PDA

View Full Version : Warning: How can we ever trust the MSM again?



DGUtley
11-09-2016, 08:03 AM
We've seen through wiki how some in the MSM conspired to try to get Clinton the presidency. Very very strongly. How can we never (ever) trust the MSM again? How can CNN ever have credibility again?

exploited
11-09-2016, 08:04 AM
By understanding what margins of errors are.

FindersKeepers
11-09-2016, 08:05 AM
We've seen through wiki how some in the MSM conspired to try to get Clinton the presidency. Very very strongly. How can we never (ever) trust the MSM again? How can CNN ever have credibility again?

It's going to be tough, but I hope we see a return to journalistic integrity.

CNN -- feeding those debate questions to Clinton -- was just beyond imagination. They really need to clean house -- get all the partisans out and start fresh.

Ethereal
11-09-2016, 08:20 AM
By understanding what margins of errors are.

Bwahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!

exploited
11-09-2016, 08:21 AM
Bwahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!

?

Ethereal
11-09-2016, 08:25 AM
?

Exactly. You just don't get it and you never will. Typical leftist idiot.

Common
11-09-2016, 08:26 AM
My question would how could you ever trust them in the first place nevermind now

Cigar
11-09-2016, 08:33 AM
We've seen through wiki how some in the MSM conspired to try to get Clinton the presidency. Very very strongly. How can we never (ever) trust the MSM again? How can CNN ever have credibility again?

Do you trust The Weather Man?

resister
11-09-2016, 08:35 AM
Do you trust The Weather Man?I look out my front door,its usually more effective

exploited
11-09-2016, 08:35 AM
Exactly. You just don't get it and you never will. Typical leftist idiot.

Good one Eth.

Safety
11-09-2016, 08:40 AM
Exactly. You just don't get it and you never will. Typical leftist idiot.

Do not call names

Ethereal
11-09-2016, 08:41 AM
Good one Eth.
And accurate.

donttread
11-09-2016, 08:43 AM
We've seen through wiki how some in the MSM conspired to try to get Clinton the presidency. Very very strongly. How can we never (ever) trust the MSM again? How can CNN ever have credibility again?


Personally I haven't trusted them in years. Like any megacorp thay have impunity behind the corporate veil as long as they make short term profits.

exploited
11-09-2016, 08:43 AM
And accurate.

Not really. You are so desperate to prove me wrong that you are making fun of me for something you also predicted wrongly. How very Ethereal.

Ethereal
11-09-2016, 08:47 AM
Not really. You are so desperate to prove me wrong that you are making fun of me for something you also predicted wrongly. How very Ethereal.
That you refuse to see the difference between a measured prediction and a smug assertion is predictable.

Or, more likely, you see the difference and just refuse to admit it because it would damage your fragile ego.

exploited
11-09-2016, 08:48 AM
That you refuse to see the difference between a measured prediction and a smug assertion is predictable.

Or, more likely, you see the difference and just refuse to admit it because it would damage your fragile ego.

I was more wrong than you?

Is that what you want to hear?

DGUtley
11-09-2016, 08:50 AM
Do you trust The Weather Man?

The weather man doesn't cook the weather.

Ravens Fan
11-09-2016, 08:54 AM
Not really. You are so desperate to prove me wrong that you are making fun of me for something you also predicted wrongly. How very Ethereal.
I don't think he is goading you over your prediction itself, but the way you have conducted yourself since your arrival towards anyone who disagrees with you. Eat some crow, learn and move on.

Ethereal
11-09-2016, 08:56 AM
I was more wrong than you?

Is that what you want to hear?

It has nothing to do with me.

I'm not the one who went around presenting my educated guesses as a divine truth.

That was you.

Ethereal
11-09-2016, 08:58 AM
I don't think he is goading you over your prediction itself, but the way you have conducted yourself since your arrival towards anyone who disagrees with you. Eat some crow, learn and move on.
He knows exactly what I'm talking about. But he will never admit it. He's not here to have reasonable, honest discussions about politics. He's here to draw attention to himself and get under people's skin. That's fine, though. He's got egg all over his face now and it won't be coming off for a long while.

exploited
11-09-2016, 09:00 AM
I don't think he is goading you over your prediction itself, but the way you have conducted yourself since your arrival towards anyone who disagrees with you. Eat some crow, learn and move on.

Don't get me wrong, Trump is still a blathering moron, and anyone who voted for him is going to seriously regret it over the next four years.

However, I admit fully that I was overconfident about a Clinton victory.

gamewell45
11-09-2016, 09:02 AM
By understanding what margins of errors are.

Keep in mind what I've been saying all along in here; the best and most accurate poll is conducted on election day. Guess I was right.

DGUtley
11-09-2016, 09:02 AM
Don't get me wrong, Trump is still a blathering moron, and anyone who voted for him is going to seriously regret it over the next four years. However, I admit fully that I was overconfident about a Clinton victory.

I'm as 'scared' about a Trump victory as I would be about a Clinton victory. It was about the Court for me. I said that many times. I don't like one party having all three braches. It's not good for the concept of compromise and they have a tendency to push it too far to one side.

These are going to be interesting times.

exploited
11-09-2016, 09:03 AM
It has nothing to do with me.

I'm not the one who went around presenting my educated guesses as a divine truth.

That was you.

How truly bizarre. I presented them as divine truth? Strange, because you're the one always going on about being objectively correct and having discovered natural, universal truth.

In any case, enjoy this. It is a good win for you. You were wrong, but less wrong than me - that is about all you can hope for.

Ethereal
11-09-2016, 09:03 AM
Don't get me wrong, Trump is still a blathering moron, and anyone who voted for him is going to seriously regret it over the next four years.

However, I admit fully that I was overconfident about a Clinton victory.
"Overconfident"... more like "arrogant" and "smug".

exploited
11-09-2016, 09:05 AM
I'm as 'scared' about a Trump victory as I would be about a Clinton victory. It was about the Court for me. I said that many times. These are going to be interesting times.

There will be no SC nominees for a long time. The Republicans played a dangerous game by not holding hearings. I wouldn't even be surprised if the court vacancies are still open in four years.

Ethereal
11-09-2016, 09:05 AM
How truly bizarre. I presented them as divine truth? Strange, because you're the one always going on about being objectively correct and having discovered natural, universal truth.

In any case, enjoy this. It is a good win for you. You were wrong, but less wrong than me - that is about all you can hope for.
I am enjoying it. It's going to be a while before that egg on your face washes off. The next time you make some kind of smug prediction or assertion, I'll be sure to remind you of this. Maybe you will learn to be a little more humble in how you present your OPINIONS, but I doubt it.

nathanbforrest45
11-09-2016, 09:06 AM
We've seen through wiki how some in the MSM conspired to try to get Clinton the presidency. Very very strongly. How can we never (ever) trust the MSM again? How can CNN ever have credibility again?

Who says they ever did?

exploited
11-09-2016, 09:07 AM
I am enjoying it. It's going to be a while before that egg on your face washes off. The next time you make some kind of smug prediction or assertion, I'll be sure to remind you of this. Maybe you will learn to be a little more humble in how you present your OPINIONS, but I doubt it.

Dude, seriously, are you this unaware? You are as bad or worse than I am. You don't know that, do you?

DGUtley
11-09-2016, 09:07 AM
There will be no SC nominees for a long time. The Republicans played a dangerous game by not holding hearings. I wouldn't even be surprised if the court vacancies are still open in four years.

How do you figure. The R's have the house, senate and the WH. He'll get what SC nominees he wants. Now, the lefties may not step down, but you can bet your pajamas that the 9th will be filled in 2017 by a conservative jurist.

nathanbforrest45
11-09-2016, 09:07 AM
Do you trust The Weather Man?


No

Ravens Fan
11-09-2016, 09:07 AM
Don't get me wrong, Trump is still a blathering moron, and anyone who voted for him is going to seriously regret it over the next four years.

However, I admit fully that I was overconfident about a Clinton victory.
I still don't like Trump, but am very relieved that Clinton lost.

Ethereal
11-09-2016, 09:08 AM
There will be no SC nominees for a long time.

I think you should get out of the prediction business for a while. Just saying.

Ethereal
11-09-2016, 09:09 AM
Dude, seriously, are you this unaware? You are as bad or worse than I am. You don't know that, do you?
Desperate deflections with zero basis in reality.

Your specialty.

exploited
11-09-2016, 09:11 AM
How do you figure. The R's have the house, senate and the WH. He'll get what SC nominees he wants. Now, the lefties may not step down, but you can bet your pajamas that the 9th will be filled in 2017 by a conservative jurist.


I still don't like Trump, but am very relieved that Clinton lost.

Last time I checked, you needed 60 senators for SC nominations. The Republicans have 51.

Yeah that was a constant source of conflict for me. I despise Clinton and always have, but I despised Trump more. I think that his Presidency will be a disaster, but as bad as Clinton? That remains to be seen. I will give him the same shot I would give her.

Ethereal
11-09-2016, 09:14 AM
Wow.

Exploited is getting right back on the prediction train, even as he floats in the wake of a Trump victory that he was 100% sure would never happen.

This is truly something to behold.

nathanbforrest45
11-09-2016, 09:14 AM
I still don't like Trump, but am very relieved that Clinton lost.

Heard a Trump supporter last night respond to the question of how could you as a woman vote for Trump. She said, I like Trump's ideas, I just don't like the way he says them. That was my position as well.

exploited
11-09-2016, 09:21 AM
Desperate deflections with zero basis in reality.

Your specialty.

Okay, fine. Let's take a look, since you don't seem to want to drop this. I skipped the first page of your post history, because that is you acting smug and arrogant towards me.


I want improved relations with Russia, so that must mean I want the Kremlin to run the country. Typical retarded Clinton supporter.


Absolutely pathetic.


That's right, loser. Get your anger out. I'm sure you got plenty of it.

I know exactly what my values are. You're the one who is hopelessly confused. And now that your cult leader is on the brink of losing, you are going to become even more confused and detached from reality than you were when the day began.


You are pathetic, you know that, right?

JDubya is a demented cultist, so he automatically assumes that anyone who is against Clinton must be for Trump. There is something mentally wrong with him and people like him...


Don't you ever get tired of being wrong?


Lulz


Between liars and dupes, perhaps.


Undisciplined, mentally weak cowards and mental defectives. Nothing to worry about.

I'm at about 6 pages in... should I continue?

Are you seriously trying to present yourself as a paragon of posting habits here? Take a look in the mirror bro.

exploited
11-09-2016, 09:36 AM
I think you should get out of the prediction business for a while. Just saying.
So should you.

nathanbforrest45
11-09-2016, 09:44 AM
I sincerely wish you two would get a room and take your eternal arguments elsewhere. It clogs up the forum.

exploited
11-09-2016, 10:23 AM
I sincerely wish you two would get a room and take your eternal arguments elsewhere. It clogs up the forum.

I've tried but he always gets angry whenever I suggest the newlywed suite.

nathanbforrest45
11-09-2016, 10:52 AM
I've tried but he always gets angry whenever I suggest the newlywed suite.


don't start with me.

decedent
11-09-2016, 11:05 AM
We've seen through wiki how some in the MSM conspired to try to get Clinton the presidency. Very very strongly. How can we never (ever) trust the MSM again? How can CNN ever have credibility again?
CNN's credibility is almost as bad as FOX's. FOX wasn't even trying to hide its pro-Trump propaganda.


The problem is that we all know that FOX is anything but fair and balanced, and Hannity was called out many times on his adoration of Trump, but CNN was a letdown lately. As interest in news networks declines, I hope CNN gets its act together, because it used to be really good.

Ethereal
11-09-2016, 11:45 AM
Okay, fine. Let's take a look, since you don't seem to want to drop this. I skipped the first page of your post history, because that is you acting smug and arrogant towards me.



















I'm at about 6 pages in... should I continue?

Are you seriously trying to present yourself as a paragon of posting habits here? Take a look in the mirror bro.
It's called fighting fire with fire.

If you punch me in the mouth, I'm going to punch you right back.

Reciprocity and turnabout is something that is totally lost on narcissists.

Anyway, if you keep deflecting, maybe people will forget how incredibly wrong you were in your smug assertions. I doubt it though.

Ethereal
11-09-2016, 11:49 AM
So should you.
Why? My prediction bore a much closer resemblance to reality than yours and I made the prediction without the epic level of smugness that you did.

You basically assigned Trump a 0% chance of winning whereas I gave him around a 40% chance of winning if I recall correctly.

Do you need me to explain the difference between 0% and 40%?

Ethereal
11-09-2016, 11:50 AM
I've tried but he always gets angry whenever I suggest the newlywed suite.
Oh please. You follow me around every chance you get. Now it's coming back to bite you in the ass. Deal.

exploited
11-09-2016, 11:51 AM
It's called fighting fire with fire.

If you punch me in the mouth, I'm going to punch you right back.

Reciprocity and turnabout is something that is totally lost on narcissists.

Anyway, if you keep deflecting, maybe people will forget how incredibly wrong you were in your smug assertions. I doubt it though.

Ah, the victimhood routine. Very nice.


You basically assigned Trump a 0% chance of winning whereas I gave him around a 40% chance of winning if I recall correctly.

Do you need me to explain the difference between 0% and 40%?

Yes, you were less wrong than I was. We've gone over this. Did you have an actual point, or are you just getting it out little buddy?

Chris
11-09-2016, 11:53 AM
exploited, Ethereal

Stop already, both of you. You're going at each other for days across threads. Take your squabble to PMs. Or put each other on ignore. Or just ignore.

Ethereal
11-09-2016, 11:53 AM
I sincerely wish you two would get a room and take your eternal arguments elsewhere. It clogs up the forum.
This isn't about him specifically. He's just a microcosm of a larger trend that needs to be addressed within "liberal" circles.

They are so smug and superior in everything they say and do and it's beyond tiresome.

They need to be knocked down a peg and reminded that they're not earthly gods. This is a great opportunity to do that because they were proven wrong in epic fashion.

Trust me. You're not going to get many chances like this one. You would do well to leverage it fully.

Ethereal
11-09-2016, 11:54 AM
Okay, so we're not allowed to discuss predictions that were made by other posters about the election. So what are we allowed to discuss?

exploited
11-09-2016, 11:56 AM
This isn't about him specifically. He's just a microcosm of a larger trend that needs to be addressed within "liberal" circles.

They are so smug and superior in everything they say and do and it's beyond tiresome.

They need to be knocked down a peg and reminded that they're not earthly gods. This is a great opportunity to do that because they were proven wrong in epic fashion.

Trust me. You're not going to get many chances like this one. You would do well to leverage it fully.

Very true.

Ethereal
11-09-2016, 12:00 PM
The MSM narrative was being pushed by virtually every "liberal" member of this forum. They threw it in everyone's faces every single chance they got for months on end. But now that they've been proven wrong, and in the most epic fashion, we're not allowed to talk about it? How can you separate the MSM's false narratives from the "liberals" who endlessly and mindlessly regurgitated it on social media, forums, comment sections, and public venues? Are they not part of a larger trend within western society? Is this disquieting trend not worthy of rigorous examination and discussion? I understand that some Trump supporters are now trying to "unite" people, but I'm not a Trump supporter and I'm not obliged to go along with any futile efforts at "unity" between factions who hate each other and will never compromise. So if I want to rub it in "liberals'" faces about how they were wrong, I should be free to do that as long as it's relevant to politics and the thread topic, which it most certainly is.

exploited
11-09-2016, 12:03 PM
The MSM narrative. Mindless regurgitation.

You said Clinton would win. What made you conclude that?

Ethereal
11-09-2016, 12:03 PM
Very true.

That's not to imply that "liberals" are rarely wrong, because they're wrong at least 70% of the time.

What is rare about this is that they cannot weasel their way out of being wrong because Trump won and Hillary lost.

In other words, no amount of sophistry, deflection, and outright lies can hide the fact that "liberals" were 100% wrong.

Ethereal
11-09-2016, 12:07 PM
The MSM narrative. Mindless regurgitation.

You said Clinton would win. What made you conclude that?

I said she probably would win, but that Trump had a much better chance than the MSM and "liberals" believed. And I was right about that.

"Liberals", on the other hand, basically gave Trump no chance at all and asserted as much in the most smug and self-assured manner.

This is important because it speaks to a larger mindset within the "liberal" bubble, which would necessarily include the Clinton-loving MSM.

They are imperious, insular, and snobbish and have a tenuous connection to the real world.

That is worth examining.

exploited
11-09-2016, 12:09 PM
You didn't answer the question. I asked you why you thought Clinton would win.

Ethereal
11-09-2016, 12:13 PM
You didn't answer the question. I asked you why you thought Clinton would win.
Because I internalized the MSM's false narratives to some extent. Mister D and I were discussing this in another thread. Even though many people realize that the MSM is full of sh*t most of the time, it's hard to withstand their endless and sophisticated propagandizing. They repeat something over and over and over again until it seems obvious and inevitable. Even cynical, skeptical people like me are impacted by it, which is incredibly disturbing. The power of propaganda is not to be underestimated.

exploited
11-09-2016, 12:19 PM
Because I internalized the MSM's false narratives to some extent. Mister D and I were discussing this in another thread. Even though many people realize that the MSM is full of sh*t most of the time, it's hard to withstand their endless and sophisticated propagandizing. They repeat something over and over and over again until it seems obvious and inevitable. Even cynical, skeptical people like me are impacted by it, which is incredibly disturbing. The power of propaganda is not to be underestimated.

Still not answering. Did you believe the polls? Is that why?

Ethereal
11-09-2016, 12:19 PM
Like all Americans, I've been subjected to MSM propaganda my entire life. They drill the same narratives into your head over and over again. It's called conditioning and it's very effective. Even people who are naturally skeptical and cynical have a difficult time resisting it. The urge to conform is deeply rooted in our psyche and nobody wants to be the lone voice shouting into the dark. The feeling of challenging the most powerful media corporations on the planet and millions of indoctrinated "liberals" is intimidating for anyone.

Ethereal
11-09-2016, 12:22 PM
Still not answering. Did you believe the polls? Is that why?
Actually I did answer the question. I internalized the MSM narrative that made a Clinton victory seem inevitable and obvious. That would necessarily include polling data, but it was not the sole determinant. Either way, I still managed to maintain some semblance of independence and good judgement because I repeatedly said that Trump's chances were much better than we were being told and that the polling data was probably overestimating Hillary's chances like they did with the Brexit. It would have been incredibly easy to just go along with the prevailing narrative that Clinton was going to win easily in a landslide like some people did.

exploited
11-09-2016, 12:49 PM
Actually I did answer the question. I internalized the MSM narrative that made a Clinton victory seem inevitable and obvious. That would necessarily include polling data, but it was not the sole determinant. Either way, I still managed to maintain some semblance of independence and good judgement because I repeatedly said that Trump's chances were much better than we were being told and that the polling data was probably overestimating Hillary's chances like they did with the Brexit. It would have been incredibly easy to just go along with the prevailing narrative that Clinton was going to win easily in a landslide like some people did.
Interesting. So what you are saying is that you fell for the same thing as the people you are making fun of, and also came to the same conclusion of the people you are making fun of, but just less so than myself or Tahuyaman or really anyone else who made a prediction about this thing?

Well done Ethereal. When you're right, you're wrong.

MisterVeritis
11-09-2016, 12:54 PM
There will be no SC nominees for a long time. The Republicans played a dangerous game by not holding hearings. I wouldn't even be surprised if the court vacancies are still open in four years.
I predict President Trump will send a nominee's name to the Senate in January.

MisterVeritis
11-09-2016, 12:56 PM
Last time I checked, you needed 60 senators for SC nominations. The Republicans have 51.
Yeah that was a constant source of conflict for me. I despise Clinton and always have, but I despised Trump more. I think that his Presidency will be a disaster, but as bad as Clinton? That remains to be seen. I will give him the same shot I would give her.
Nuclear option. It is time to fill the court with originalists.

MRogersNhood
11-09-2016, 12:58 PM
I look out my front door,its usually more effective
Yeah,but that's Florida.Any meteorologist that takes a job in FL has some fortitude.

MRogersNhood
11-09-2016, 12:59 PM
The MSM lied about the polls.I'm about to start on that anyway.

Ethereal
11-09-2016, 01:00 PM
Interesting. So what you are saying is that you fell for the same thing as the people you are making fun of, and also came to the same conclusion of the people you are making fun of, but just less so than myself or Tahuyaman or really anyone else who made a prediction about this thing?

Well done Ethereal. When you're right, you're wrong.
If I had fell for the same thing as you and other "liberals" did, I would have gone around smugly asserting that Trump had virtually no chance of winning. Instead, I said he had a fair and realistic chance of winning in much the same vein as Brexit.

What about this simple logic do you find confusing or challenging?

exploited
11-09-2016, 01:02 PM
If I had fell for the same thing as you and other "liberals" did, I would have gone around smugly asserting that Trump had virtually no chance of winning. Instead, I said he had a fair and realistic chance of winning in much the same vein as Brexit.

What about this simple logic do you find confusing or challenging?

A fair and realistic chance? Quote it. I want to see those words. Also quote the 60% chance of Clinton winning post.

In any case, it doesn't matter. You were less wrong than I was. And we are back at square one. Except one of us has admitted we were wrong, while the other has not.

donttread
11-09-2016, 07:21 PM
I don't think he is goading you over your prediction itself, but the way you have conducted yourself since your arrival towards anyone who disagrees with you. Eat some crow, learn and move on.


In other words, Exploited, say what you have to say without being a pompous ass or a dick about it. A lesson a few here have never learned.

Peter1469
11-09-2016, 07:25 PM
If you had not stopped trusting them a decade ago, you are part of the problem.

donttread
11-10-2016, 08:22 AM
If you had not stopped trusting them a decade ago, you are part of the problem.

There's a reason grandpa said "believe half of what you see and none of what you hear."

Captain Obvious
11-10-2016, 10:29 AM
How can we ever... lawl

Only an idiot would trust MSM, ever.

Chris
11-10-2016, 02:19 PM
In other words, Exploited, say what you have to say without being a pompous ass or a dick about it. A lesson a few here have never learned.



donttread

Don't call members names. Stick to topic.

The Xl
11-10-2016, 02:23 PM
The media was openly pushing Clinton by any means. It was beyond obvious.