|
|
Post by angel97701 on Nov 16, 2016 23:09:09 GMT
As there are many peas at odds over conflicting "news" stories this is a good resource: False and Misleading Stories from a college professor of journalismIn case you don't want to scroll through the list this is what I found most helpful from the document: "Tips for analyzing news sources:
Avoid websites that end in “lo” ex: Newslo (above). These sites take pieces of accurate information and then packaging that information with other false or misleading “facts” (sometimes for the purposes of satire or comedy).
Watch out for websites that end in “.com.co” as they are often fake versions of real news sources
Watch out if known/reputable news sites are not also reporting on the story. Sometimes lack of coverage is the result of corporate media bias and other factors, but there should typically be more than one source reporting on a topic or event.
Odd domain names generally equal odd and rarely truthful news.
Lack of author attribution may, but not always, signify that the news story is suspect and requires verification.
Some news organizations are also letting bloggers post under the banner of particular news brands; however, many of these posts do not go through the same editing process (ex: BuzzFeed Community Posts, Kinja blogs, Forbes blogs).
Check the “About Us” tab on websites or look up the website on Snopes or Wikipedia for more information about the source.
Bad web design and use of ALL CAPS can also be a sign that the source you’re looking at should be verified and/or read in conjunction with other sources.
If the story makes you REALLY ANGRY it’s probably a good idea to keep reading about the topic via other sources to make sure the story you read wasn’t purposefully trying to make you angry (with potentially misleading or false information) in order to generate shares and ad revenue.
It’s always best to read multiple sources of information to get a variety of viewpoints and media frames. Some sources not yet included in this list (although their practices at times may qualify them for addition), such as The Daily Kos, The Huffington Post, and Fox News, vacillate between providing important, legitimate, problematic, and/or hyperbolic news coverage, requiring readers and viewers to verify and contextualize information with other sources.
Update 3: Some people are asking which news sources I trust, and all I can say is that I read/watch/listen very widely, from mainstream, corporate owned sources (The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Boston Globe, The Wall Street Journal, Forbes) as well as The Atlantic, National Public Radio, and various local and alternative sources with different political perspectives, some of which are included on this list. The problem: Even typically reliable sources, whether mainstream or alternative, corporate or nonprofit, rely on particular media frames to report stories and select stories based on different notions of newsworthiness. The best thing to do in our contemporary media environment is to read/watch/listen widely and often, and to be critical of the sources we share and engage with on social media. "
In the Facebook age of receiving news we are all guilty of clicking those inflammatory "shares" and reading something we take as news. Facebook is not a reputable source for news in some cases, but about 67% of Americans use it as their news source. Some comments expressed here indicate that some believe that these false news stories are truth. This comes at a time where both sides are trying to inflame the general public and basically fanning the flames. I am posting this in hopes that we can continue to build bridges instead of fences, not name call, or assume the worst of the person on the other side of the screen just because we voted differently from one another. |
|
ginacivey
Pearl Clutcher
refupea #2 in southeast missouri
Posts: 4,685 
|
Post by ginacivey on Nov 16, 2016 23:11:05 GMT
when someone is telling a story they 'read on facebook' - it's almost a lock that it's from some alt website or completely made up
same people that believe the Star and National Enquirer
gina
|
|
|
|
Post by mymindseyedpea on Nov 16, 2016 23:15:22 GMT
Thanks for sharing  I just go with what resonates and trust my intuition. It helps me recover from external validation. And I stay away from political stories. |
|
|
|
Post by birukitty on Nov 16, 2016 23:46:34 GMT
when someone is telling a story they 'read on facebook' - it's almost a lock that it's from some alt website or completely made up same people that believe the Star and National Enquirer gina In my opinion this is not always true. During the election, the media ( 90% of which is owned by 6 corporations) were heavily pro Hillary Clinton (and why not? Those same 6 corporations donated to her campaign). One way to get unbiased news was through facebook. My candidate Jill Stein got zero coverage from main stream media. I depended on facebook resources to keep me in touch with what Jill Stein and her campaign were doing, and unbiased news reports about her. Facebook is merely a gathering spot for news or posts that get posted. It's up to the individual to look at the source of the news and decide if it is made up or not. I do not read nor do I ever believe anything the Star or the National Enquirer publishes. |
|
|
|
Post by Sam on Nov 16, 2016 23:57:05 GMT
There was a piece on the news that stated that something like (I think and am being conservative about it) 65%+ of Americans get all of their news from social media such as Facebook. It went on to reference the number of false stories that were circulated.
Part of me thought that must be incorrect and then I thought about the people I knew through various work places who were younger and how they communicate and was shocked that I kind of thought this might actually (scarily) be true.
|
|
|
|
Post by ktdoesntscrap on Nov 17, 2016 0:05:21 GMT
when someone is telling a story they 'read on facebook' - it's almost a lock that it's from some alt website or completely made up same people that believe the Star and National Enquirer gina In my opinion this is not always true. During the election, the media ( 90% of which is owned by 6 corporations) were heavily pro Hillary Clinton (and why not? Those same 6 corporations donated to her campaign). One way to get unbiased news was through facebook. My candidate Jill Stein got zero coverage from main stream media. I depended on facebook resources to keep me in touch with what Jill Stein and her campaign were doing, and unbiased news reports about her. Facebook is merely a gathering spot for news or posts that get posted. It's up to the individual to look at the source of the news and decide if it is made up or not. I do not read nor do I ever believe anything the Star or the National Enquirer publishes. I did a quick google search and saw coverage on Jill Stein from Time, CNN, Cosmopolitan and RollingStone. But the Red Feed Blue Feed experiment from Facebook, demonstrates all of our Facebook news feeds are heavily favored to show us what we want to see. Which seems like a good idea but if we are relying on FB for our news it is a very one sided approach, especially during a presidential campaign. We all need to be responsible for ensuring we read a variety of news sources and get varied points of view. That won't happen if we rely on Facebook. |
|
|
|
Post by dillydally on Nov 17, 2016 0:09:21 GMT
In the Facebook age of receiving news we are all guilty of clicking those inflammatory "shares" and reading something we take as news. Facebook is not a reputable source for news in some cases, but about 67% of Americans use it as their news source. Or, even worse, it is clear that some people aren't clicking to read the actual story, but are simply reading the article's title and getting offended/angry just from that. I think technology has made us lazy - why actually read the article when you can just assume that the headline is correct and spout off from there??
I've stayed fairly silent about politics on facebook since I have friends all over the spectrum, but I may need to post that article. I'm sure, my friend that posts multiple Breitbart articles each day and my friend that posts Occupy Democrat memes all the time will surely take issue with those sites being on the list. (I manage to roll my eyes at the majority of those posts.)
|
|
|
|
Post by birukitty on Nov 17, 2016 0:20:14 GMT
In my opinion this is not always true. During the election, the media ( 90% of which is owned by 6 corporations) were heavily pro Hillary Clinton (and why not? Those same 6 corporations donated to her campaign). One way to get unbiased news was through facebook. My candidate Jill Stein got zero coverage from main stream media. I depended on facebook resources to keep me in touch with what Jill Stein and her campaign were doing, and unbiased news reports about her. Facebook is merely a gathering spot for news or posts that get posted. It's up to the individual to look at the source of the news and decide if it is made up or not. I do not read nor do I ever believe anything the Star or the National Enquirer publishes. I did a quick google search and saw coverage on Jill Stein from Time, CNN, Cosmopolitan and RollingStone. But the Red Feed Blue Feed experiment from Facebook, demonstrates all of our Facebook news feeds are heavily favored to show us what we want to see. Which seems like a good idea but if we are relying on FB for our news it is a very one sided approach, especially during a presidential campaign. We all need to be responsible for ensuring we read a variety of news sources and get varied points of view. That won't happen if we rely on Facebook. I looked up your google search stories. I found the two from Time and CNN. Both were negatively based. I couldn't find the two from Cosmo and Rolling Stone. I maintain that there is a lot more coverage now after the election on main stream media than there was during the election-now that Trump has won. You have your opinion. I have my opinion. I felt a right to state my opinion. I'm going to leave it at that. The last thing I want to do is get involved in another political thread. |
|
ginacivey
Pearl Clutcher
refupea #2 in southeast missouri
Posts: 4,685
|
Post by ginacivey on Nov 17, 2016 0:30:14 GMT
when someone is telling a story they 'read on facebook' - it's almost a lock that it's from some alt website or completely made up same people that believe the Star and National Enquirer gina In my opinion this is not always true. During the election, the media ( 90% of which is owned by 6 corporations) were heavily pro Hillary Clinton (and why not? Those same 6 corporations donated to her campaign). One way to get unbiased news was through facebook. My candidate Jill Stein got zero coverage from main stream media. I depended on facebook resources to keep me in touch with what Jill Stein and her campaign were doing, and unbiased news reports about her. Facebook is merely a gathering spot for news or posts that get posted. It's up to the individual to look at the source of the news and decide if it is made up or not. I do not read nor do I ever believe anything the Star or the National Enquirer publishes. i'll add...'in my experience' it was mostly people telling what other horrible thing trump/clinton had done no real info on actual policy or ideology gina |
|
|
|
Post by angel97701 on Nov 17, 2016 0:30:26 GMT
Thank you for taking this in the spirit in which it was posted!
I clicked something a few days back that had "Rape Melania" on a sign SUPPOSEDLY at a protestor rally in front of Trump's hotel in DC. Snopes stated most likely photoshopped. It was intended to make me angry . . .
A commenter here recently stated that that Trumps older kids had requested top secret security clearances, mainstream reported this morning that is a FALSE news story. Again the intent was to make you angry.
Just saying that it is both sides.
But with that said, Mainstream Media lead us down a path where Trump's election was truly shocking to many, and bit of a surprise to others.
The blame game continues in the war of words by Clinton, Sanders, etc, and it is time for Americans to move forward and work towards what is right and good for all. For some that is donating to causes such as Planned Parenthood or for others it is helping illegal aliens work towards legal status. Stepping in when someone is being accosted and moving bigoted bullies away from their target is another way to be proactive. Being angry, fearful, and anxious about what might happen does not do anyone any good! Be thankful for the freedoms that we do have and the blessings of living in the greatest country in the world.
Trump's 60 minute interview said some important things about issues that many have fears about, such as gay marriage--that is is law according to the Supreme Court so it will stand. Have an open mind and watch the interview.
Posting angry statements, name calling like "morons", calling other Peas out is not the way that you will improve the divide that has been created by the poison of the last election cycle. Please don't post anything that you would not say in person, have some common decency as we all do deserve respect even if we did not support the same candidate.
|
|
|
|
Post by ktdoesntscrap on Nov 17, 2016 0:32:53 GMT
I did a quick google search and saw coverage on Jill Stein from Time, CNN, Cosmopolitan and RollingStone. But the Red Feed Blue Feed experiment from Facebook, demonstrates all of our Facebook news feeds are heavily favored to show us what we want to see. Which seems like a good idea but if we are relying on FB for our news it is a very one sided approach, especially during a presidential campaign. We all need to be responsible for ensuring we read a variety of news sources and get varied points of view. That won't happen if we rely on Facebook. I looked up your google search stories. I found the two from Time and CNN. Both were negatively based. I couldn't find the two from Cosmo and Rolling Stone. I maintain that there is a lot more coverage now after the election on main stream media than there was during the election-now that Trump has won. You have your opinion. I have my opinion. I felt a right to state my opinion. I'm going to leave it at that. The last thing I want to do is get involved in another political thread. Not trying to argue.. I just like to be accurate... and I am not sharing these to change your mind I just thought you would like to see them. www.cosmopolitan.com/politics/news/a61808/who-is-jill-stein-green-party-candidate/ ( I thought you would like this as it is a positive article) and was posted before the election. This one was posted in Sept. Not positive but I would think any press is better than no press. www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/the-case-against-jill-stein-w436362 |
|
|
|
Post by birukitty on Nov 17, 2016 0:51:36 GMT
In my opinion this is not always true. During the election, the media ( 90% of which is owned by 6 corporations) were heavily pro Hillary Clinton (and why not? Those same 6 corporations donated to her campaign). One way to get unbiased news was through facebook. My candidate Jill Stein got zero coverage from main stream media. I depended on facebook resources to keep me in touch with what Jill Stein and her campaign were doing, and unbiased news reports about her. Facebook is merely a gathering spot for news or posts that get posted. It's up to the individual to look at the source of the news and decide if it is made up or not. I do not read nor do I ever believe anything the Star or the National Enquirer publishes. i'll add...'in my experience' it was mostly people telling what other horrible thing trump/clinton had done no real info on actual policy or ideology gina My experience was very different. I joined Jill Stein's facebook page (her organization's) and two others that were pro Jill Stein facebook pages. These pages would post daily the true poll numbers (not the manufactured ones the Hillary Clinton and DNC office were posting). For instance the DNC were reporting that all former Bernie supporters had moved over to Hillary Clinton and were supporting her. I know that wasn't true, and the Jill Stein pages proved that. There were posts about where she was speaking next, what she had planned and all sorts of things. It was through these pages that I first learned about the Standing Rock situation because Jill Stein went there in person to support them very early on. It sounds Gina like our experiences were very different. And (I'm not picking on you) to the general you I think it's important to not lump everyone and everything (about Facebook) for instance in one big giant fishbowl and say "it all sucks" because that is simply not true. Facebook is a gathering place of information that is not controlled by the corporation owned media. That's what it is. And it looks like I need to learn this lesson to. As ktdoesntscrap has pointed out to me there were articles in the mainstream media about Jill Stein that I completely overlooked-because I was so convinced they'd by negatively based since the media is owned by those 6 corporations-well, 90% of it anyway. I closed my ears to main stream media and stayed away from it completely because it was so pro Hillary and I hated Hillary Clinton. So maybe the lesson here is nothing is always 100% one way or the other. And we can always learn something every day. |
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Nov 17, 2016 1:22:19 GMT
Thank you for taking this in the spirit in which it was posted! I clicked something a few days back that had "Rape Melania" on a sign SUPPOSEDLY at a protestor rally in front of Trump's hotel in DC. Snopes stated most likely photoshopped. It was intended to make me angry . . . A commenter here recently stated that that Trumps older kids had requested top secret security clearances, mainstream reported this morning that is a FALSE news story. Again the intent was to make you angry. Just saying that it is both sides. But with that said, Mainstream Media lead us down a path where Trump's election was truly shocking to many, and bit of a surprise to others. The blame game continues in the war of words by Clinton, Sanders, etc, and it is time for Americans to move forward and work towards what is right and good for all. For some that is donating to causes such as Planned Parenthood or for others it is helping illegal aliens work towards legal status. Stepping in when someone is being accosted and moving bigoted bullies away from their target is another way to be proactive. Being angry, fearful, and anxious about what might happen does not do anyone any good! Be thankful for the freedoms that we do have and the blessings of living in the greatest country in the world. Trump's 60 minute interview said some important things about issues that many have fears about, such as gay marriage--that is is law according to the Supreme Court so it will stand. Have an open mind and watch the interview. Posting angry statements, name calling like "morons", calling other Peas out is not the way that you will improve the divide that has been created by the poison of the last election cycle. Please don't post anything that you would not say in person, have some common decency as we all do deserve respect even if we did not support the same candidate. Thanks for your patronizing words, but I'm going to keep right on being angry until this person you helped elect is right back out of office where he belongs. If you don't like it, that's too bad. I plan to use my anger in the most positive way possible - to make sure that Donald Trump leaves the White House in four years, and sooner if possible. I think you're deluding yourself if you think that man is anything but dangerously ignorant at best and outright dangerous at worst, and even if you're willing to stand back and let it all happen with your "wait and see" attitude, I'm not. It's easy to sit there in your relative privilege and tell others that they shouldn't worry - not so easy for those potentially affected. We were too complacent this time and have let this person be elected our president. We won't be complacent any more. Not for one second. And I'd be happy to say all of that to you in person, as well. ETA: It's not up to me to "improve the divide." You created the divide when you elected an individual who based his entire campaign on hateful, divisive rhetoric. Expecting the rest of us to just fall in line with that now in the name of unity is ludicrous. YOU improve the divide. Apologize for the error in electing him and the insult you've inflicted on a huge segment of the population in doing so. Join us in electing someone who is actually fit for office next time. |
|
used2scrap
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,034
|
Post by used2scrap on Nov 17, 2016 1:25:54 GMT
Thank you for taking this in the spirit in which it was posted! I clicked something a few days back that had "Rape Melania" on a sign SUPPOSEDLY at a protestor rally in front of Trump's hotel in DC. Snopes stated most likely photoshopped. It was intended to make me angry . . . A commenter here recently stated that that Trumps older kids had requested top secret security clearances, mainstream reported this morning that is a FALSE news story. Again the intent was to make you angry. Just saying that it is both sides. But with that said, Mainstream Media lead us down a path where Trump's election was truly shocking to many, and bit of a surprise to others. The blame game continues in the war of words by Clinton, Sanders, etc, and it is time for Americans to move forward and work towards what is right and good for all. For some that is donating to causes such as Planned Parenthood or for others it is helping illegal aliens work towards legal status. Stepping in when someone is being accosted and moving bigoted bullies away from their target is another way to be proactive. Being angry, fearful, and anxious about what might happen does not do anyone any good! Be thankful for the freedoms that we do have and the blessings of living in the greatest country in the world. Trump's 60 minute interview said some important things about issues that many have fears about, such as gay marriage--that is is law according to the Supreme Court so it will stand. Have an open mind and watch the interview. Posting angry statements, name calling like "morons", calling other Peas out is not the way that you will improve the divide that has been created by the poison of the last election cycle. Please don't post anything that you would not say in person, have some common decency as we all do deserve respect even if we did not support the same candidate. Maybe, maybe not. But that has been the Trump stance the entire campaign. www.redstate.com/patterico/2016/11/15/trump-campaign-now-admits-request-trump-kids-security-clearances-blames-low-level-staffer/ |
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Nov 17, 2016 2:22:49 GMT
Thank you for taking this in the spirit in which it was posted! I clicked something a few days back that had "Rape Melania" on a sign SUPPOSEDLY at a protestor rally in front of Trump's hotel in DC. Snopes stated most likely photoshopped. It was intended to make me angry . . . A commenter here recently stated that that Trumps older kids had requested top secret security clearances, mainstream reported this morning that is a FALSE news story. Again the intent was to make you angry. Just saying that it is both sides. But with that said, Mainstream Media lead us down a path where Trump's election was truly shocking to many, and bit of a surprise to others. The blame game continues in the war of words by Clinton, Sanders, etc, and it is time for Americans to move forward and work towards what is right and good for all. For some that is donating to causes such as Planned Parenthood or for others it is helping illegal aliens work towards legal status. Stepping in when someone is being accosted and moving bigoted bullies away from their target is another way to be proactive. Being angry, fearful, and anxious about what might happen does not do anyone any good! Be thankful for the freedoms that we do have and the blessings of living in the greatest country in the world. Trump's 60 minute interview said some important things about issues that many have fears about, such as gay marriage--that is is law according to the Supreme Court so it will stand. Have an open mind and watch the interview. Posting angry statements, name calling like "morons", calling other Peas out is not the way that you will improve the divide that has been created by the poison of the last election cycle. Please don't post anything that you would not say in person, have some common decency as we all do deserve respect even if we did not support the same candidate. Maybe, maybe not. But that has been the Trump stance the entire campaign. www.redstate.com/patterico/2016/11/15/trump-campaign-now-admits-request-trump-kids-security-clearances-blames-low-level-staffer/Exactly. It's the same old pattern of "I never said that!" when there are videos or Tweets or other media showing that he did say exactly that. |
|
|
|
Post by birukitty on Nov 17, 2016 22:11:25 GMT
Thank you for taking this in the spirit in which it was posted! I clicked something a few days back that had "Rape Melania" on a sign SUPPOSEDLY at a protestor rally in front of Trump's hotel in DC. Snopes stated most likely photoshopped. It was intended to make me angry . . . A commenter here recently stated that that Trumps older kids had requested top secret security clearances, mainstream reported this morning that is a FALSE news story. Again the intent was to make you angry. Just saying that it is both sides. But with that said, Mainstream Media lead us down a path where Trump's election was truly shocking to many, and bit of a surprise to others. The blame game continues in the war of words by Clinton, Sanders, etc, and it is time for Americans to move forward and work towards what is right and good for all. For some that is donating to causes such as Planned Parenthood or for others it is helping illegal aliens work towards legal status. Stepping in when someone is being accosted and moving bigoted bullies away from their target is another way to be proactive. Being angry, fearful, and anxious about what might happen does not do anyone any good! Be thankful for the freedoms that we do have and the blessings of living in the greatest country in the world. Trump's 60 minute interview said some important things about issues that many have fears about, such as gay marriage--that is is law according to the Supreme Court so it will stand. Have an open mind and watch the interview. Posting angry statements, name calling like "morons", calling other Peas out is not the way that you will improve the divide that has been created by the poison of the last election cycle. Please don't post anything that you would not say in person, have some common decency as we all do deserve respect even if we did not support the same candidate. Thanks for your patronizing words, but I'm going to keep right on being angry until this person you helped elect is right back out of office where he belongs. If you don't like it, that's too bad. I plan to use my anger in the most positive way possible - to make sure that Donald Trump leaves the White House in four years, and sooner if possible. I think you're deluding yourself if you think that man is anything but dangerously ignorant at best and outright dangerous at worst, and even if you're willing to stand back and let it all happen with your "wait and see" attitude, I'm not. It's easy to sit there in your relative privilege and tell others that they shouldn't worry - not so easy for those potentially affected. We were too complacent this time and have let this person be elected our president. We won't be complacent any more. Not for one second. And I'd be happy to say all of that to you in person, as well. ETA: It's not up to me to "improve the divide." You created the divide when you elected an individual who based his entire campaign on hateful, divisive rhetoric. Expecting the rest of us to just fall in line with that now in the name of unity is ludicrous. YOU improve the divide. Apologize for the error in electing him and the insult you've inflicted on a huge segment of the population in doing so. Join us in electing someone who is actually fit for office next time. I know you are hurting and I know are angry. Right now you are lashing out because you need someone to blame for Donald Trump winning the election. I think you are overlooking the fact that Hillary Clinton and the DNC's had a huge part to blame in Donald Trump winning the election. If they hadn't rigged the primaries (and this is a proven fact) to make it so Hillary Clinton would win instead of Bernie Sanders, she could have won this election or the Democrats could have. 1. Without rigging the election Bernie would have won and numerous polls show Bernie would have beaten Donald Trump. 2. By rigging the election many people (including myself) felt that was the very last straw against her and could never, ever vote for someone who cheated their way through a national primary. So in my opinion a lot of the blame of who put Donald Trump in the White House fall squarely on the shoulders of Hillary Clinton and the corrupt DNC. Perhaps you don't see it that way. Maybe you don't even believe Hillary and the DNC rigged the primary (although there is evidence proving this). If that is so, I can certainly understand your side of it. We need not take this any further. I am sorry you are hurting and angry. And I mean that sincerely. By the way I don't think anything Angel97701 said was patronizing. She said what was her opinion. We are all entitled to that here on this board. |
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Nov 18, 2016 3:04:17 GMT
Thanks for your patronizing words, but I'm going to keep right on being angry until this person you helped elect is right back out of office where he belongs. If you don't like it, that's too bad. I plan to use my anger in the most positive way possible - to make sure that Donald Trump leaves the White House in four years, and sooner if possible. I think you're deluding yourself if you think that man is anything but dangerously ignorant at best and outright dangerous at worst, and even if you're willing to stand back and let it all happen with your "wait and see" attitude, I'm not. It's easy to sit there in your relative privilege and tell others that they shouldn't worry - not so easy for those potentially affected. We were too complacent this time and have let this person be elected our president. We won't be complacent any more. Not for one second. And I'd be happy to say all of that to you in person, as well. ETA: It's not up to me to "improve the divide." You created the divide when you elected an individual who based his entire campaign on hateful, divisive rhetoric. Expecting the rest of us to just fall in line with that now in the name of unity is ludicrous. YOU improve the divide. Apologize for the error in electing him and the insult you've inflicted on a huge segment of the population in doing so. Join us in electing someone who is actually fit for office next time. I know you are hurting and I know are angry. Right now you are lashing out because you need someone to blame for Donald Trump winning the election. I think you are overlooking the fact that Hillary Clinton and the DNC's had a huge part to blame in Donald Trump winning the election. If they hadn't rigged the primaries (and this is a proven fact) to make it so Hillary Clinton would win instead of Bernie Sanders, she could have won this election or the Democrats could have. 1. Without rigging the election Bernie would have won and numerous polls show Bernie would have beaten Donald Trump. 2. By rigging the election many people (including myself) felt that was the very last straw against her and could never, ever vote for someone who cheated their way through a national primary. So in my opinion a lot of the blame of who put Donald Trump in the White House fall squarely on the shoulders of Hillary Clinton and the corrupt DNC. Perhaps you don't see it that way. Maybe you don't even believe Hillary and the DNC rigged the primary (although there is evidence proving this). If that is so, I can certainly understand your side of it. We need not take this any further. I am sorry you are hurting and angry. And I mean that sincerely. By the way I don't think anything Angel97701 said was patronizing. She said what was her opinion. We are all entitled to that here on this board. I don't believe I ever said she wasn't entitled to her opinion, but I do think she's been patronizing. She seems to think that she should get to have her vote AND have everyone else like it, and that's just not how this works. And, no. The DNC could have run Donald Duck and he should have beaten Trump. I don't expect you to agree with me, and I don't expect to convince anyone who voted for Trump to do differently next time. I think if you were able to cast a vote for him, even reluctantly, you see the world in a fundamentally different way than I do. You're not my target market, so to speak. We're going to have to reach out to the people who didn't vote this time to change things next time. I think it's really unfortunate that you're already wanting to place the blame for your own terrible candidate and the fact that he won on the shoulders of the other party. You all ran that man for office and voted him in. That's not on me, the DNC or Hillary Clinton. That's all on the people who actively made it happen. Honestly, your words are reminiscent of an abusive spouse who throws a punch and says, "Now look what you made me do!" And no, Hillary did not "rig" the primaries. She did receive stronger support from the DNC as their preferred candidate. And I guarantee that if we had access to the RNC emails, we'd see similar attempts to bring certain candidates forward from them. That's the national committee's job. It's all very convenient that only the DNC was hacked, isn't it? |
|
|
|
Post by birukitty on Nov 18, 2016 3:59:42 GMT
I know you are hurting and I know are angry. Right now you are lashing out because you need someone to blame for Donald Trump winning the election. I think you are overlooking the fact that Hillary Clinton and the DNC's had a huge part to blame in Donald Trump winning the election. If they hadn't rigged the primaries (and this is a proven fact) to make it so Hillary Clinton would win instead of Bernie Sanders, she could have won this election or the Democrats could have. 1. Without rigging the election Bernie would have won and numerous polls show Bernie would have beaten Donald Trump. 2. By rigging the election many people (including myself) felt that was the very last straw against her and could never, ever vote for someone who cheated their way through a national primary. So in my opinion a lot of the blame of who put Donald Trump in the White House fall squarely on the shoulders of Hillary Clinton and the corrupt DNC. Perhaps you don't see it that way. Maybe you don't even believe Hillary and the DNC rigged the primary (although there is evidence proving this). If that is so, I can certainly understand your side of it. We need not take this any further. I am sorry you are hurting and angry. And I mean that sincerely. By the way I don't think anything Angel97701 said was patronizing. She said what was her opinion. We are all entitled to that here on this board. I don't believe I ever said she wasn't entitled to her opinion, but I do think she's been patronizing. She seems to think that she should get to have her vote AND have everyone else like it, and that's just not how this works. And, no. The DNC could have run Donald Duck and he should have beaten Trump. I don't expect you to agree with me, and I don't expect to convince anyone who voted for Trump to do differently next time. I think if you were able to cast a vote for him, even reluctantly, you see the world in a fundamentally different way than I do. You're not my target market, so to speak. We're going to have to reach out to the people who didn't vote this time to change things next time. I think it's really unfortunate that you're already wanting to place the blame for your own terrible candidate and the fact that he won on the shoulders of the other party. You all ran that man for office and voted him in. That's not on me, the DNC or Hillary Clinton. That's all on the people who actively made it happen. Honestly, your words are reminiscent of an abusive spouse who throws a punch and says, "Now look what you made me do!" And no, Hillary did not "rig" the primaries. She did receive stronger support from the DNC as their preferred candidate. And I guarantee that if we had access to the RNC emails, we'd see similar attempts to bring certain candidates forward from them. That's the national committee's job. It's all very convenient that only the DNC was hacked, isn't it? Well in my opinion she's not the one being patronizing, you are. And got it-you don't believe that the DNC or Hillary Clinton rigged the primaries in her favor and against Bernie Sanders, even though there is evidence that proves this. No wonder you are so angry. And let me say again Donald Trump is NOT my candidate! First Bernie Sanders was, but by cheating Hillary Clinton got rid of him. Next Jill Stein was up until election day seconds before I made my final vote. I only voted for Donald Trump because he was the strongest vote AGAINST Hillary Clinton! I am not a Republican and never have been. I've been a Democrat since I turned 18 in 1978 until the day of this year's Democrat Convention when they announced Hillary Clinton as their nominee and threw Bernie Sanders practically by the wayside. The next day I (and many other Bernie or Bust people) did a DemExit. I joined the Green Party instead and followed Jill Stein who is for Peace, equality for all human kind, and protecting our Earth. Does that sound Republican to you? So once again, I voted for Donald Trump at the very last second only because it was the strongest vote against Hillary Clinton because I did NOT want her in the White House. I see her as a severe security risk, a war monger who would have gotten us into WW3, someone who accepted millions of dollars from the Saudis during her time as Secretary of State for her Clinton Foundation, and many more reasons. This is my personal opinion. It's not yours and I get that. I do believe a lot of Bernie people felt like I did and probably voted like I did. |
|
|
|
Post by peano on Nov 18, 2016 4:05:23 GMT
 I would just like to thank Merge for going into my head and doing the work of typing what I'm thinking. |
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Nov 18, 2016 4:16:31 GMT
Thank you for taking this in the spirit in which it was posted! I clicked something a few days back that had "Rape Melania" on a sign SUPPOSEDLY at a protestor rally in front of Trump's hotel in DC. Snopes stated most likely photoshopped. It was intended to make me angry . . . A commenter here recently stated that that Trumps older kids had requested top secret security clearances, mainstream reported this morning that is a FALSE news story. Again the intent was to make you angry. Just saying that it is both sides. But with that said, Mainstream Media lead us down a path where Trump's election was truly shocking to many, and bit of a surprise to others. The blame game continues in the war of words by Clinton, Sanders, etc, and it is time for Americans to move forward and work towards what is right and good for all. For some that is donating to causes such as Planned Parenthood or for others it is helping illegal aliens work towards legal status. Stepping in when someone is being accosted and moving bigoted bullies away from their target is another way to be proactive. Being angry, fearful, and anxious about what might happen does not do anyone any good! Be thankful for the freedoms that we do have and the blessings of living in the greatest country in the world. Trump's 60 minute interview said some important things about issues that many have fears about, such as gay marriage--that is is law according to the Supreme Court so it will stand. Have an open mind and watch the interview. Posting angry statements, name calling like "morons", calling other Peas out is not the way that you will improve the divide that has been created by the poison of the last election cycle. Please don't post anything that you would not say in person, have some common decency as we all do deserve respect even if we did not support the same candidate. Thank you for posting the OP. Very good information for people on both sides of the aisle. But regarding the paragraph I bolded: no, the mainstream media did not lead us astray. The polling was inaccurate. The media can only report on the polling it sees. |
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Nov 18, 2016 4:17:43 GMT
I would just like to thank Merge for going into my head and doing the work of typing what I'm thinking. Ditto that. |
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Nov 18, 2016 11:21:27 GMT
I don't believe I ever said she wasn't entitled to her opinion, but I do think she's been patronizing. She seems to think that she should get to have her vote AND have everyone else like it, and that's just not how this works. And, no. The DNC could have run Donald Duck and he should have beaten Trump. I don't expect you to agree with me, and I don't expect to convince anyone who voted for Trump to do differently next time. I think if you were able to cast a vote for him, even reluctantly, you see the world in a fundamentally different way than I do. You're not my target market, so to speak. We're going to have to reach out to the people who didn't vote this time to change things next time. I think it's really unfortunate that you're already wanting to place the blame for your own terrible candidate and the fact that he won on the shoulders of the other party. You all ran that man for office and voted him in. That's not on me, the DNC or Hillary Clinton. That's all on the people who actively made it happen. Honestly, your words are reminiscent of an abusive spouse who throws a punch and says, "Now look what you made me do!" And no, Hillary did not "rig" the primaries. She did receive stronger support from the DNC as their preferred candidate. And I guarantee that if we had access to the RNC emails, we'd see similar attempts to bring certain candidates forward from them. That's the national committee's job. It's all very convenient that only the DNC was hacked, isn't it? Well in my opinion she's not the one being patronizing, you are. And got it-you don't believe that the DNC or Hillary Clinton rigged the primaries in her favor and against Bernie Sanders, even though there is evidence that proves this. No wonder you are so angry. And let me say again Donald Trump is NOT my candidate! First Bernie Sanders was, but by cheating Hillary Clinton got rid of him. Next Jill Stein was up until election day seconds before I made my final vote. I only voted for Donald Trump because he was the strongest vote AGAINST Hillary Clinton! I am not a Republican and never have been. I've been a Democrat since I turned 18 in 1978 until the day of this year's Democrat Convention when they announced Hillary Clinton as their nominee and threw Bernie Sanders practically by the wayside. The next day I (and many other Bernie or Bust people) did a DemExit. I joined the Green Party instead and followed Jill Stein who is for Peace, equality for all human kind, and protecting our Earth. Does that sound Republican to you? So once again, I voted for Donald Trump at the very last second only because it was the strongest vote against Hillary Clinton because I did NOT want her in the White House. I see her as a severe security risk, a war monger who would have gotten us into WW3, someone who accepted millions of dollars from the Saudis during her time as Secretary of State for her Clinton Foundation, and many more reasons. This is my personal opinion. It's not yours and I get that. I do believe a lot of Bernie people felt like I did and probably voted like I did. All I can say is, Bernie told you to vote for Hillary. If you're really concerned about the possibility of WWIII, the environment, or the other things you name, you made a poor choice. I was a Bernie supporter, too, and no power on earth could have moved me from supporting Bernie to voting for Trump. That is completely illogical to me. It rather sounds to me like you started following far-right clickbait links at some point if you think that Hillary is the dangerous one. Regardless, the only person to blame for the fact that you voted for Trump is YOU. No one stood beside you in the voting booth and made you do it. So kindly leave me, Hillary and the rest of the Democrats out of it. |
|
craftykitten
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,304
Jun 26, 2014 7:39:32 GMT
|
Post by craftykitten on Nov 18, 2016 11:43:40 GMT
I don't believe I ever said she wasn't entitled to her opinion, but I do think she's been patronizing. She seems to think that she should get to have her vote AND have everyone else like it, and that's just not how this works. And, no. The DNC could have run Donald Duck and he should have beaten Trump. I don't expect you to agree with me, and I don't expect to convince anyone who voted for Trump to do differently next time. I think if you were able to cast a vote for him, even reluctantly, you see the world in a fundamentally different way than I do. You're not my target market, so to speak. We're going to have to reach out to the people who didn't vote this time to change things next time. I think it's really unfortunate that you're already wanting to place the blame for your own terrible candidate and the fact that he won on the shoulders of the other party. You all ran that man for office and voted him in. That's not on me, the DNC or Hillary Clinton. That's all on the people who actively made it happen. Honestly, your words are reminiscent of an abusive spouse who throws a punch and says, "Now look what you made me do!" And no, Hillary did not "rig" the primaries. She did receive stronger support from the DNC as their preferred candidate. And I guarantee that if we had access to the RNC emails, we'd see similar attempts to bring certain candidates forward from them. That's the national committee's job. It's all very convenient that only the DNC was hacked, isn't it? Well in my opinion she's not the one being patronizing, you are. And got it-you don't believe that the DNC or Hillary Clinton rigged the primaries in her favor and against Bernie Sanders, even though there is evidence that proves this. No wonder you are so angry. And let me say again Donald Trump is NOT my candidate! First Bernie Sanders was, but by cheating Hillary Clinton got rid of him. Next Jill Stein was up until election day seconds before I made my final vote. I only voted for Donald Trump because he was the strongest vote AGAINST Hillary Clinton! I am not a Republican and never have been. I've been a Democrat since I turned 18 in 1978 until the day of this year's Democrat Convention when they announced Hillary Clinton as their nominee and threw Bernie Sanders practically by the wayside. The next day I (and many other Bernie or Bust people) did a DemExit. I joined the Green Party instead and followed Jill Stein who is for Peace, equality for all human kind, and protecting our Earth. Does that sound Republican to you? So once again, I voted for Donald Trump at the very last second only because it was the strongest vote against Hillary Clinton because I did NOT want her in the White House. I see her as a severe security risk, a war monger who would have gotten us into WW3, someone who accepted millions of dollars from the Saudis during her time as Secretary of State for her Clinton Foundation, and many more reasons. This is my personal opinion. It's not yours and I get that. I do believe a lot of Bernie people felt like I did and probably voted like I did. If you voted for Donald Trump, he IS YOUR CANDIDATE. Own it. You can't vote for a candidate you didn't like, and then whinge that it's someone else's fault that he won. I understand that lots of people had different reasons for voting for him and I do not think there are any answers to this that are easy to hear, or solutions that will be easy to achieve. But for goodness sake don't blame anyone but yourself for YOUR VOTE. |
|
|
|
Post by pierkiss on Nov 18, 2016 11:51:40 GMT
I really wish there were mandatory critical thinking classes in high schools here. So much of this could be avoided if everyone had decent critical thinking skills.
|
|
|
|
Post by farmdpea on Nov 18, 2016 11:54:55 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by peasapie on Nov 18, 2016 12:48:59 GMT
Well in my opinion she's not the one being patronizing, you are. And got it-you don't believe that the DNC or Hillary Clinton rigged the primaries in her favor and against Bernie Sanders, even though there is evidence that proves this. No wonder you are so angry. And let me say again Donald Trump is NOT my candidate! First Bernie Sanders was, but by cheating Hillary Clinton got rid of him. Next Jill Stein was up until election day seconds before I made my final vote. I only voted for Donald Trump because he was the strongest vote AGAINST Hillary Clinton! I am not a Republican and never have been. I've been a Democrat since I turned 18 in 1978 until the day of this year's Democrat Convention when they announced Hillary Clinton as their nominee and threw Bernie Sanders practically by the wayside. The next day I (and many other Bernie or Bust people) did a DemExit. I joined the Green Party instead and followed Jill Stein who is for Peace, equality for all human kind, and protecting our Earth. Does that sound Republican to you? So once again, I voted for Donald Trump at the very last second only because it was the strongest vote against Hillary Clinton because I did NOT want her in the White House. I see her as a severe security risk, a war monger who would have gotten us into WW3, someone who accepted millions of dollars from the Saudis during her time as Secretary of State for her Clinton Foundation, and many more reasons. This is my personal opinion. It's not yours and I get that. I do believe a lot of Bernie people felt like I did and probably voted like I did. If you voted for Donald Trump, he IS YOUR CANDIDATE. Own it. You can't vote for a candidate you didn't like, and then whinge that it's someone else's fault that he won. I understand that lots of people had different reasons for voting for him and I do not think there are any answers to this that are easy to hear, or solutions that will be easy to achieve. But for goodness sake don't blame anyone but yourself for YOUR VOTE. I agree. You can't say you voted for Trump against someone. It is nonsense to tell yourself that. You voted for Trump because his values most closely align with your own. Saying anything else is rationalization. |
|
|
|
Post by birukitty on Nov 18, 2016 13:57:53 GMT
Merge, craftykitten, and peasapie, Okay-you don't get my voting logic. That's fine. But I am sick and tired of being beaten up around here for my voting choice. I'm not leaving this board. But I'm taking a break from political threads.
|
|
craftykitten
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,304
Jun 26, 2014 7:39:32 GMT
|
Post by craftykitten on Nov 18, 2016 14:15:53 GMT
Merge, craftykitten, and peasapie, Okay-you don't get my voting logic. That's fine. But I am sick and tired of being beaten up around here for my voting choice. I'm not leaving this board. But I'm taking a break from political threads. No, I do understand your voting logic. I may disagree with it, but that's not the point. My point was that you cannot say you voted for Donald Trump but he is not "your candidate". If you voted him for him, for whatever reason, he IS your candidate. Saying that we disagree, or think your logic is wrong, does not = 'beating you up' for your voting choice. |
|
|
|
Post by angel97701 on Nov 18, 2016 17:15:42 GMT
But with that said, Mainstream Media lead us down a path where Trump's election was truly shocking to many, and bit of a surprise to others. Thank you for posting the OP. Very good information for people on both sides of the aisle. But regarding the paragraph I bolded: no, the mainstream media did not lead us astray. The polling was inaccurate. The media can only report on the polling it sees. I can agree that the polling was inaccurate, and more analysis by the media shows that in key swing states it was off by a very small percentage. However it was obvious by the reactions of more than a few of the talking heads on election night that they were overwhelmed that they were wrong and the Hillary wasn't the president elect, consider the magazine covers that were already printed and distributed! I do understand the anger, I get it! There are several stages of grief and Hillary supporters will need to work through that. What I remember is that one person DOES NOT MAKE our government when past elections did not elect the candidate I supported. I did not go around "blaming his voters". Yes the Republicans do control 2 of the branches, but that does not mean that things will drastically change. I really like what Tom Hanks had to say at his MOMA awards Tom Hanks full speech and the shorter version here. For what it is worth my vote didn't even count as my state went blue, my county is pink but that is another statistic worth discussing. I am listening to the concerns and watching as the transition team interviews and makes selections. Am I concerned about some of the selections, of course. But this does not over-ride the fact that are many layers to our government designed to protect us under our constitutional rights. Misplacing anger towards our fellow Americans isn't productive. Moving forward and making our country the UNITED STATES of AMERICA is what makes this the greatest country on the planet. |
|
1GreenLegume
Throbbing Member
Posts: 69
Nov 14, 2016 4:29:51 GMT
|
Post by 1GreenLegume on Nov 18, 2016 17:50:42 GMT
Moving forward and making our country the UNITED STATES of AMERICA is what makes this the greatest country on the planet. And that is exactly what many of us will do. Not just make America "great again' for white people. I plan on standing up for the rights and freedoms of ALL people, and not just the ones that look like me or that I agree with. Save |
|
