2020 US Election (Part Two)

[Gorbles]

Huffington Post is very biased and not always the best quality.

They're not ranked that well, better than fox news though.

They're not as extreme as Fox and they lean in the opposite direction.

If I was writing a university paper I wouldn't use them as a source unless the paper was about media bias or something similar.

Right on the edge of unreliable.

https://www.adfontesmedia.com/

The horrific coding of that site aside, you do realise it places HuffPo in the centre-top green-marked area? What point were you even trying to make

 

[tuckerkao]

After much thought, I've concluded that Kamala Harris is a good choice for VP.

Don't forget to vote early and flatten the burdens of the postal services as much as possible -

 

[IglooDame]

Don't forget to vote early and flatten the burdens of the postal services as much as possible.

Truly. Wife and I are doing our part by applying for, and then dropping off, our absentee ballots at our town office personally. Essentially, what we'd do if we were not going to be in town on Nov 3rd anyway. Postal delivery has always been problematic in our town, so Trump's crusade to erode USPS can only make things worse in that regard.

 

[Farm Boy]

I get that it's pretty good hysterical news if you haven't been following postal news in rural America for like, what, 30 years? But here's a tidbit to start catching up.

 

[Zardnaar]

The horrific coding of that site aside, you do realise it places HuffPo in the centre-top green-marked area? What point were you even trying to make

Yeah wasn't great.

I read Huffington Post sometimes, it's free.

You generally know what they're about though. Betting there's an anti Trump story near the top right now.

At least they more or less tell the truth just put a lot of spin on it.

As opposed to FOX which barely counts as infotainment let alone news.

 

[Patine]

Yeah wasn't great.

I read Huffington Post sometimes, it's free.

You generally know what they're about though. Betting there's an anti Trump story near the top right now.

At least they more or less tell the truth just put a lot of spin on it.

As opposed to FOX which barely counts as infotainment let alone news.

The CBC and the BBC for the win. Yes, they're getting some strange material, contributor and programming right now, but they're still much more highbrow, respectable, and credible, and not as blatantly, ridiculously, and insultingly to the intelligence biased as every American media outlet I've seen. But it seems a lot of Americans hold a residual "patriotic," duty to watch American "news," - even if nowadays it's painfully obvious they're being told a huge heap of blatant lies and propaganda of one "side," (artificial, forced, and contrived American socio-political "side," not a real, natural, or comprehensive "side," based on any realistic or rational appraisal of the pressing issues of the day, of which multiple such "sides," would be acknowledged) or another.

After much thought, I've concluded that Kamala Harris is a good choice for VP.

No, she is not at all what's needed right now. But neither is the "wolf in sheep's clothing amongst the flock," who is there to deceive true Christians that the evil regime supports and send a signal to the Followers of the Deceiver, that is much more sincere, of such support for them. And the two geriatrics on the tops of the ticket with seemingly no real, discernable, platforms going into this election are the LAST thing needed. But, again, the forces that commit electoral malfeasance and interference in the U.S. for the last few (the same crimes as levied against the enigmatic "Russian hacker," in 2016 - but they keep getting away with it, unindicted for their treason and high betrayals of the worst sort) means those are the only two who are ALLOWED to have a possible chance of winning - when neither of them is what's needed, will do no good and only harm for the nation, and show that U.S. Government from BOTH major parties has learned nothing and still does not care at all about it's people in truth, and that maybe these whole two parties should be held to account and meet an actual political demise - something considered "unthinkable," in American politics, but which happens all the time to even major parties in healthy, free-and-fair, multi-party systems.

 

[Zardnaar]

The CBC and the BBC for the win. Yes, they're getting some strange material, contributor and programming right now, but they're still much more highbrow, respectable, and credible, and not as blatantly, ridiculously, and insultingly to the intelligence biased as every American media outlet I've seen. But it seems a lot of Americans hold a residual "patriotic," duty to watch American "news," - even if nowadays it's painfully obvious they're being told a huge heap of blatant lies and propaganda of one "side," (artificial, forced, and contrived American socio-political "side," not a real, natural, or comprehensive "side," based on any realistic or rational appraisal of the pressing issues of the day, of which multiple such "sides," would be acknowledged) or another.



No, she is not at all what's needed right now. But neither is the "wolf in sheep's clothing amongst the flock," who is there to deceive true Christians that the evil regime supports and send a signal to the Followers of the Deceiver, that is much more sincere, of such support for them. And the two geriatrics on the tops of the ticket with seemingly no real, discernable, platforms going into this election are the LAST thing needed. But, again, the forces that commit electoral malfeasance and interference in the U.S. for the last few (the same crimes as levied against the enigmatic "Russian hacker," in 2016 - but they keep getting away with it, unindicted for their treason and high betrayals of the worst sort) means those are the only two who are ALLOWED to have a possible chance of winning - when neither of them is what's needed, will do no good and only harm for the nation, and show that U.S. Government from BOTH major parties has learned nothing and still does not care at all about it's people in truth, and that maybe these whole two parties should be held to account and meet an actual political demise - something considered "unthinkable," in American politics, but which happens all the time to even major parties in healthy, free-and-fair, multi-party systems.

American news is generally trash. I use Reuters, BBC abd RNZ.

I did subscribe to Washington Post, they had some good political coverage an relation to polls and individual states.

 

[IglooDame]

For local/national evening TV news, ABC. Then Politico and NationalReview for my political news, by and large.

 

[Patine]

American news is generally trash. I use Reuters, BBC abd RNZ.

I did subscribe to Washington Post, they had some good political coverage an relation to polls and individual states.

Yes, Reuters is a good news source. Al Jazeera is even more credible than pretty much any American outlet. Of course, I'm not saying American new outlets are the absolute worst. Pravda, the Korean National News Committee (I think that's the translated name), Xinhua and the South China News, the Jerusalem Post, the Socialist Militant, and that major Iranian propaganda mill I can't remember the name of, are all FAR worse for obvious bias and ignoring facts to make ulterior points than the majority of American outlets...

 

[Zardnaar]

Yes, Reuters is a good news source. Al Jazeera is even more credible than pretty much any American outlet. Of course, I'm not saying American new outlets are the absolute worst. Pravda, the Korean National News Committee (I think that's the translated name), Xinhua and the South China News, the Jerusalem Post, the Socialist Militant, and that major Iranian propaganda mill I can't remember the name of, are all FAR worse for obvious bias and ignoring facts to make ulterior points than the majority of American outlets...

Yeah. Al Jazeera isn't that bad, use it sometimes for regional type news.

 

[AmazonQueen]

Mostly I rely on BBC, Channel 4 News, the Guardian and the New Statesman (although the last has had a tendency to shift its editoral stance with ownership changes but mostly on internal Labour Party matters).

 

[EnglishEdward]

No, she is not at all what's needed right now. But neither is the "wolf in sheep's clothing amongst the flock," who is there to deceive true Christians that the evil regime supports and send a signal to the Followers of the Deceiver, that is much more sincere, of such support for them. And the two geriatrics on the tops of the ticket with seemingly no real, discernable, platforms going into this election are the LAST thing needed. But, again, the forces that commit electoral malfeasance and interference in the U.S. for the last few (the same crimes as levied against the enigmatic "Russian hacker," in 2016 - but they keep getting away with it, unindicted for their treason and high betrayals of the worst sort) means those are the only two who are ALLOWED to have a possible chance of winning - when neither of them is what's needed, will do no good and only harm for the nation, and show that U.S. Government from BOTH major parties has learned nothing and still does not care at all about it's people in truth, and that maybe these whole two parties should be held to account and meet an actual political demise - something considered "unthinkable," in American politics, but which happens all the time to even major parties in healthy, free-and-fair, multi-party systems.

Did God tell you that himself?

 

[Patine]

Did God tell you that himself?

No. And I don't expect such guidance from on high in these kinds of matters. But divine revelation is not necessary to see a lot of these blatant and glaring problems. It requires choosing to stop being willfully blind to these obvious things.

 

[EnglishEdward]

No. And I don't expect such guidance from on high in these kinds of matters. But divine revelation is not necessary to see a lot of these blatant and glaring problems. It requires choosing to stop being willfully blind to these obvious things.

Yes, we can see that there are problems.

But what is so bad about Kamala Harris?

 

[Patine]

Yes, we can see that there are problems.

But what is so bad about Kamala Harris?

I think I've reiterated the main problem and issue with her about three times since Biden tapped her.

 

[EnglishEdward]

... I, too, do remain unconvinced about the part of her ideological "epiphany," from a hard law-and-order, pro-police state, pro-private prison (slave labour) quota prosecutor to any sort of Social Progressive. I am completely unconvinced there, and I believe it's a vile hoodwink by the Biden Campaign.

In an adversarial legal system such as the USA, the job of the prosecutor is to aggressively prosecute.

The fact that she has been effective at that does not demonstrate her personal ideology, merely her professionalism.

If the requirements for the VP role are that she addresses the criminal justice system in the context of BLM, professionalism is similarly needed.

 

[Samson]

When you state news sources, do you mean web sites or broadcast? I cannot imagine watching BBC News 24 outside of the UK, certainly at the moment. There have been weeks go by when you would not know there is a world outside of the UK and Washington DC during the COVID. I mostly watch Al Jazeera (and yes, it is funded by a theocracy run on almost slavery).

 

[Patine]

In an adversarial legal system such as the USA, the job of the prosecutor is to aggressively prosecute.

The fact that she has been effective at that does not demonstrate her personal ideology, merely her professionalism.

If the requirements for the VP role are that she addresses the criminal justice system in the context of BLM, professionalism is similarly needed.

Apex government by robotic, mode-swapping, soulless bureaucrats with no true personal investment or belief in any of the issues? Is this what you're praising, or am I reading this wrong?

 

[stinkubus]

It's also worth noting that they are pretending prosecutorial discretion isn't a thing.

The US is a nation which is DESPERATELY in need of serious criminal justice reform. A former prosecutor does not have the moral authority to lead us at this moment in our history.

 

[El_Machinae]

The only hope there is that Biden passes the torch to a new team in 2024