Just the facts, mam. Just the facts.

[Guest]

Why does every discussion turn into insults? Why do people state lies as fact? How about one thread with just facts.

Hint, just because David Brock from progressive site mediamatters.org says something, does not make it fact.


http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160824/a52914f73e23440c67873fefa12649f0.jpg

[Guest]

Because facts get in the way. It's much easier to win a point with conjecture, lies and obfuscation. And, if that doesn't work, they can always resort to name calling.

Of course, there is the problem that it seems we really don't get facts any more. It seems more and more "news" is based on opinion rather than truth.

Red

[Guest]

Now the bar is set high. We shall see.

I will start.
Every day, it seems, more emails and or evidence of Clinton wrong doing is released.

Yet there is little or no mention by the media. In fact commentary from the media is more than obvious by their absence. It is easy to conclude the media is either biased or managed or both.

In any case if they treated Trump information the same as the Clinton information what would it sound like? Quiet and no comment.

The main stream media has deteiorated in substance and credibility with their bias. Unfortunately like the dems they don't care.

[Guest]

The Associated Press, widely accepted as fair, if not slightly left reports facts as follows:


WASHINGTON (AP) — More than half the people outside the government who met with Hillary Clinton while she was secretary of state gave money — either personally or through companies or groups — to the Clinton Foundation. It's an extraordinary proportion indicating her possible ethics challenges if elected president.

At least 85 of 154 people from private interests who met or had phone conversations scheduled with Clinton while she led the State Department donated to her family charity.....

Hmmm. My following statement is not a fact: I think these meetings were to discuss yoga.

Many donors to Clinton Foundation met with her at State (http://bigstory.ap.org/article/82df550e1ec646098b434f7d5771f625/many-donors-clinton-foundation-met-her-state)

[Guest]

Just to add to the wonderful post above from the AP:

"The 154 did not include U.S. federal employees or foreign government representatives. Clinton met with representatives of at least 16 foreign governments that donated as much as $170 million to the Clinton charity, but they were not included in AP's calculations because such meetings would presumably have been part of her diplomatic duties.:

[Guest]

Just to add to the wonderful post above from the AP:

"The 154 did not include U.S. federal employees or foreign government representatives. Clinton met with representatives of at least 16 foreign governments that donated as much as $170 million to the Clinton charity, but they were not included in AP's calculations because such meetings would presumably have been part of her diplomatic duties.:
This is just so factual and certainly has the "appearance" of conflict of interest.

I can't wait for more emails to be released, my "opinion" is that eventually clinton won't be able to blame it on a Russian plan. They will come out with something even more bizarre. I can't wait to see their new defense.

[Guest]

Because facts get in the way. It's much easier to win a point with conjecture, lies and obfuscation. And, if that doesn't work, they can always resort to name calling.

Of course, there is the problem that it seems we really don't get facts any more. It seems more and more "news" is based on opinion rather than truth.

Red

One of the few times I agree with you:shocked:

[Guest]

This is just so factual and certainly has the "appearance" of conflict of interest.

I can't wait for more emails to be released, my "opinion" is that eventually clinton won't be able to blame it on a Russian plan. They will come out with something even more bizarre. I can't wait to see their new defense.

"Appearance of conflict of interest" When people only listen to Fox News appearance is really.

Clinton Campaign Hits Back at AP Story on Family Foundation | US News (http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-08-24/clinton-campaign-hits-back-at-ap-story-on-family-foundation)

How much money did Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea receive from the Foundation? That would be zero. Fox News reports that only 9% was donated to charities from the Foundation. They fail to say that 85+% was spent on the ground helping people in need in Africa. It is a working foundation.

Take a look in the article. it states that nothing they did violates the agreement they signed with the Obama administration.

For the next two months, facts be damned. As far is Trump is concerned, how can you believe anything that he says. Trump's new female mouthpiece was asked over seven times by CNN, if Trump has changed his views on deporting illegals. She never answered the question. The words coming out of her mouth made absolutely no sense at all. They won't even answer a simple question. They could care less about facts.

[Guest]

Now the bar is set high. We shall see.

I will start.
Every day, it seems, more emails and or evidence of Clinton wrong doing is released.

Yet there is little or no mention by the media. In fact commentary from the media is more than obvious by their absence. It is easy to conclude the media is either biased or managed or both.

In any case if they treated Trump information the same as the Clinton information what would it sound like? Quiet and no comment.

The main stream media has deteiorated in substance and credibility with their bias. Unfortunately like the dems they don't care.
Although my opinion is that I agree with you 100% but I want facts.

Like this...

Survey: 7 percent of reporters identify as Republican - POLITICO (http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2014/05/survey-7-percent-of-reporters-identify-as-republican-188053)

Politico which is center/left says only 7%of the media is Republican. Hmmmmp, interesting.

You are correct, I apologize.

[Guest]

We made it thru 8 posts without explitives.....amazing!

[Guest]

The Associated Press, widely accepted as fair, if not slightly left reports facts as follows:


WASHINGTON (AP) — More than half the people outside the government who met with Hillary Clinton while she was secretary of state gave money — either personally or through companies or groups — to the Clinton Foundation. It's an extraordinary proportion indicating her possible ethics challenges if elected president.

At least 85 of 154 people from private interests who met or had phone conversations scheduled with Clinton while she led the State Department donated to her family charity.....

Hmmm. My following statement is not a fact: I think these meetings were to discuss yoga.

Many donors to Clinton Foundation met with her at State (http://bigstory.ap.org/article/82df550e1ec646098b434f7d5771f625/many-donors-clinton-foundation-met-her-state)

I hope you realize how totally unacceptable your post is.

She met with far more than 154 people from private interests while Secy of State....far more.

Come on...get real..she was a senator, first lady, etc. I think more than 154 people....many many more....visited her. The Clintons are friends with a lot of people and your "fact" is that she met with 154 over the years as SSTATE ????

"Tuesday afternoon, Stephen Braun and Eileen Sullivan of the Associated Press released the results of a review of State Department appointment data that they used to make some striking claims about Hillary Clinton’s schedule as secretary of state.

According to their reporting, Clinton spent a remarkably large share of her time as America’s chief diplomat talking to people who had donated money to the Clinton Foundation. She went out of her way to help these Clinton Foundation donors, and her decision to do so raises important concerns about the ethics of her conduct as secretary and potentially as president. It’s a striking piece of reporting that made immediate waves in my social media feed, as political journalists of all stripes retweeted the story’s headline conclusions.

Except it turns out not to be true. The nut fact that the AP uses to lead its coverage is wrong, and Braun and Sullivan’s reporting reveals absolutely no unethical conduct. In fact, they found so little unethical conduct that an enormous amount of space is taken up by a detailed recounting of the time Clinton tried to help a former Nobel Peace Prize winner who’s also the recipient of a Congressional Gold Medal and a Presidential Medal of Freedom."

The AP’s big expose on Hillary meeting with Clinton Foundation donors is a mess - Vox (http://www.vox.com/2016/8/24/12618446/ap-clinton-foundation-meeting)

I AM TYPING IN CAPS BECAUSE I AM HOPING THIS LAST PART WILL AT LEAST GET A CURSORY GLANCE....

I am not a Clinton supporter, actually....well, it matters not. I refer to post #2 which is true. TOTALLY

The only way to get to real facts is do your own investigation and reading. Now, of course most....the largest majority of Americans are too lazy or brainwashed to do that, thus.......WE GET THE TWO CANDIDATES THAT WE HAVE IN THIS ELECTION.

Certainly anyone with any knowledge of facts would never vote for neither of these two.

A few examples......did you know....

"Donald Trump has real problems being truthful, as evidenced by the record number of “Pants on Fire” ratings he’s received from Politifact.

Now it seems Trump has flat-out fabricated an encounter he supposedly had with a “top” Chicago police officer.

NBC Chicago is reporting that the Chicago Police Department is pushing back on Trump’s claim that a “top” Chicago cop told him that the city’s violence could be stopped in a week if he were allowed to employ unspecified “tough police tactics.”

“We’ve discredited this claim months ago,” CPD spokesperson Frank Giancamilli said in a statement. “No one in the senior command at CPD has ever met with Donald Trump or a member of his campaign.”



"The Chicago Police Department on Tuesday denied Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump's claim that he met with a "top" Chicago officer and argued the city's violence would not be solved with "tough police tactics."
"We've discredited this claim months ago," CPD spokesperson Frank Giancamilli said in a statement. "No one in the senior command at CPD has ever met with Donald Trump or a member of his campaign."


Source: Police Respond to Donald Trump's Claim That Chicago's Violence Can Be Stopped In A Week | NBC Chicago Police Respond to Donald Trump's Claim That Chicago's Violence Can Be Stopped In A Week | NBC Chicago (http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/chicago-police-respond-donald-trump-chicago-violence-can-be-stopped-in-a-week-391116511.html#ixzz4IGqbA3gB)
Follow us: @nbcchicago on Twitter | nbcchicago on Facebook

Now if you support Trump, you buy into his lies and this is just another one to chew on and THINK you are informed but he lied to you all.

Then this.....

"The Trump Presidential campaign rolled out its first major television ad last week, aimed at voters in Florida, Ohio, North Carolina and Pennsylvania. For Social Security experts and advocates, it wasn’t worth waiting for.

“In Hillary Clinton’s America, the system stays rigged against Americans,” the ad declares. “Illegal immigrants convicted of committing crimes get to stay, collecting Social Security benefits, skipping the line.”

Bluntly speaking, these statements about Social Security are untrue.

Here are the lies about Social Security in Donald Trump's new nationwide ad - LA Times (http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-social-security-trump-20160822-snap-story.html)

So, again, Trump lied to you....you all ok with that ????

[Guest]

I hope you realize how totally unacceptable your post is.

She met with far more than 154 people from private interests while Secy of State....far more.

Come on...get real..she was a senator, first lady, etc. I think more than 154 people....many many more....visited her. The Clintons are friends with a lot of people and your "fact" is that she met with 154 over the years as SSTATE ????

"Tuesday afternoon, Stephen Braun and Eileen Sullivan of the Associated Press released the results of a review of State Department appointment data that they used to make some striking claims about Hillary Clinton’s schedule as secretary of state.

According to their reporting, Clinton spent a remarkably large share of her time as America’s chief diplomat talking to people who had donated money to the Clinton Foundation. She went out of her way to help these Clinton Foundation donors, and her decision to do so raises important concerns about the ethics of her conduct as secretary and potentially as president. It’s a striking piece of reporting that made immediate waves in my social media feed, as political journalists of all stripes retweeted the story’s headline conclusions.

Except it turns out not to be true. The nut fact that the AP uses to lead its coverage is wrong, and Braun and Sullivan’s reporting reveals absolutely no unethical conduct. In fact, they found so little unethical conduct that an enormous amount of space is taken up by a detailed recounting of the time Clinton tried to help a former Nobel Peace Prize winner who’s also the recipient of a Congressional Gold Medal and a Presidential Medal of Freedom."

The AP’s big expose on Hillary meeting with Clinton Foundation donors is a mess - Vox (http://www.vox.com/2016/8/24/12618446/ap-clinton-foundation-meeting)

I AM TYPING IN CAPS BECAUSE I AM HOPING THIS LAST PART WILL AT LEAST GET A CURSORY GLANCE....

I am not a Clinton supporter, actually....well, it matters not. I refer to post #2 which is true. TOTALLY

The only way to get to real facts is do your own investigation and reading. Now, of course most....the largest majority of Americans are too lazy or brainwashed to do that, thus.......WE GET THE TWO CANDIDATES THAT WE HAVE IN THIS ELECTION.

Certainly anyone with any knowledge of facts would never vote for neither of these two.

A few examples......did you know....

"Donald Trump has real problems being truthful, as evidenced by the record number of “Pants on Fire” ratings he’s received from Politifact.

Now it seems Trump has flat-out fabricated an encounter he supposedly had with a “top” Chicago police officer.

NBC Chicago is reporting that the Chicago Police Department is pushing back on Trump’s claim that a “top” Chicago cop told him that the city’s violence could be stopped in a week if he were allowed to employ unspecified “tough police tactics.”

“We’ve discredited this claim months ago,” CPD spokesperson Frank Giancamilli said in a statement. “No one in the senior command at CPD has ever met with Donald Trump or a member of his campaign.”



"The Chicago Police Department on Tuesday denied Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump's claim that he met with a "top" Chicago officer and argued the city's violence would not be solved with "tough police tactics."
"We've discredited this claim months ago," CPD spokesperson Frank Giancamilli said in a statement. "No one in the senior command at CPD has ever met with Donald Trump or a member of his campaign."


Source: Police Respond to Donald Trump's Claim That Chicago's Violence Can Be Stopped In A Week | NBC Chicago Police Respond to Donald Trump's Claim That Chicago's Violence Can Be Stopped In A Week | NBC Chicago (http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/chicago-police-respond-donald-trump-chicago-violence-can-be-stopped-in-a-week-391116511.html#ixzz4IGqbA3gB)
Follow us: @nbcchicago on Twitter | nbcchicago on Facebook

Now if you support Trump, you buy into his lies and this is just another one to chew on and THINK you are informed but he lied to you all.

Then this.....

"The Trump Presidential campaign rolled out its first major television ad last week, aimed at voters in Florida, Ohio, North Carolina and Pennsylvania. For Social Security experts and advocates, it wasn’t worth waiting for.

“In Hillary Clinton’s America, the system stays rigged against Americans,” the ad declares. “Illegal immigrants convicted of committing crimes get to stay, collecting Social Security benefits, skipping the line.”

Bluntly speaking, these statements about Social Security are untrue.

Here are the lies about Social Security in Donald Trump's new nationwide ad - LA Times (http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-social-security-trump-20160822-snap-story.html)

So, again, Trump lied to you....you all ok with that ????
Vox, really!!! the organization that called for anti trump RIOTS!!!!!

[Guest]

Vox, really!!! the organization that called for anti trump RIOTS!!!!!

Your comment on the other lie ?

Lots more bold faced lies to come

[Guest]

Which lie in particular?

[Guest]

Let's be clear...

The report on Clinton visitors and giving money to her charity is an insinuation with not only no proof of wrong doing, but no charge of wrong doing.

The lies Trump tells are factual, and meaningful.

What sane man makes up meetings like the one in Chicago ? What sane man actually lies as he did on donations to vets until media caught him ?

If you want to compare "apples and " oranges, as in the Clinton story, let's discuss Trumps relationships with mob bosses. All insinuation, I understand but no difference.

Wonder if Trump who supposedly gave 100000.00 to the charity he now trashes was ever one of those visitors.

[Guest]

Title XIX of the Social Security Act (part of the Social Security

Amendments of 1965) established the Medicaid program to

provide medical and health related services for individuals and

families with low incomes through direct payment to suppliers of

the program. Medicaid is the largest source of funds for medical

care and related services to our Nation’s poorest people.

INCLUDING ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS

DON'T TRY AND SAY SOCIAL SECURITY DOES NOT FUND ILLEGALS.

Also, please try to use neutral sources.


Sorry for the caps

[Guest]

Which lie in particular?

He lied about consulting with the Chicago police.

Perhaps reading everything before jumping into the fray may help

[Guest]

Title XIX of the Social Security Act (part of the Social Security

Amendments of 1965) established the Medicaid program to

provide medical and health related services for individuals and

families with low incomes through direct payment to suppliers of

the program. Medicaid is the largest source of funds for medical

care and related services to our Nation’s poorest people.

INCLUDING ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS

DON'T TRY AND SAY SOCIAL SECURITY DOES NOT FUND ILLEGALS.

Also, please try to use neutral sources.


Sorry for the caps

hopeless to talk rationally here..post 2 hit it on the head.

[Guest]

I have personally seen illegals abuse federal programs reserved for citizens countless times.

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160824/af9bc52e2f4b9dffe5a12ca447854314.jpg

How Undocumented Immigrants Sometimes Receive Medicaid Treatment | PBS NewsHour (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/how-undocumented-immigrants-sometimes-receive-medicaid-treatment/)

[Guest]

I have personally seen illegals abuse federal programs reserved for citizens countless times.

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160824/af9bc52e2f4b9dffe5a12ca447854314.jpg

How Undocumented Immigrants Sometimes Receive Medicaid Treatment | PBS NewsHour (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/how-undocumented-immigrants-sometimes-receive-medicaid-treatment/)

Nobody ever said it was not ABUSED. Not the point at all.

Perhaps each poster should let everyone know what sources they will accept.

The Trump story has two sources and still not acceptable.

Amazing how generally speaking he is considered pathological with lying and on here he is just like Honest Abe

[Guest]

Although not provable to a non believer, I though empirical evidence, 30+ years of seeing, in NYC, with my own eyes illegals stealing federal, state and local services by many different methods. It is not limited to hispanics there are russians, Asians, etc. The identity fraud alone is incredible. In many instances one person in a family is legal and many receive services. I have seen it all, if you think there are checks and balances, think again.

These are only my facts. Sorry if you don't believe me

[Guest]

I hope you realize how totally unacceptable your post is.

She met with far more than 154 people from private interests while Secy of State....far more.

Come on...get real..she was a senator, first lady, etc. I think more than 154 people....many many more....visited her. The Clintons are friends with a lot of people and your "fact" is that she met with 154 over the years as SSTATE ????

"Tuesday afternoon, Stephen Braun and Eileen Sullivan of the Associated Press released the results of a review of State Department appointment data that they used to make some striking claims about Hillary Clinton’s schedule as secretary of state.

According to their reporting, Clinton spent a remarkably large share of her time as America’s chief diplomat talking to people who had donated money to the Clinton Foundation. She went out of her way to help these Clinton Foundation donors, and her decision to do so raises important concerns about the ethics of her conduct as secretary and potentially as president. It’s a striking piece of reporting that made immediate waves in my social media feed, as political journalists of all stripes retweeted the story’s headline conclusions.

Except it turns out not to be true. The nut fact that the AP uses to lead its coverage is wrong, and Braun and Sullivan’s reporting reveals absolutely no unethical conduct. In fact, they found so little unethical conduct that an enormous amount of space is taken up by a detailed recounting of the time Clinton tried to help a former Nobel Peace Prize winner who’s also the recipient of a Congressional Gold Medal and a Presidential Medal of Freedom."

The AP’s big expose on Hillary meeting with Clinton Foundation donors is a mess - Vox (http://www.vox.com/2016/8/24/12618446/ap-clinton-foundation-meeting)

I AM TYPING IN CAPS BECAUSE I AM HOPING THIS LAST PART WILL AT LEAST GET A CURSORY GLANCE....

I am not a Clinton supporter, actually....well, it matters not. I refer to post #2 which is true. TOTALLY

The only way to get to real facts is do your own investigation and reading. Now, of course most....the largest majority of Americans are too lazy or brainwashed to do that, thus.......WE GET THE TWO CANDIDATES THAT WE HAVE IN THIS ELECTION.

Certainly anyone with any knowledge of facts would never vote for neither of these two.

A few examples......did you know....

"Donald Trump has real problems being truthful, as evidenced by the record number of “Pants on Fire” ratings he’s received from Politifact.

Now it seems Trump has flat-out fabricated an encounter he supposedly had with a “top” Chicago police officer.

NBC Chicago is reporting that the Chicago Police Department is pushing back on Trump’s claim that a “top” Chicago cop told him that the city’s violence could be stopped in a week if he were allowed to employ unspecified “tough police tactics.”

“We’ve discredited this claim months ago,” CPD spokesperson Frank Giancamilli said in a statement. “No one in the senior command at CPD has ever met with Donald Trump or a member of his campaign.”



"The Chicago Police Department on Tuesday denied Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump's claim that he met with a "top" Chicago officer and argued the city's violence would not be solved with "tough police tactics."
"We've discredited this claim months ago," CPD spokesperson Frank Giancamilli said in a statement. "No one in the senior command at CPD has ever met with Donald Trump or a member of his campaign."


Source: Police Respond to Donald Trump's Claim That Chicago's Violence Can Be Stopped In A Week | NBC Chicago Police Respond to Donald Trump's Claim That Chicago's Violence Can Be Stopped In A Week | NBC Chicago (http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/chicago-police-respond-donald-trump-chicago-violence-can-be-stopped-in-a-week-391116511.html#ixzz4IGqbA3gB)
Follow us: @nbcchicago on Twitter | nbcchicago on Facebook

Now if you support Trump, you buy into his lies and this is just another one to chew on and THINK you are informed but he lied to you all.

Then this.....

"The Trump Presidential campaign rolled out its first major television ad last week, aimed at voters in Florida, Ohio, North Carolina and Pennsylvania. For Social Security experts and advocates, it wasn’t worth waiting for.

“In Hillary Clinton’s America, the system stays rigged against Americans,” the ad declares. “Illegal immigrants convicted of committing crimes get to stay, collecting Social Security benefits, skipping the line.”

Bluntly speaking, these statements about Social Security are untrue.

Here are the lies about Social Security in Donald Trump's new nationwide ad - LA Times (http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-social-security-trump-20160822-snap-story.html)

So, again, Trump lied to you....you all ok with that ????

take caps and bold fonts and book a Tee time.

Stop it, too bad we can't set Ignore on these guest names

[Guest]

take caps and bold fonts and book a Tee time.

Stop it, too bad we can't set Ignore on these guest names

Reading problem ? Immune to accepting information ?

[Guest]

[QUOTE=Guest;1277332]Why does every discussion turn into insults? Why do people state lies as fact? How about one thread with just facts.

Hint, just because David Brock from progressive site mediamatters.org says something, does not make it fact.


Dear Guest: The answer to this question requires one to go back quite a few years ago because there was a time when when being caught in a lie had consequences and created shame.

You can also blame the entertainment industry because once upon a time criminals i movies were seen as bad and bad meaning bad and ended up punished for their crimes. Over time bad meant good and bad meant cool and bad was so cool that punishment turned into reward and justly deserved.

there was also a time when most journalist had some sort of ethics and were good at fact finding. today they invent their stories do not know how to fact check and believe it is justified.

Education went from teaching people to think to teaching them to emote . Educators moved from subjects of importance the classics, studies in logic civics , etc to diversity studies gender studies, etc . today only 26% of high school students can pass the ACT's So what evolved is that these folks actually believe that name calling is their argument


admittedly this is just a brief outline but there is not enough space on this post or posters who are interested in reading a short book written by me.

Personal Best Regards:

[Guest]

That has NO POLITICAL leanings that is a good fact check... sounds like this website and Facebook could use it! Please answer without insults.

[Guest]

That has NO POLITICAL leanings that is a good fact check... sounds like this website and Facebook could use it! Please answer without insults.
how to find fact checking sites - Google Search (https://www.google.com/search?q=how+to+find+fact+checking+sites&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8)

[Guest]

how to find fact checking sites - Google Search (https://www.google.com/search?q=how+to+find+fact+checking+sites&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8)

Google is a left leaning, liberal search engine that provides priority to liberal sites. If you want balanced, you need to use a different search engine.

[Guest]

Google is a left leaning, liberal search engine that provides priority to liberal sites. If you want balanced, you need to use a different search engine.

Or..novel idea,but it works...

Read BOTH sides and then investigate the facts that seem skewed by either side.

Most, and I mean 99% simply search until they find something they WANT TO AGREE WITH.

Most on this forum who say they KNOW or are INFORMED, stick with their comfort zone.

This election, you have two liars, one pathological....so nothing much will change without the traditional "October surprise".

And it WILL happen

[Guest]

Google is a left leaning, liberal search engine that provides priority to liberal sites. If you want balanced, you need to use a different search engine.
how to find factr checking sites - Yahoo Search Results (https://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylc=X3oDMTFiN25laTRvBF9TAzIwMjM1MzgwNzUEaX RjAzEEc2VjA3NyY2hfcWEEc2xrA3NyY2h3ZWI-?p=how+to+find+factr+checking+sites&fr=yfp-t&fp=1&toggle=1&cop=mss&ei=UTF-8)

[Guest]

You know everyone is right everyone is wrong everyone are liars everyone is crooked. I guess you get my drift. There really isnt anything to talk about. Bottom line vote and vote for the lesser of the two evils. You decide whom that my be. Myself TRUMP.

[Guest]

You know everyone is right everyone is wrong everyone are liars everyone is crooked. I guess you get my drift. There really isnt anything to talk about. Bottom line vote and vote for the lesser of the two evils. You decide whom that my be. Myself TRUMP.

Not going Clinton, but knowing Trump is clearly and openly the most dangerous of the two. Having a President deep in debt to Russia and China and who lies each day leads me to skip that decision.

Will vote down ticket but not President

[Guest]

Not only are the journalists and other media liberal, but all the major players in social media and search engines are as well. They are actively trying to cut off your pathway to the truth.

You can't make this stuff up.

[Guest]

Not only are the journalists and other media liberal, but all the major players in social media and search engines are as well. They are actively trying to cut off your pathway to the truth.

You can't make this stuff up.

Nobody is cutting it off anywhere.

If you want it, you cand find it. Seems in this country, we make up our mind and then search only to validate that, not ever to hear other views.

They are out there...we just are lazy and thus very misinformed.

Besides, seems to me we don't care about the truth anyway. Candidates lie, and we just ignore it.

We deserve the crap running for President.

[Guest]

Nobody is cutting it off anywhere.

If you want it, you cand find it. Seems in this country, we make up our mind and then search only to validate that, not ever to hear other views.

They are out there...we just are lazy and thus very misinformed.

Besides, seems to me we don't care about the truth anyway. Candidates lie, and we just ignore it.

We deserve the crap running for President.
Google Search Results Could Steal the Presidency | PJ Media (https://pjmedia.com/blog/google-search-results-could-steal-the-presidency/)

Facebook admits rogue employees may have shown bias against conservatives - Washington Times (http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/may/23/facebook-admits-rogue-employees-may-have-shown-bia/)

It's common knowledge and the not so savvy Internet user, like most seniors might believe the total bulls#it that they search for or the pops up on their Facebook feed.

It's a very big problem that the liberal wants to downplay..... like the emails, benghazi, corruption at the Clinton foundation, etc etc

[Guest]

Google Search Results Could Steal the Presidency | PJ Media (https://pjmedia.com/blog/google-search-results-could-steal-the-presidency/)

Facebook admits rogue employees may have shown bias against conservatives - Washington Times (http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/may/23/facebook-admits-rogue-employees-may-have-shown-bia/)

It's common knowledge and the not so savvy Internet user, like most seniors might believe the total bulls#it that they search for or the pops up on their Facebook feed.

It's a very big problem that the liberal wants to downplay..... like the emails, benghazi, corruption at the Clinton foundation, etc etc

Please..stop the condescending crap. Truth is available, and I can tell you that most seniors I know are pretty savvy. Question is if they, or anyone of any age group, want to search it out.

Your reference to liberal shows how shallow a person here can be. There are an equal number of conservative websites.

Blaming liberals or conservatives is a shallow way to say you are lazy. Truth is available if you want it.

Spin is different. That is reporting the facts in the wrong context, or facts incomplete. All you need to do is do your homework...you can easily find either liberal or conservative and they do not change the facts...just deliver them in different packages

For example, one of the candidates will have good relationship with a media source until they say something about him that he does not like, and that becomes a bad media source for him and his followers.

I realize most are not as shallow but our country now has candidates cutting off credentials because a media person does not agree. That is making America a third world country.

[Guest]

Google Search Results Could Steal the Presidency | PJ Media (https://pjmedia.com/blog/google-search-results-could-steal-the-presidency/)

"Conservatives have been claiming for years that Google has an anti-conservative bias. But in recent years, Google has been contributing to conservative organizations like the Heritage Foundation and the Federalist Society. Of course, that doesn't mean much, but it raises questions as to whether Google's bias against conservatives and conservative issues translates into a deliberate effort to create an algorithm that would penalize the right when it comes to elections.

I don't even know if that's possible. People use Google to search for everything from baby clothes to candidates' positions on issues. Could they actually write a program that would always rank negative stories about conservative candidates first?

There's no doubt Google, the company, has a liberal bias. But whether they could -- or would -- consciously use their search engine to advance their agenda can't be proved and would seem to be impossible."


Rick Moran is PJ Media's Chicago editor and Blog editor at The American Thinker. His own blog is Right Wing Nut House.
For media inquiries, please contact communications@pjmedia.com

Reminder do not direct comments toward other users. Your post will be removed.

[Guest]

Google Search Results Could Steal the Presidency | PJ Media (https://pjmedia.com/blog/google-search-results-could-steal-the-presidency/)

"Conservatives have been claiming for years that Google has an anti-conservative bias. But in recent years, Google has been contributing to conservative organizations like the Heritage Foundation and the Federalist Society. Of course, that doesn't mean much, but it raises questions as to whether Google's bias against conservatives and conservative issues translates into a deliberate effort to create an algorithm that would penalize the right when it comes to elections.

I don't even know if that's possible. People use Google to search for everything from baby clothes to candidates' positions on issues. Could they actually write a program that would always rank negative stories about conservative candidates first?

There's no doubt Google, the company, has a liberal bias. But whether they could -- or would -- consciously use their search engine to advance their agenda can't be proved and would seem to be impossible."


Rick Moran is PJ Media's Chicago editor and Blog editor at The American Thinker. His own blog is Right Wing Nut House.
For media inquiries, please contact communications@pjmedia.com

Reminder do not direct comments toward other users. Your post will be removed.

Google is left wing. No one can dispute that. Anyone doing a simple search can tell that. I have tested it by reading a right lean article and then going to Google and doing a search for the issue/incident and have found ONLY the left slant on the same issue/incident. Try it sometime and you will find the same thing. I've done this on many issues, just to have more than one view on an issue. Always the left lean from Google. Look up something on HIllary and you will have to dig pretty deep to find anything at all derogatory.

[Guest]

Google is left wing. No one can dispute that. Anyone doing a simple search can tell that. I have tested it by reading a right lean article and then going to Google and doing a search for the issue/incident and have found ONLY the left slant on the same issue/incident. Try it sometime and you will find the same thing. I've done this on many issues, just to have more than one view on an issue. Always the left lean from Google. Look up something on HIllary and you will have to dig pretty deep to find anything at all derogatory.

Why rely on Google at all ?

How about old fashioned reading ? How bout do your own research ?

[Guest]

So many, like Trump, rely on uninformed, misinformed people to support them.

They accept the simplistic, non validated rhetoric.

[Guest]

Because facts get in the way. It's much easier to win a point with conjecture, lies and obfuscation. And, if that doesn't work, they can always resort to name calling.

Of course, there is the problem that it seems we really don't get facts any more. It seems more and more "news" is based on opinion rather than truth.

Red

The "news" is what they're TOLD is news. The higher-ups set the tone and determine what will run. They ALL get the same "news". They report what they're handed. It's all propaganda.

Although not provable to a non believer, I though empirical evidence, 30+ years of seeing, in NYC, with my own eyes illegals stealing federal, state and local services by many different methods. It is not limited to hispanics there are russians, Asians, etc. The identity fraud alone is incredible. In many instances one person in a family is legal and many receive services. I have seen it all, if you think there are checks and balances, think again.

These are only my facts. Sorry if you don't believe me

Yes, and they steal the low skilled jobs which forces LEGAL citizens onto welfare. Get rid of the 100 million immigrants and their children, you could put a LOT of people back to work. Get a LOT of people off welfare.

Reading problem ? Immune to accepting information ?

Most people are...confirmation bias...they only see what they want to see.

[QUOTE=Guest;1277332]Why does every discussion turn into insults? Why do people state lies as fact? How about one thread with just facts.

Hint, just because David Brock from progressive site mediamatters.org says something, does not make it fact.


Dear Guest: The answer to this question requires one to go back quite a few years ago because there was a time when when being caught in a lie had consequences and created shame.

You can also blame the entertainment industry because once upon a time criminals i movies were seen as bad and bad meaning bad and ended up punished for their crimes. Over time bad meant good and bad meant cool and bad was so cool that punishment turned into reward and justly deserved.

there was also a time when most journalist had some sort of ethics and were good at fact finding. today they invent their stories do not know how to fact check and believe it is justified.

Education went from teaching people to think to teaching them to emote . Educators moved from subjects of importance the classics, studies in logic civics , etc to diversity studies gender studies, etc . today only 26% of high school students can pass the ACT's So what evolved is that these folks actually believe that name calling is their argument


admittedly this is just a brief outline but there is not enough space on this post or posters who are interested in reading a short book written by me.

Personal Best Regards:

Everywhere but here...the TRUTH is squelched...hidden...banned...censored.

Don't you get it? Education HAS to lower it's standards to allow THEM to have ANY chance in succeeding. They're great at sports...not much else. We're killing ourselves in this futile equality insanity.

Diversity studies are the way they spread the BIG LIE. That we're all "equal".

Show me...show me where we're all equal.

Or..novel idea,but it works...

Read BOTH sides and then investigate the facts that seem skewed by either side.

Most, and I mean 99% simply search until they find something they WANT TO AGREE WITH.

Most on this forum who say they KNOW or are INFORMED, stick with their comfort zone.

This election, you have two liars, one pathological....so nothing much will change without the traditional "October surprise".

And it WILL happen

One problem with searching and finding TRUE information is the censorship. The truth can't be spoken outside this political forum, it would be censored.

You have TWO psychopaths running...don't be fooled by either of them.

You know everyone is right everyone is wrong everyone are liars everyone is crooked. I guess you get my drift. There really isnt anything to talk about. Bottom line vote and vote for the lesser of the two evils. You decide whom that my be. Myself TRUMP.

NO...NOT the lesser of two evils where there are NON-EVIL people running. Don't believe the "electibility" BS they shove down your throats. MAKE them electable by voting for them. WE'RE supposed to pick the president, not them, don't let them tell you who is best because it's neither of those two.

Not only are the journalists and other media liberal, but all the major players in social media and search engines are as well. They are actively trying to cut off your pathway to the truth.

You can't make this stuff up.

BOTH sides try to cut off the truth.

Nobody is cutting it off anywhere.

If you want it, you cand find it. Seems in this country, we make up our mind and then search only to validate that, not ever to hear other views.

They are out there...we just are lazy and thus very misinformed.

Besides, seems to me we don't care about the truth anyway. Candidates lie, and we just ignore it.

We deserve the crap running for President.

If you want it, you have to go to web sites that will post the truth. There aren't many. And most scoff at them as being racist.

We DON'T care about the truth any more...it's clearly evident. We actively deny/fight it.

Please..stop the condescending crap. Truth is available, and I can tell you that most seniors I know are pretty savvy. Question is if they, or anyone of any age group, want to search it out.

Your reference to liberal shows how shallow a person here can be. There are an equal number of conservative websites.

Blaming liberals or conservatives is a shallow way to say you are lazy. Truth is available if you want it.

Spin is different. That is reporting the facts in the wrong context, or facts incomplete. All you need to do is do your homework...you can easily find either liberal or conservative and they do not change the facts...just deliver them in different packages

For example, one of the candidates will have good relationship with a media source until they say something about him that he does not like, and that becomes a bad media source for him and his followers.

I realize most are not as shallow but our country now has candidates cutting off credentials because a media person does not agree. That is making America a third world country.

Many seniors may be savvy...but NOT in these arenas. They've been brainwashed their whole live into believing outright lies.

Spin is called propaganda. It's pretty much ALL we get from the media.

What's making us 3rd world is all the 3rd worlders living here now. 1/3 the population is immigrant or the child of an immigrant. And it's growing! It's not your imagination that you see a LOT of Hispanics now. They're successfully invading us.

Why rely on Google at all ?

How about old fashioned reading ? How bout do your own research ?

For what? Stuff that's 25 years old? Pretty much everything is digital now.

How much research do you need to do to know that the country is going 3rd world? Go to any town and see the changes. See every standard lowered to accommodate "them".

So many, like Trump, rely on uninformed, misinformed people to support them.

They accept the simplistic, non validated rhetoric.

Yes, they do. And the "information" they get is propaganda. Confirmation bias...it's alive and well in America.

[Guest]

Why rely on Google at all ?

How about old fashioned reading ? How bout do your own research ?

What do you think I am doing when I search for information? I am not listening or watching videos. I am reading. The issue was whether or not Google is steering people to the left. You issue is what? Challenging someone just to argue? I use other search engines besides google for my searches, so that I can get less filtered information.

[Guest]

The only obvious truth/fact in politics is if you are Democrat you see everything shaded in that light and if Republican then shaded in that light.

No side is open minded and will not tolerate anything being said (whether truth or fact)from the opposing viewpoint.

An objective (space alien) probably would see BOTH sides as non-factual and both sides with a lot of baggage.

The U.S. fought a Civil War because there were 2 ways of believing. Generally beliefs are about EMOTION and not facts/truths. We fight another emotional Civil War now as Red and Blue states. It is a shame the U.S. as mighty as it is, can't develop moral leaders so that the country is managed morally by what ever emotional side turns out more voters.