The Well-Mannered Politics Thread

[K-Dog]

I'm going to do my best to avoid this thread. No sense in discussing things with people who have no interest in discussion. No sense finding common ground with people who can't even agree on which news is real or fake. How can you have a discussion when you can't agree on a common set of facts? You can't.

Good luck with your president. I hope he starts governing soon.

Right there is a good example.
I did not vote Trump. I only marginally support him. You have me lumped in a group you have no business lumping me into.

 

[Tank]

Are you suggesting that the news media didn't seriously report on Bill's talk with Lynch? Because the NY Times, WaPo, CNN, and all the major hubs ran stories on it for days.

Are you saying that you don't recognize that most of the major news hubs skew their "reports" to the partisan views of their controlling interests? You don't think the intensity and duration would have been much different had it been George Bush on that plane asking Lynch to drop an investigation on some Republican candidate? If I didn't mention it already, I am registered Independent and just call 'em like I see 'em and Stevie Wonder can see that most US outlets have a huge tilt to the left in their political reporting.

 

[Inqui]

Same sadly. I love politics but it's hard to find other people who are at least willing to listen to what you have to say.

Yeah, I got pretty excited about this thread when I saw it but I got disillusioned by the tone it quickly took. Which is a shame because I was hoping to talk about stuff like Trump's trade policies, foreign policies and his skinny budgets, the UK election and what that means for Brexit, the French election (both the presidential one and the parliamentary one coming up this week), the Iranian election and the ongoing Chinese Congress (possibly one of the most important events going on in the world atm, but also the most underreported). And then my more academic thoughts on stuff like macroeconomics in the 21st century, the US electoral system and various topics about the state of the media.

Ah well, probably better to have conversations like that in person anyway - or in PM if anyone feels like it. And so my quest to find a unicorn of a person who doesn't get bored by my rambling about those topics continues.

 

[K-Dog]

Shouldn't we aspire to be right and not be wrong?

Of course, but that is a debate not a conversation. There is a vast difference.
I have no interst in a debate. I have no interest in arguing. I will share my thoughts all day. I will read others thoughts all day. I will question to obtain clarity.

 

[Dom McRaven]

As someone who also reads this thread, but doesn't participate as much, I gotta ask everyone: what websites do YOU use to get the news?

 

[Tank]

As someone who also reads this thread, but doesn't participate as much, I gotta ask everyone: what websites do YOU use to get the news?

I don't read/watch any sites or networks exclusively, but do avoid CNN and FOX like the plague as both make me hurl within minutes. lol

 

[Inqui]

As someone who also reads this thread, but doesn't participate as much, I gotta ask everyone: what websites do YOU use to get the news?

The Financial Times is my main jam, though it's kinda expensive and I'm tempted to wind down that subscription for a few months. I'm not so regular with these, but I also keep an eye on The Economist, The NY Times, The Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg and tend to pick stuff up if I find the articles interesting. As well as the NZ Herald (haha, obviously), and the Australian newspapers I edit for (as part of the job). If I wind down my FT subscription I'll probably see if I can afford a NZ business publication no-one here has heard of to pick up that slack.

If you're looking for a good source for international (ie, non-US) politics news, I legitimately think Bloomberg is a great source. I find it more detached and focused on actual policies and ramifications of events rather than just hype. This kinda thing from the French election, for example.

 

[Oldfaithful]

What do I read? The economist, the Atlantic, NYT, Fox and CNN. I read everything to get everyone's viewpoint. Then I form my own opinions.

 

[Willbacker]

I learned nothing all that new about the Russia situation that I didn't know before. Much of what he said was already reported in the media -- but wait, you don't read that fake news bullshit. What do you read, by the way? We knew Trump himself wasn't under investigation. That's not new information lol. And oh god, Comey leaked his own documents, how horrible. Technically, they could have been obtained via a FOIA request. They weren't classified. An existing government document in the public sector is subject to release unless it's classified or privileged info -- and since he wrote the documents, I'm inclined to think that he's qualified to leak it.

Lynch wanting to change it to a "matter" is bad news. Bubba's meeting with Lynch was never good, and we all knew it. However, that the Clinton investigation found no evidence of criminal wrongdoing lends credence to the idea that it was indeed a "nothing burger." I mean, c'mon. You right wingers harp on Hill day and night but she's still never been found guilty of anything, whether it's Benghazi or the emails. Either your GOP reps on the investigating committees are incompetent idiots or she's not as dirty as you think -- or both. How would you explain this?

How do you defend Trump after Comey talked about how much he couldn't trust him? I mean, how can you defend him period is a good question, but specifically with this issue. You're acting like the hearing was some great revelatory win for the right but it was anything but that. I want us to get past this Russia debacle as much as you do because I'd like to see some governing for once, but maybe it would go away if we actually saw some governing.

And in case you missed it: “There should be no fuzz on this whatsoever,” Comey said. “The Russians interfered in our election in the 2016 cycle. They did it with purpose, they did it with sophistication, they did it with overwhelming technical efforts, and it was an active measures campaign driven from the top of that government.”

We know Trump isn't under investigation. The question we have is why Trump is so adamantly against the investigation if he's not the subject of it. The intel community is clear that there was Russian meddling, and the president, who again is not the subject of the investigation, wants it shut down. What is it that he doesn't want people to know? Why is he worried, if they aren't looking at him?

1st paragraph. I'm sorry all I've been hearing from the left is about trump colluding with the Russians and listening to Maxine Waters "I'm gonna impeach the president". My bad. You guys knew all along. Oh Comey was also allowed to leak "his documents" even tho he did this thru govt channels while employed with the FBI. Hmmm. Interesting.

2nd paragraph. Comey came out and said the next day that Clinton pretty much broke every law in the books but then said no charges should be filed and that no prosecutor would take the case. Lets see. Its not his decision to make!! Its Loretta Lynch's. Sounds like collusion and obstruction of justice. And then Trump like a nice guy said he didn't want to put her thru no more.

3rd paragraph. I'll simply say Trump said Comey was a liar and I guess you been missing the governing.

4th paragraph. Russia has been messing in our elections for waaaay longer than this past election and its funny how the left really didn't care until after the votes had been counted and then again it has been nonstop. Also Obama had his nose all up in Israel's and Canada"s elections and did his best to influence them

5th paragraph The bottomline is Trump is just friggin tired of it like the rest of us are but we all know the left will keep coming with their next line of how do we impeach Trump

 

[Tank]

Again I tell you: we are underpaid and overworked, and if we really wanted to indoctrinate people, we'd go find a job where we can get paid decent money to do it. Why do you think journalists do the work they do, for such little pay and such terrible hours? Seriously. That's a question I want you and @K-Dog to answer. I've asked it a few times and I've never gotten an answer. Why do you think we go into this field, when we know it's shit going in?

Another thing: I'm not sure I fully subscribe to this theory, but there are some who argue that "the truth leans left." While leftists like me are advocating for clean energy, because coal is running out, Trump is still trying to convince people that coal will make a come back. The science says that's not sustainable, yet the right is infatuated with coal and fracking -- both of which are totally unsustainable. Also, the right wing's economic platform is based on "tax cuts on the rich bring prosperity." This, too, is demonstrably false. Trickle down economics are, as GHWB put it, are voodoo economics. For example, according to the Guardian, which cites Oxfam, "the richest 85 people in the world have as much wealth as the poorest 3.5 billion – or half the world's entire population – put together." The rich benefit most from tax cuts, but the money is not trickling down. The religious right wants creationism taught in schools. That's horse manure. Some on the religious right still believe in a flat earth. That's also horse manure.

I mean shit, Vice President Pence still thinks gay conversion therapy works, even though every scientist who matters says it's bullshit. Seriously. Pence is a heart attack or impeachment away from the Oval, and he still thinks that electrocuting gay folks will make them straight. There may be some on the right that base policy on research, but it certainly isn't the majority.

We reporters like facts. We defer to the scientists and economists who know more than us. And, as I illustrated above, the right is often at odds with the findings of scientists and economists. As Stephen Colbert said once, "Reality has a well-known liberal bias"

We all choose different paths in life and only you can answer why you are in the field you chose. What does that have to do with the validity of biased, partisan reporting of political news? IDK. You only feel it's correct and just because the bulk of the partisanship supports your own political views as many of the outlets are controlled by folks that lean far to the left. I'd prefer to hear the news and form my own opinion, not have someone decide for me if it is right or wrong. Make sense?

Somehow I doubt that all reporters are liberals and the ones that aren't are no less noble or trustworthy than you. Wouldn't you agree? Where the line blurs for me is reporting in a manner that spins matters to reflect the politics of the controlling interests of the outlet. While these folks have to make a living, obviously they often know what they are writing or saying is less than truthful, or shall we say "embellished". But they wouldn't have their job very long if they didn't report in the manner they are directed. I get it, it's called making a living. Doesn't make it right, but people have to eat. lol

The fact is that reality lies somewhere in between liberalism and conservatism, borrowing factual pieces from both and ignoring the bullshit that lies at either end of the spectrum. To each his own but for me blindly supporting the views of either ain't for me.

 

[Willbacker]

Yeah, I got pretty excited about this thread when I saw it but I got disillusioned by the tone it quickly took. Which is a shame because I was hoping to talk about stuff like Trump's trade policies, foreign policies and his skinny budgets, the UK election and what that means for Brexit, the French election (both the presidential one and the parliamentary one coming up this week), the Iranian election and the ongoing Chinese Congress (possibly one of the most important events going on in the world atm, but also the most underreported). And then my more academic thoughts on stuff like macroeconomics in the 21st century, the US electoral system and various topics about the state of the media.

Ah well, probably better to have conversations like that in person anyway - or in PM if anyone feels like it. And so my quest to find a unicorn of a person who doesn't get bored by my rambling about those topics continues.

Just bring up whatever you want to talk about since the Teresa May gamble turned out to be a botch job especially after the terrorist actions and she's head of security but somebody has got to start the conversation

 

[Tank]

Actually, I'll note that 93 percent of journalists identify as democrats, according to a survey that I think came out last year. I know a few that were Republicans before they got into journalism -- including me. I can say that most reporters I know are liberals -- and let me share a bit of why I think that is.

I was a registered Republican and voted Romney in 2012. But after I got into journalism, I started to notice that Republicans are only capable of saying "God, guns, tax cuts, and Murica!" Honestly. I've covered some campaigns and I've interviewed a dozen Republicans of varying positions and they all have the exact same platform I described. If I missed anything let me know.

When you talk to Democrats, you hear people talk about how student loans are crippling the economy, how an unwillingness to embrace renewable energy is hurting us, how an unskilled workforce is stalling growth and how investing in community colleges with trade programs will be a boost. Republican politicians, in my experience, don't offer solutions unless it's open carry and no taxes with a side of prayer in schools. Democrats actually have some substance. That kind of shit platform, I think, has pushed a lot of us to the left. I recently talked to a Dem running for office on the lower eastern shore who said she wants to improve digital infrastructure, you know, the Internet, in rural Maryland, because a lack of it is killing the economy. I've never heard a Republican suggest improving digital infrastructure anywhere.

The news doesn't decide your opinion. It informs your opinion. Whether you take factual reporting into account is up to you. Please remember there is a difference between a reporter, a columnist, and a commentator. Some people don't know the difference. Columnists may be trying to persuade you, but a reporter is just informing you. Media literacy is one of the biggest problems we have.

lol.....I think you better go back and fact check your percentages. The data I found does say that only 7% of journalists identify themselves as Republican, but about 65% identify as Independent or "other", and 28% as Democrat, not 93%.

If you can't see the bias in much of today's reporting then you are just ignoring fact. It's my contention that bias isn't originating with the individual reporter, but rather the editors representing the politics of the controlling principals. That's not me buying into the Trump revelation of "fake news", it's an unbiased observation.

I'm not going to get into debating individual issues such as an "unskilled work force" or "prayer in schools". You are cherry picking and identifying outlier solutions as dem or republican. That's just trying to debate for the sake of winning an argument, not identifying right or wrong. What I would say is that there is a plethora of solutions to various issues and those solutions don't identify with a political party or ideology, they align with common sense and justice. That's something that is often sorely missed in your world of partisan politics.

 

[Oldfaithful]

This thread was a bad idea.

 

[The Raven]

I'm out. For real this time. This just isn't going to get anywhere. It'll be a useless back and forth. Nobody's interested in learning any damn thing and I'm part of the problem. See you in the OL thread.

And I'm sorry if I was ever harsh. I get frustrated with the Republican party for a number of reasons, but I know that you guys here are good people. The party's leaders just aren't getting it done in my eyes, so I lash out. I need to do better at distinguishing the dummies from the smart ones. If I feel better about it later on I may return but for now it's for the best I dip.

 

[K-Dog]

This thread was a bad idea.

Was, is, and always will be.

 

[BloodRaven]

I tried to tell you.

 

[The Raven]

I tried to tell you.

I'm an optimist. Should have listened.

 

[Tank]

I remember hearing a lot of complaining on the BR boards about restricting discussion of politics and religion. It's fairly obvious why those restrictions existed. Both subjects are very personal and most people's thoughts in these areas are very deep seated.

 

[allblackraven]

I remember hearing a lot of complaining on the BR boards about restricting discussion of politics and religion. It's fairly obvious why those restrictions existed. Both subjects are very personal and most people's thoughts in these areas are very deep seated.

I admit, I do not and never did understand religion. I fully understand how it becomes very personal to religious people. And that's fine.

For the life of me though, I just cannot comprehend the politics as something that people can attach to on the same level. It just doesn't make any sense.

 

[Willbacker]

I'm out. For real this time. This just isn't going to get anywhere. It'll be a useless back and forth. Nobody's interested in learning any damn thing and I'm part of the problem. See you in the OL thread.

And I'm sorry if I was ever harsh. I get frustrated with the Republican party for a number of reasons, but I know that you guys here are good people. The party's leaders just aren't getting it done in my eyes, so I lash out. I need to do better at distinguishing the dummies from the smart ones. If I feel better about it later on I may return but for now it's for the best I dip.

Hopefully you write an article soon. Maybe on the center situation. And I never had no hard feelings towards you in case you thought so and hopefully it was the same in return.

I admit, I do not and never did understand religion. I fully understand how it becomes very personal to religious people. And that's fine.

For the life of me though, I just cannot comprehend the politics as something that people can attach to on the same level. It just doesn't make any sense.

Right now in the US the political divide is the biggest I've ever seen and the nastiest. I get around and it just seems like everybody is just talking about politics. That didn't used to be the case.