the basis for evaluation, Jimmy Carter was, arguably, the best president ever. Hopefully we agree that wasn’t the case. The thing is... there's a big difference between excessively good moral character and excessively bad moral character. The latter is much more alarming. Trump has shown that his primary focus as President is personally profiting from it. As I've said before elsewhere, he was restrained somewhat in his corruptive chances by being surrounded by employees who moderated his worst impulses. This, time, he's setting it up to flood the government with toadies who will just do his bidding. The level of profiteering should climb considerably. And it's not just him. He attracts similar types of people. Look at the criminality of the people he had working for him in his first term. He pardoned some of them himself and says he wants to do that for the Jan 6th people who led the coup in his name. What his people learned from his first failed attempt is that it almost worked. They just didn't go far enough, trying to win with flag poles instead of easy-to-acquire military caliber weapons. If Trump gets back in office again, he will set it up so that he won't leave until he croaks. He has plenty of authoritarians he's chummy with to model what he'd do. |
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanVBfan on May 24, 2024 8:37:24 GMT -5
Again, your critique lands on Trump as a person. A critique of his character is valid but shouldn’t be conflated with what he did as president. If moral character was the basis for evaluation, Jimmy Carter was, arguably, the best president ever. Hopefully we agree that wasn’t the case. The thing is... there's a big difference between excessively good moral character and excessively bad moral character. The latter is much more alarming. Trump has shown that his primary focus as President is personally profiting from it. As I've said before elsewhere, he was restrained somewhat in his corruptive chances by being surrounded by employees who moderated his worst impulses. This, time, he's setting it up to flood the government with toadies who will just do his bidding. The level of profiteering should climb considerably. And it's not just him. He attracts similar types of people. Look at the criminality of the people he had working for him in his first term. He pardoned some of them himself and says he wants to do that for the Jan 6th people who led the coup in his name. What his people learned from his first failed attempt is that it almost worked. They just didn't go far enough, trying to win with flag poles instead of easy-to-acquire military caliber weapons. If Trump gets back in office again, he will set it up so that he won't leave until he croaks. He has plenty of authoritarians he's chummy with to model what he'd do. What "worst impulses" are you referring to? If his employees were doing so, whoever was in charge of his then Twitter account dropped the ball. Did it? A bunch of buffoons walked around a bit, some sat in offices and took stuff. One breached an area she shouldn't have been in and was killed. One dude walked inside was told by police to exit the building and immediately did so. This, imo, didn't even come close to "working", as you put it. |
|
|
|
Post by jsquare on May 24, 2024 8:41:57 GMT -5
The thing is... there's a big difference between excessively good moral character and excessively bad moral character. The latter is much more alarming. Trump has shown that his primary focus as President is personally profiting from it. As I've said before elsewhere, he was restrained somewhat in his corruptive chances by being surrounded by employees who moderated his worst impulses. This, time, he's setting it up to flood the government with toadies who will just do his bidding. The level of profiteering should climb considerably. And it's not just him. He attracts similar types of people. Look at the criminality of the people he had working for him in his first term. He pardoned some of them himself and says he wants to do that for the Jan 6th people who led the coup in his name. What his people learned from his first failed attempt is that it almost worked. They just didn't go far enough, trying to win with flag poles instead of easy-to-acquire military caliber weapons. If Trump gets back in office again, he will set it up so that he won't leave until he croaks. He has plenty of authoritarians he's chummy with to model what he'd do. What "worst impulses" are you referring to? If his employees were doing so, whoever was in charge of his then Twitter account dropped the ball. Did it? A bunch of buffoons walked around a bit, some sat in offices and took stuff. One breached an area she shouldn't have been in and was killed. One dude walked inside was told by police to exit the building and immediately did so. This, imo, didn't even come close to "working", as you put it. all you are doing is once again showing off your complete and utter ignorance. Trump attempted to bribe a foreign leader, he tried to strong arm election officials, he stole classified documents, he obstructed justice, he committed campaign finance fraud. That's just off the top of my head. |
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanVBfan on May 24, 2024 8:42:04 GMT -5
I am surprised that the viewing options in the part of Maryland where you live are so limited. Is there no way of changing the channels in your exercise room and is there no way to get a basic cable package that includes all of the big four Networks? Are you also suggesting that CNN and MSNBC don’t create an echo chamber of their own? You have to consider the situation. To get tenants, the owners of the apartment complex want a spiffy exercise room with lots of TVs. But people coming in to evaluate whether to go to that apartment versus some other aren't going to pay close attention to what programs are running on what channels beyond "two sports, one news, one spanish, etc". Combine that with the fact that channel setups are packaged and it's easy to understand how the package deal people end up with is very limited in its selection. As for me, I spend far too much time on this stupid forum and not nearly enough time exercizing, so the impact of which channels are on during my daily run is... limited. But I do find it mildly irritating that the one news channel is a bit slanted. I tend to watch the sports channels. Note that this TV package for the exercize room is not the same as the TV package for residents in their apartments. The latter has options. The difference is that the CNN/MSNBC "echo chamber" covers the real news in a pretty balanced manner. As I said before, I invite you to compare online, where it is easiest to analyze the differences. Pay close attention to stories that are bad for each group. How much display do they get? Is that display timely? How exactly is that news presented? If a story begins with an emotional summary before the content is stated, that should be taken as a red flag. Also bad if stories are non-stop opinion pieces with no supporting data. I guess CNN/MSNBC online are different than their television product. Ex-CNN head had wanted their reporting to be more balanced. Their nighttime anchors (Don Lemon, Chris Cuomo) were hardly balanced, but you may have been referring to their overall product. |
|
|
|
Post by jsquare on May 24, 2024 8:43:32 GMT -5
You have to consider the situation. To get tenants, the owners of the apartment complex want a spiffy exercise room with lots of TVs. But people coming in to evaluate whether to go to that apartment versus some other aren't going to pay close attention to what programs are running on what channels beyond "two sports, one news, one spanish, etc". Combine that with the fact that channel setups are packaged and it's easy to understand how the package deal people end up with is very limited in its selection. As for me, I spend far too much time on this stupid forum and not nearly enough time exercizing, so the impact of which channels are on during my daily run is... limited. But I do find it mildly irritating that the one news channel is a bit slanted. I tend to watch the sports channels. Note that this TV package for the exercize room is not the same as the TV package for residents in their apartments. The latter has options. The difference is that the CNN/MSNBC "echo chamber" covers the real news in a pretty balanced manner. As I said before, I invite you to compare online, where it is easiest to analyze the differences. Pay close attention to stories that are bad for each group. How much display do they get? Is that display timely? How exactly is that news presented? If a story begins with an emotional summary before the content is stated, that should be taken as a red flag. Also bad if stories are non-stop opinion pieces with no supporting data. I guess CNN/MSNBC online are different than their television product. Ex-CNN head had wanted their reporting to be more balanced. Their nighttime anchors (Don Lemon, Chris Cuomo) were hardly balanced, but you may have been referring to their overall product. Which News Network paid close to a billion dollars to settle a lawsuit accusing them of lying? |
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanVBfan on May 24, 2024 8:43:32 GMT -5
What "worst impulses" are you referring to? If his employees were doing so, whoever was in charge of his then Twitter account dropped the ball. Did it? A bunch of buffoons walked around a bit, some sat in offices and took stuff. One breached an area she shouldn't have been in and was killed. One dude walked inside was told by police to exit the building and immediately did so. This, imo, didn't even come close to "working", as you put it. all you are doing is once again showing off your complete and utter ignorance. Trump attempted to bribe a foreign leader, he tried to strong arm election officials, he stole classified documents, he obstructed justice, he committed campaign finance fraud. That's just off the top of my head. Well then, I guess the employees that 'vark was talking about did a terrible job. Shame on them. |
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanVBfan on May 24, 2024 8:47:33 GMT -5
I guess CNN/MSNBC online are different than their television product. Ex-CNN head had wanted their reporting to be more balanced. Their nighttime anchors (Don Lemon, Chris Cuomo) were hardly balanced, but you may have been referring to their overall product. Which News Network paid close to a billion dollars to settle a lawsuit accusing them of lying? Shhh you're harping again. Sound these words out as I space them for you, maybe it will help you to better understand. Whatever money FOX paid in a lawsuit settlement has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with CNN and MSNBC having reporting biases over their own. |
|
|
|
Post by jsquare on May 24, 2024 8:49:33 GMT -5
Which News Network paid close to a billion dollars to settle a lawsuit accusing them of lying? Shhh you're harping again. Sound these words out as I space them for you, maybe it will help you to better understand. Whatever money FOX paid in a lawsuit settlement has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with CNN and MSNBC having reporting biases over their own. It does have to do with your silly assed comparisons. What stories have either CNN or MSNBC blatantly lied about? |
|
|
|
Post by jsquare on May 24, 2024 8:50:40 GMT -5
The thing is... there's a big difference between excessively good moral character and excessively bad moral character. The latter is much more alarming. Trump has shown that his primary focus as President is personally profiting from it. As I've said before elsewhere, he was restrained somewhat in his corruptive chances by being surrounded by employees who moderated his worst impulses. This, time, he's setting it up to flood the government with toadies who will just do his bidding. The level of profiteering should climb considerably. And it's not just him. He attracts similar types of people. Look at the criminality of the people he had working for him in his first term. He pardoned some of them himself and says he wants to do that for the Jan 6th people who led the coup in his name. What his people learned from his first failed attempt is that it almost worked. They just didn't go far enough, trying to win with flag poles instead of easy-to-acquire military caliber weapons. If Trump gets back in office again, he will set it up so that he won't leave until he croaks. He has plenty of authoritarians he's chummy with to model what he'd do. What "worst impulses" are you referring to? If his employees were doing so, whoever was in charge of his then Twitter account dropped the ball. Did it? A bunch of buffoons walked around a bit, some sat in offices and took stuff. One breached an area she shouldn't have been in and was killed. One dude walked inside was told by police to exit the building and immediately did so. This, imo, didn't even come close to "working", as you put it. BTW those buffoons you are talking about and minimizing their crimes were incited by Trump. |
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on May 24, 2024 9:08:12 GMT -5
What "worst impulses" are you referring to? If his employees were doing so, whoever was in charge of his then Twitter account dropped the ball. Did it? A bunch of buffoons walked around a bit, some sat in offices and took stuff. One breached an area she shouldn't have been in and was killed. One dude walked inside was told by police to exit the building and immediately did so. This, imo, didn't even come close to "working", as you put it. There were so many worst impulses! I became numb to the onslaught of nonsense he was delivering. You can google "President Trump's worst offenses" for an article by CREW. Honestly, after a while, I shut down on it. I just decided he was unworthy to hold the office no matter what. His weakness of character transcends politics. The one person shot to death was at the head of a mob. There are well known videos of the scene. This was all done relatively impromptu, and they still managed to delay the certification vote. Now, imagine the difference if Trump has four years to prepare. If he gets his butt back in the Oval Office, do you really think he will give it up? As long as he and his followers keep ahold of power, they won't be held accountable. He will stock every position in government with his people to use and keep that power. His next VP won't get the job unless (s)he promises to do Trump's bidding all the way. The next mob will have better planning and arsenal. The capital defense was flimsy, and wouldn't be any stronger in 2028 with Trump in charge. |
|
|
|
Post by blue-footedbooby on May 24, 2024 9:34:45 GMT -5
The thing is... there's a big difference between excessively good moral character and excessively bad moral character. The latter is much more alarming. Trump has shown that his primary focus as President is personally profiting from it. As I've said before elsewhere, he was restrained somewhat in his corruptive chances by being surrounded by employees who moderated his worst impulses. This, time, he's setting it up to flood the government with toadies who will just do his bidding. The level of profiteering should climb considerably. And it's not just him. He attracts similar types of people. Look at the criminality of the people he had working for him in his first term. He pardoned some of them himself and says he wants to do that for the Jan 6th people who led the coup in his name. What his people learned from his first failed attempt is that it almost worked. They just didn't go far enough, trying to win with flag poles instead of easy-to-acquire military caliber weapons. If Trump gets back in office again, he will set it up so that he won't leave until he croaks. He has plenty of authoritarians he's chummy with to model what he'd do. What "worst impulses" are you referring to? If his employees were doing so, whoever was in charge of his then Twitter account dropped the ball. Did it? A bunch of buffoons walked around a bit, some sat in offices and took stuff. One breached an area she shouldn't have been in and was killed. One dude walked inside was told by police to exit the building and immediately did so. This, imo, didn't even come close to "working", as you put it. This is so comical of a response that a 1000 rolled eyes and a 1000 oh-brothers wouldn't mollify it. American't you really ought go back to the drawing board on this one. |
|
|
|
Post by T Gap on May 24, 2024 9:57:51 GMT -5
Which News Network paid close to a billion dollars to settle a lawsuit accusing them of lying? Shhh you're harping again. Sound these words out as I space them for you, maybe it will help you to better understand. Whatever money FOX paid in a lawsuit settlement has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with CNN and MSNBC having reporting biases over their own. Bias and repeateated false information and fabrication leading to Fox News paying $800 million are completely different, Canuck Cuck. You're really too stupid to discuss: politics, media, journalism, history, per capita, basic US government, economics. I'm beginning to doubt you even understand icing; which most Canadians understand as children. By the way, Trump has said DOZENS of false statements and crazy %*$# ("bIdEn tRiEd tO aSsSiNinate mE!) since Biden's inflation blunder. It's been an hour or two since you've brought up that ONE gaffe. I hope everything is ok... www.politifact.com/factchecks/list/?category=&ruling=pants-fire&speaker=donald-trump |
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanVBfan on May 24, 2024 12:31:13 GMT -5
Shhh you're harping again. Sound these words out as I space them for you, maybe it will help you to better understand. Whatever money FOX paid in a lawsuit settlement has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with CNN and MSNBC having reporting biases over their own. Bias and repeateated false information and fabrication leading to Fox News paying $800 million are completely different, Canuck Cuck. You're really too stupid to discuss: politics, media, journalism, history, per capita, basic US government, economics. I'm beginning to doubt you even understand icing; which most Canadians understand as children. By the way, Trump has said DOZENS of false statements and crazy %*$# ("bIdEn tRiEd tO aSsSiNinate mE!) since Biden's inflation blunder. It's been an hour or two since you've brought up that ONE gaffe. I hope everything is ok... www.politifact.com/factchecks/list/?category=&ruling=pants-fire&speaker=donald-trumpGlad you agree. You're the one talking about it right now.  Aww, seems like someone googled "the rules of ice hockey" in order to impress me. How cute. |
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanVBfan on May 24, 2024 12:32:27 GMT -5
What "worst impulses" are you referring to? If his employees were doing so, whoever was in charge of his then Twitter account dropped the ball. Did it? A bunch of buffoons walked around a bit, some sat in offices and took stuff. One breached an area she shouldn't have been in and was killed. One dude walked inside was told by police to exit the building and immediately did so. This, imo, didn't even come close to "working", as you put it. This is so comical of a response that a 1000 rolled eyes and a 1000 oh-brothers wouldn't mollify it. American't you really ought go back to the drawing board on this one. Ah that's what's been missing... the rantings musings of a boob. Thanks for your contribution. |
|
