Just because I don't completely trust them doesn't mean I can't watch/read what they are saying.
This Trump presser today -- pure gold
- Thread starter Blue2010
- Start date
Congratulations on arguing with yourself.
If you can place any trust in them whatsoever, then Archer's poast was hyperbole.
My iPad is screwed up. It shows strums poasts with raising heels avatar
Ok. I just didn't think it was hyperbole. Was it an exaggeration? Sure, but there was some truth in it. Maybe we just have a different definition of hyperbole. We will have to agree to disagree on this one.
Now you're just embarrassing yourself.
hy·per·bo·le
hīˈpərbəlē/
noun
- exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally.
synonyms: exaggeration, overstatement, magnification, embroidery, embellishment, excess, overkill, rhetoric
When someone says hyperbole I think overkill and excess. I didn't really think his statement was overkill. If you did that's fine. Regardless, if we use the definition that you found from your google search then you shouldn't have taken him literally to begin with.
Hardy har har.
I just find it incredibly discouraging that it's impossible to have reasoned political discourse on this board. This entire thread is like a shine to confirmation bias. Case in point, somebody says the news media can't be trusted AT ALL and it turns into a f*cking argument, as if everyone stays abreast of current events via osmosis.
I can buy what you are selling here. But if you will notice most of the time it begins with a liberal twisting something into something totally different than what is being discussed or a drive by insult like our resident penis inspector.
Don't be yelling at me. All I was saying is I didn't think it was the appropriate word in that situation because it wasn't an extreme exaggeration. You are the one that wants to have a pissing match about it.
Thank you for proving my point by blaming it on liberals.
His answer to that question should have been short and sweet: "That's exactly what I'm doing cuz you guys are a bunch of bozos"
Agreed. Confirmation bias makes it impossible for any political debate on this board to be worthwhile.
My bad. I forgot people can't calmly reply to other people's post on here. Would it have been better if I personally insulted you? Maybe if I would have ended the comment with Trump sucks or Obama sucks?
There are 2 different movies playing on the same screen right now and both sides can't understand why the other side is unable to follow the plot.
Personally, my plot consists of Trump winning the election as expected and now doing the things he said he would do while facing opposition from traitors and lunatics.
The plot for the other side consists of Trump stealing the election with the help of the Russians and now being stopped from implementing racist policies by patriots who smash up buildings and leak summaries apparently written from classified information.
Personally, my plot consists of Trump winning the election as expected and now doing the things he said he would do while facing opposition from traitors and lunatics.
The plot for the other side consists of Trump stealing the election with the help of the Russians and now being stopped from implementing racist policies by patriots who smash up buildings and leak summaries apparently written from classified information.
And @Raising Heel while Archer may have exaggerated when he said that you can't trust any media, the tweet below just came out. it is 100% false. DHS has confirmed it is false. The WH press secretary has confirmed it is false. Yet the AP- THE AP- is now publishing bs like this, which is why it is now easy to say that all media is to be distrusted. Quite simply, at this point it is impossible to know which stories are true, so I believe none of them until they can be verified.
Everything is an attempt to make sure Trump does not get re-elected. Credibility be damned, they want to make certain this is a 4-year term.
I know and he's at 55% approval. Whether or not Archer's poast was hyperbole, it seems that a lot of people aren't buying the media's bullshit.
To be fair, there are several other polls that show his approval rating significantly lower.
Rasmussen's daily tracking poll has him that high. Most others have him well below that though.
Right- the same ones that showed him getting blown out of the water in the election. Rasmussen had him winning. Rasmussen has also continuously run a presidential approval poll for a long time, whereas at least some of the others are one shot deals.
So if you are going to be fair, then be fair. Don't just throw out some Huffington Post poll as a counter to a long established poll from one of the few groups who accurately predicted the election.
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows that 55% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Trump’s job performance. Forty-five percent (45%) disapprove.
The latest figures include 39% who Strongly Approve of the way Trump is performing and 37% who Strongly Disapprove. This gives him a Presidential Approval Index rating of +2. (see trends).
Regular updates are posted Monday through Friday at 9:30 a.m. Eastern (sign up for free daily e-mail update).
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trump_administration/prez_track_feb17
When even the AP is putting out fake news, it's time to take a long look at the quality of the media today. A friend of mine (hardcore Trump hater by the way) has begun teaching his kids an approach that I think would behoove everyone to use: don't trust a single thing you read/see in the news, until you have seen two unrelated sources both reporting the same thing. While even then you could be dealing with fake news, you at least significantly cut down on it by making sure you corroborate one source with another.
The real question is who is hallucinating?
As a general rule, the one hallucinating is the one who sees an elephant in the room. Also, the side that has a trigger is more likely to hallucinate.
I predicted a Trump win. My world is consistent with my ego. All is just fine- I don't have a trigger. Plenty of people thought Trump would never make it to the first primary, let alone win. Their ego is bruised because they were wrong. They now need to prove they are right about Trump not being worthy of being president. They are triggered and thus also more likely to hallucinate.
As a general rule, the one hallucinating is the one who sees an elephant in the room. Also, the side that has a trigger is more likely to hallucinate.
I predicted a Trump win. My world is consistent with my ego. All is just fine- I don't have a trigger. Plenty of people thought Trump would never make it to the first primary, let alone win. Their ego is bruised because they were wrong. They now need to prove they are right about Trump not being worthy of being president. They are triggered and thus also more likely to hallucinate.
Thanks for making my point. Only 1 of those polls is recent and none other than Rasmussen do a daily tracking poll.
Historically, Rasmussen has been a very accurate and reliable polling firm.
Ok, we will check back in a week and see how many 55% polls we've got. Just curious where do you see that Rasmussen had him winning?
Haven't we learned recently the accuracy of any poll with regards to Trump? He's like nothing we (or they) have seen before in this type of role. They are out of touch, plain and simple.
I think polls are still credible in terms of the areas that are pretty set in stone historically. But when you have a game-changer...you cannot pin point something / someone you've never seen before. It's a complete shot in the dark.
I think polls are still credible in terms of the areas that are pretty set in stone historically. But when you have a game-changer...you cannot pin point something / someone you've never seen before. It's a complete shot in the dark.
Only the ones that a person doesn't agree with. If they like the results then it's the best poll around. I'm not specifically talking about you, just generally speaking.
Great example of me getting pulled in by fake news. I should have looked more closely instead of glancing at a headline.
Rasmussen has a headline that says Rasmussen Reports Calls It Right" What they should have said was "Rassmussen gets it right on popular vote count but misses election prediction"
I agree with this in general. I quoted a poll (in this thread, I believe) about the media's trust ratings -- that I definitely agree with, and it is something you can trust within the margin of error...the media base is established, so you can trust these polls have a good pulse on that.
But Trump is different. There's a lot of uncertainty, and I just don't think you can put much stock in anyone thinking they have a solid pulse on him. I'm VERY optimistic about the next 4 years because the way my mind works fits with what I see him doing, but that doesn't mean that I trust any poll right now on him, good or bad.
I thought another bonus part of the press conference was when he assumed that April Ryan could set up a meeting with the Congressional Black Caucus for Trump. In Don's world all the blacks know each other. That's how out-of-fvcking-touch he is with American society. I'm sure he can do worse than that if we're patient with him.
Maybe this is why. Full disclosure, I haven't seen the press conference and I don't know anything about the website linked.
Oh, well, you're lukewarm as usual.
I'm sure DJT knew all about Ryan's stealth status. He knows what he's told, so... anything is possible.
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
THI Podcast: The Football Show | Observations 2 Months into Belichick Era
- Latest: andrew jones