Page 190 of 190 FirstFirst ... 90140180188189190
Results 2,836 to 2,843 of 2843

Thread: US Presidential Election 2016

  1. #2836
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    5,362

    Default Re: US Presidential Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by A Marxist Historian View Post
    RNY has an excellent point on the alleged "voter fraud" issue, which is utterly phony. In fact, there has been a systematic effort by Republicans to prevent blacks and Latinos from voting through all sorts of illicit methods, which is one of the reasons why Hillary lost.
    looks like this time they even got a little helping hand from the Russians on that voter suppression ..

    But this whole discussion of how The Internet Rules All is just wrong, whether from your POV or hers. The Internet is just another mode of communication, quicker than older ones, but that's all. Internet propaganda is not inherently more effective than TV propaganda a generation ago, radio propaganda two, or newspaper three. It's just faster, that's all.
    I am not sure both jmcc and I are completely wrong. Although I agree with you that propaganda always played a part in elections

    the fact that the internet is faster AND people engage with it emotionally IS the problem as it can swing people's vote on the last minute. You can't go back on an impetuous last sec decision after you've cast your vote.

    I very much like the 24hr moratorium on political propaganda still in place for the french election .. it was the same in PT before i left .. the reason is that it gives everyone a break so people can make informed/cool headed decisions rather than leaning on impulsive reactions based on the latest lie they've heard.

    Why? Because America is going to h*ll in a handbasket, just like the rest of the world, though maybe not quite as quickly.
    gee this is so negative ..

    If the Republicans had had a less unsavory anti-establishment candidate than Trump, which they most certainly did not (Cruz? Please...) they would have won by a landslide.
    agreed

    And if the Demos had nominated Sanders, he would have won by a landslide.
    Disagree. H*ll would freeze over before Sanders could be elected by the current American electorate.

  2. #2837
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Wash DC
    Posts
    7,436

    Default Re: US Presidential Election 2016

    Jayzus, if only I had known my prestige was under attack........
    As a general rule the most successful man in life is the man who has the best information.

  3. #2838
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2,819

    Default Re: US Presidential Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by A Marxist Historian View Post
    But this whole discussion of how The Internet Rules All is just wrong, whether from your POV or hers. The Internet is just another mode of communication, quicker than older ones, but that's all. Internet propaganda is not inherently more effective than TV propaganda a generation ago, radio propaganda two, or newspaper three. It's just faster, that's all.
    The Internet isn't everything but it gets directly to individuals in away that print, TV and radio does not. Newspaper sales have been falling continually for decades. TV has moved from being synchronous (everyone watching a programme as it is broadcast) to asynchronous (people watching programmes and movies on digital video records or streaming). Radio is more of background thing now. But almost everyone has a mobile phone and many voters use the Internet throughout the day. This means that it is possible to get political ideas and memes to people in seconds rather than the hours or days it used to take with print. It can be used to change the outcome of elections or to destroy candidates. Without the Internet, Obama would not have been POTUS and HRC would have won.

    Regards...jmcc

  4. #2839
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2,819

    Default Re: US Presidential Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by random new yorker View Post
    someone has been busy keeping track of where i post .. mostly in FB for EU politics and here for US politics and the very best lands in my blog (seldom posting, unless some major event is going on) .. i tried political irish as you very well know as we interacted there as well... but i found the crowd a bit xenophobic ... i dont know maybe it is different now, but at the time the US election campaign was picking up and i just found some of the members there really obnoxious.
    You are Person Of Interest. I explained that since you effectively span a number of social networks, you are different to the typical one forum/site poster. PI can be a bit rough and tumble and it has quite an eclectic mix of opinions.

    Of course people cross-post stuff all the time. And you should assume that a non-contributing reader in this forum can copy and paste what he/she reads here and clone it elsewhere for the sake of argumentation .. you should be able to use one of your tools in the backroom to figure out which and how many posts get copy/pasted. That number will give you an idea about your OUT-to-g-d-knows-where traffic
    A lot of stuff gets cloned into the Chinese webspace to generate search engine spam. Some of it gets harvested for Sentiment Analysis.

    Wrong. Copy-pasted OUT material counts as much ..
    So my comments could have changed the outcome of the US election? It is very Douglas Adams/Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy territory.

    so is DCOn and a number of other contributors that only add a link to an outside pieces and some other members even have their own private threads to promote blogs etc and i don't see you complaining about that, and then there's that disgraceful Global Warming piece of trash of a thread that is basically SPAMnation ... is it cos the Count is Irish+ ?
    I've commented about the Climate Change thread being a spamfest. Basically the same thing was happening over on P.ie with the much the same posters. DCon adds the links to the day's newspapers. Some of the blogs being promoted are political in nature but these aren't hit and run link drops. They are generating posts.

    WHAT? what do you mean you don't have a simple word for Yes and No in the Irish language ? what does that mean? can you give me an example? (translated into english of course i dont understand a word of irish)
    Strange isn't it? But once you understand that, you are part of the way towards understanding the Irish mindset. In Computing terms, most languages operate in binary with 'yes' and 'no'. The Irish mindset is closer to quantum computing. The closest phrases for 'yes' would be 'it is' and for 'no' 'it is not'. Yes and no generally tend to be gross simplifications and tens of thousands of years of arguing have demonstrated that.

    (Ireland does not operate in simple binary terms... ?? .. no Yes or No in language? )
    It is behind one of the biggest polling screwups in recent history. RedC was polling for the party support for the last General Election and it asked people about their likelihood to vote on a scale of 1 to 10. Seems simple, right? The problem is that people are not simple. Since the vote was weeks away, people could not be certain that they would vote as something important might arise. And giving a blunt response to such a question would have been bad manners. RedC also used English call centres with peope who couldn't even pronounce the names of the political parties properly. (A great way to trigger the old "Whatever you say, say nothing." instinct.) The result was that RedC decided to cut all those with a likelihood to vote of less than 8. It excluded approximately 80% of the responses. All they included were the responses from party members like HBAP and other fanatics. It got things massively wrong and the election did not turn out like they "predicted". This can also lead to situations where a voter for Fine Gael might give his or her second preference vote to Fianna Fail candidate. (Think a Republican voter voting for the Republican candidate first and then the Democrat candidate. Proportional Representation voting is a highly complex voting system and far more fun than the Electoral College.)

    and you buy that Trumpian voter fraud garbage?
    The checks and balances on the voting side of things don't seem to be working. With voter ID, both sides might see their votes drop.

    you are not going to tell me you believe that the 3MM people that voted for Hillary voted illegally ? ... in those rolls of 'voter fraud' they include the names of people that are registered to vote in 2 states which happens a LOT in the US (number is actually close to 2.7 or 2.8MM). That means that in theory people that are registered in two states could vote in both, which I believe does not get taken advantage of by people that do not want to land in jail (which is most people). It should be up to each state to figure out the best way to reconcile their Voter lists w federal documents and maybe taxation documents so that if a person registers in State number 2 because they moved for a new job, he/she should be dropped from the Voter list in State number 1.
    There is going to be voter fraud in any election. The state authorities should be trying to reduce it rather than enabling it. That means getting accurate voter lists and ensuring that those who are entitled to vote do vote. However, I completely distrust electronic voting and consider those who tried to implement it in Ireland as traitors.

    Regards...jmcc

  5. #2840
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2,819

    Default Re: US Presidential Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by random new yorker View Post
    the fact that the internet is faster AND people engage with it emotionally IS the problem as it can swing people's vote on the last minute. You can't go back on an impetuous last sec decision after you've cast your vote.




    Regards...jmcc

  6. #2841
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    5,362

    Default Re: US Presidential Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by jmcc View Post
    You are Person Of Interest. I explained that since you effectively span a number of social networks, you are different to the typical one forum/site poster.
    Do you know what being a POI means in the US?

    [re: no Yes/No in irish language] Strange isn't it? But once you understand that, you are part of the way towards understanding the Irish mindset. In Computing terms, most languages operate in binary with 'yes' and 'no'. The Irish mindset is closer to quantum computing. The closest phrases for 'yes' would be 'it is' and for 'no' 'it is not'. Yes and no generally tend to be gross simplifications and tens of thousands of years of arguing have demonstrated that.
    oh get out of here.. you're BSing me w this stuff?

    if true, in that respect you guys are similar to the Brits, no? although there's Yes/No in Eng I always feel there's some sort of doublespeak in the way people use it/don't use it ...especially when it comes to No, which seems to mean Not yet, or, Can we discuss this later, what about tomorrow? dinner is also ok with me..dinner doesn't work, no problem, what about a cup of coffee/tea?, I think that's what makes them great negotiators and diplomats.

    The problem is that people are not simple. Since the vote was weeks away, people could not be certain that they would vote as something important might arise. And giving a blunt response to such a question would have been bad manners.
    Interesting, so people reading me here must be horrified at my manners and the stuff i write sometimes.. . also it could explain age old 'hatred' btw Eng and Germans.. In Germany No means No. In Pt No means No most of the time. So it is very unsettling and odd the back and forth engagement w Britons sometimes, this is defo a huge cultural difference.

    Ok .. so now I am even more confused. How do you know a Yes is a Yes?

  7. #2842
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1,644

    Default Re: US Presidential Election 2016

    It's funny I had to run away in horror from a group of conspiracy freaks who were all pissed off that the "MSM" LA Slimes slated the movie about JFK's shooting by their guru John Barbour. I think the friendship, which I ended, came from a mutual friend who was then very very fond of dope and late night internet sessions. The LA Times called Barbour's movie "conspiracy porn' made by a crank basically. This apparently should be a badge of honour because it came from the MSM. When I pointed out, referring also to my own experience running the bureau of an international news agency and meeting many of the world's top foreign correspondents, that the MSM to which they referred was actually made up of hundreds of thousands of people and all of the good ones blessed with sceptical minds. And even allowing for the disgraces, for every Judith Miller peddling WMDs there were others urging caution and casting doubt on the official narrative. Sure, and increasingly so with the digitalisation of media, you get outfits peddling agendas. Ironically some of the worst examples of deceitful journalism come from many of the organs these people follow and deem to be exceptions to MSM. But the bottomline is that within the more established media world, you are more merely likely to find truth over agenda. You will find contradictory stories and opinions within the same publication. But more so in the New York Times than Breibart. Pizzagate. The current Seth "execution" being amongst the more ludicrous examples. The vehemence with which people peddled Pizzagate. The latest Homeland covered this "manufacture of outrage" extremely well. As people have pointed out in recent days if that Bible and journalist thumping Montana thug had been a Democrat. Phew. New World Order assault. Black helicopters blaring Wagner trying to gook us. And Benghazi. ******* Benghazi. What the **** was Benghazi if not a bad morning in Iraq, a hellish evening in Helmand. For ****'s sake. But on they screamed about the MSM. When asked how so many sceptics could be made to think as one, "echo chambers" was what was screamed from the echo chamber. Sure the main US papers did a very shoddy job on Iraq. But Trump is not acting the furious little tin-pot dictator roaring Nazi 'lugenpres' for no reason. They are on to the con man, not cos they are lying but cos they are doing their job. And as for supposed fake news, you gotta love this:

    ast week, when CNN reported that Attorney General Jeff Sessions had left a couple of meetings with Russian officials off his application for a security clearance, Representative Jeff Duncan (R-SC) falsely claimed that the broadcaster had later retracted the story. In a Facebook post, Duncan, who is not known for having the keenest intellect on Capitol Hill, wrote, “The media was never this critical to President Obama, the recent Harvard study proves that the media has applied a completely different standard to President Trump.”
    Duncan, like many on the right, sees a recent study of the mainstream coverage of Trump’s first 100 days in office released by Harvard’s Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics, and Public Policy as solid proof that the media treat Trump unfairly. It looked at news reports “in the print editions of The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post, the main newscasts of CBS, CNN, Fox News, and NBC, and three European news outlets,” and found that 80 percent of Trump’s coverage by those outlets was negative—significantly higher than the shares for Barack Obama (41 percent negative), George W. Bush (57 percent), and Bill Clinton (60 percent) at this point in their presidencies. Conservative publications greeted the report with headlines like “Harvard Study Confirms Media Bias Against Trump” and “Harvard Report: There Is A Huge Anti-Trump Bias In Corporate Media.”
    But that’s not the real story. The real story is that Trump’s negative coverage is being driven not by liberals or Democrats but by law-enforcement sources and pissed-off Republicans.
    And here’s a key point, as it relates to that first category: “Republican voices,” wrote Patterson, “accounted for 80 percent of what newsmakers said about the Trump presidency, compared to only 6 percent for Democrats and 3 percent for those involved in anti-Trump protests.” So the coverage has not featured a bunch of liberals complaining about Trump—Democrats and those engaged with the anti-Trump resistance were few and far between. “The fact that Trump has received more negative coverage than his predecessor is hardly surprising,” the report says. “The early days of his presidency have been marked by far more missteps and miss-hits, often self-inflicted, than any presidency in memory, perhaps ever.”

    Stories about events that reflect poorly on the White House have in large part been driven by leaks (a fact that infuriates Trump and his supporters). We can’t know the ideological breakdown of the people speaking to reporters anonymously, but we do know that Trump’s own staff—people close to him—have been the source of a number of negative stories, and we know, thanks to White House leaks, that Trump’s staff often leaks information to the press because, as the very conservative Erick Erickson reported, “sometimes the president will not take advice. Sometimes the president treats suggestions as criticism. More often than not, the president is vastly more interested in what the media says about him than what his advisers in his employ say to him.” According to Erickson, who personally knows “an ardent Trump supporter” in Trump’s orbit who was the source of one such leak, “White House staff have ample incentive to leak to the press when they believe the president needs to pay attention or be admonished.” Just think for a moment how often you’ve read a story in which an anonymous source criticizing the president is identified as a current or former supporter or adviser or donor.
    And guess what kids, they did find some biased reporting

    Ironically, the Shorenstein study did find significant bias at one media outlet: Fox News was a lone outlier in that almost half of its Trump coverage was positive. Looking back at 100 days marked by chaos and failure, it’s hard to imagine what a truly fair and balanced news outlet possibly could have covered in order to run so many positive segments.
    https://www.thenation.com/article/co...-liberal-bias/

  8. #2843
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2,819

    Default Re: US Presidential Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by random new yorker View Post
    Do you know what being a POI means in the US?
    Yes. but this is in the case of Social Networks.

    oh get out of here.. you're BSing me w this stuff?
    It is 100% true. You can even check on Google.

    if true, in that respect you guys are similar to the Brits, no?
    Similar, in some respects. But Irish is the older language.

    although there's Yes/No in Eng I always feel there's some sort of doublespeak in the way people use it/don't use it ...especially when it comes to No, which seems to mean Not yet, or, Can we discuss this later, what about tomorrow? dinner is also ok with me..dinner doesn't work, no problem, what about a cup of coffee/tea?, I think that's what makes them great negotiators and diplomats.
    There is, to some extent. You have to be able to read the situation for the correct context. Most of it would be done so as not to offer offence.

    Interesting, so people reading me here must be horrified at my manners and the stuff i write sometimes..
    I've been trying to point that out to you for some time.

    . also it could explain age old 'hatred' btw Eng and Germans..
    That's a very different issue. Britain was invaded by Angles and Saxons. It had just got over being invaded by the Irish and the Romans. The Romans were very brave chaps and one of them thought he could conquer and hold Ireland with a very limited military force. However the Roman naval expertise was acquired in the bathtub of the Med rather than the Irish sea. The Irish sea is one of the most changeable in the world and it can get very rough, very quickly. In Roman times, when we weren't trading with them, the Irish raided Britain and there were strong family connections between what is now Scotland and Ireland. Parts of Wales were, after the Romans left, under Irish kingship. The Roman description for the Irish is the Scotti which means Pirates. Britain also was invaded and conquered by Vikings. After that, it got conquered by the Normans who were a combination of the Vikings and some French. There's still a very strong Celtic substrate to the British character that all these invasions and interlopers haven't been able to destroy.

    In Germany No means No. In Pt No means No most of the time. So it is very unsettling and odd the back and forth engagement w Britons sometimes, this is defo a huge cultural difference.
    It is probably quite confusing.

    Ok .. so now I am even more confused. How do you know a Yes is a Yes?
    Context. Though sometimes, a 'yes' can mean yes.

    Regards...jmcc

Page 190 of 190 FirstFirst ... 90140180188189190

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Share us
Follow Us