The media is knowingly lying about the dangers of Trump

Author: WyIted
Trump
Media

Posts

Total: 46
Topic's author
#31
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,466
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@RemyBrown
Race vs Education spending vs IQ - Google Sheets indicates a correlation of over .5 between education spending ranking and IQ ranking. Sources are in the spreadsheet.
This is one of those situations where correlation does not equal causation. We know that IQ is mostly genetic. In the United States where even the poor are well nourished anyway. 

We know that wealthy people are more likely to be high IQ. Property taxes go to schools and the wealthy pay more in property taxes so their schools will be better funded. It seems like Occam's razor will lead us to conclude that education spending and IQ is not causation. 

I could see school funding resulting in better educated children or better academic tests but IQ seems to be a stretch
#32
RemyBrown
RemyBrown's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 232
1
2
4
RemyBrown's avatar
RemyBrown
1
2
4
-->
@WyIted
This is one of those situations where correlation does not equal causation. We know that IQ is mostly genetic. In the United States where even the poor are well nourished anyway. 
There is probably some genetic component to it, but is it race related?  There was this black kid in my school that had a very high GPA.  The school had every kid getting the same amount of education funding.  I don't believe there was a significant correlation between race and IQ in that school.

We know that wealthy people are more likely to be high IQ. Property taxes go to schools and the wealthy pay more in property taxes so their schools will be better funded. It seems like Occam's razor will lead us to conclude that education spending and IQ is not causation. 
I would argue there is a loop effect.  More education funding -> higher IQ -> wealthier people -> higher property taxes -> more education funding.  But there is a lot of friction associated with it, if you work out, then you will gain strength consistently, but matienience is required (otherwise you become weak again).  You can overtrain and undertrain.  But the more you work out, the more weight you would have to lift for it to be overtraining.

I could see school funding resulting in better educated children or better academic tests but IQ seems to be a stretch
The average person now probably has a higher IQ on average than a person in the middle ages.
#33
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,989
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@WyIted
IQ is biology, not behavior. You can exercise the brain like a muscle, but genetics will always set an upper limit. It's why we all can't look like Arnold in the Gym.
#34
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,989
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@WyIted
You could make a case that modern society relies less on natural selection for intelligence than in the Middle Ages due to technological advancements. In earlier times, survival often depended on practical intelligence—problem-solving skills in agriculture, warfare, and navigation, which were crucial for survival success and reproduction. Today, machines and systems do much of the complex thinking for us, such as performing calculations, organizing information, and optimizing processes. This naturally reduces the direct selection pressure on individuals for those traits, diluting the emphasis on practical intelligence in reproduction as a critical survival trait.

IQ scores have probably risen over the past century, due to a phenomenon known as the Flynn effect. The Flynn effect says IQ increased due to improved education, nutrition, and access to information, rather than an inherent biological increase in intelligence.
Topic's author
#35
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,466
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@Greyparrot
Scientists have noticed that are IQs are declining recently and we are having a type of reverse Flynn effect for similar reasons as mentioned in idiocracy. 

#36
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@WyIted
Chat GPT defended the media a bit by saying that there could be studio pressures to frame the speech a certain way or maybe that the journalists have it in their mind that Trump is already dangerous so are more inclined to interpret things he says in a certain way
Probably both but the latter is the more important part to understand. For what it’s worth, I think the bloodbath example is a complete loser and I wish Democratic politicians would stop using it, there is no shortage of very real and clear examples they could use instead. It was clear that Trump was talking about an economic blood bath so all this does is give fodder for people claiming democrats and the media are lying, then they get use it as an excuse to hand waive away everything that follows which is inconvenient to them.

But with all that said, it’s not like there isn’t something very wrong with this. You talk about putting the quote in context, I agree. The context is that Trump has said things like that many times before and these kinds of buzzwords are a signal to a lot of people out there. If Trump actually cared about not giving people the impression that he supports political violence he would have adjusted his behavior and choice of words a long time ago, but he won’t because he knows what he’s doing. That’s what more people in the media should be explaining. The sentiment is justified, the details being asserted are problematic.

You stated that I framed it as the media lying which is true.
As I just explained, it’s more complicated than that.

After this I got into a conversation and we discussed how the media harms its own case by sensationalism and spin.
True to a certain extent, but again, when you have an audience that is combing through every word you say looking for anything they can use to discredit you... and by 'you' we’re talking about an entire industry with different networks, different shows, multiple hosts sometimes on each show, and multiple guests per show… of course you’re going to find the examples you’re looking for.

This is where I wanted to drill more down into media motivations because although I do buy into some of the reasons for the spin, I also feel like a lot of the media is knowingly being dishonest so I pressed it and asked what would motivate rational actors if they know they are spinning an event a certain way. 
And this is largely where we depart. By this point you've discarded all of the points I've reiterated above and moved on as if they are just false. There's no common ground from here by which a conversation can be had.

I am not attempting to conflate all of media, but trying to understand a specific slice of media and I think when most people say "media" they really do mean fox news, CNN and MSNBC and HLN.
The fact that you're narrowing it down to three or four networks doesn't really change the underlying point. There's still a large apparatus at play, and there are still numerous actors all with their own views, opinions, and motivations which you are all lumping together.

On its own there's nothing wrong with this, there's clearly value in analyzing a phenomenon like this at a 30k foot view. The problem is what many do, and I'm sure I've seen you do many times before, which is that you use this as an excuse to dismiss stories and arguments that are inconvenient to you on the basis that it comes from an untrustworthy source (by which you mean the entire apparatus). That's not how it works, any report stands on its own merit.

I'll "concede" that this is fine in some senses - if we're talking about a default position for example. When someone tells me something I've never heard and then links to a Fox News article or the NY Post I can already say with a good deal of confidence in most cases that it's nonsense, but again, that's just a default. I don't get to pretend the argument hasn't been offered and I'm not justified in continuing to argue my position without a real tangible reason to dismiss it unless I've looked at the report specifically and can say why it should be ignored.
Topic's author
#37
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,466
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@Double_R
I think the bloodbath example is a complete loser and I wish Democratic politicians would stop using it, there is no shortage of very real and clear examples they could use instead.
Nope, think about this from a logical perspective. If there were good examples of this, than why would they be forced to use bad examples?

The fact that you're narrowing it down to three or four networks doesn't really change the underlying point. There's still a large apparatus at play, and there are still numerous actors all with their own views, opinions, and motivations which you are all lumping together.
So you are insinuating it's not some sort of hive mind but a collection of people with their own views, motivations and opinions (same thing as views) that all just coincidentally 100% agree with each other on every single thing and seem to have a pro establishment bias as evidenced by repeated studies on media bias.

On its own there's nothing wrong with this, there's clearly value in analyzing a phenomenon like this at a 30k foot view. The problem is what many do, and I'm sure I've seen you do many times before, which is that you use this as an excuse to dismiss stories and arguments that are inconvenient to you on the basis that it comes from an untrustworthy source (by which you mean the entire apparatus). That's not how it works, any report stands on its own merit.

I still read their stories, its just whenever I see something crazy and fact check it, or whenever something seems to have an emotional or sensationalized headline, it is typically wrong. If you are asking if I am skeptical of people always lying to me than I would say yes. Do you by default trust these people who repeatedly lie to you?

I don't get to pretend the argument hasn't been offered and I'm not justified in continuing to argue my position without a real tangible reason to dismiss it unless I've looked at the report specifically and can say why it should be ignored.
Listen, people with huge audiences have a higher ethical responsibility to not be biased, and to present facts in as plain and as dry way possible, to dig extremely deep into the story in a dispassionate way that prioritizes fact finding. Guess what though I am about to watch or grab articles from CNN or other liberal news agency and compare them to similar articles or a 1 hour program on a conservative news source and we will see who lies more though. maybe I wil repost it in this thread or start a new thread

#38
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@WyIted
If there were good examples of this, than why would they be forced to use bad examples?
It's not an "if". There are good examples. That's a fact, just look at his comments this past weekend as yet another example saying we should use the military to go after "radical leftist lunitics" (the same thing he reflexively calls every democrat or institution  that disagrees with him on anything).

Setting that aside, that's exactly my point. Using the bloodbath comments is stupid because there are better examples. If there weren't, then this would all be fabricated which would make your point but it's just factually not the case. So, logically, the next step is to ask why would they use the bloodbath comments when there were better examples? The obvious answer is because they saw in those comments what I described earlier and don't understand everything else that you and I are both pointing out about them.

So you are insinuating it's not some sort of hive mind but a collection of people with their own views, motivations and opinions
Yes, that's how human brains work. This isn't Star Trek, the Borg are not a real thing.

that all just coincidentally 100% agree with each other on every single thing
Ridiculous hyperbole. There fact that you see it this way speaks to your remarkable bias and lack of interest in understanding nuance.

people with huge audiences have a higher ethical responsibility
So what is your opinion on Trump spreading these ridiculous "Haitians are eating the dogs" conspiracy or that Joe Biden is withholding aid from republican areas lie that he just made up out of pure projection? 
Topic's author
#39
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,466
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
It's not an "if". There are good examples. That's a fact, just look at his comments this past weekend as yet another example saying we should use the military to go after "radical leftist lunitics" (the same thing he reflexively calls every democrat or institution  that disagrees with him on anything).
please link me to a video showing the full context of this quote. This sounds like another retarded lie like the inject bleach thing.

logically, the next step is to ask why would they use the bloodbath comments when there were better examples? The obvious answer is because they saw in those comments what I described earlier and don't understand everything else that you and I are both pointing out about them.
SO a political commentator who has the free time to study this 12 hours a day, because they don't have a real job somehow misses this but me who works 75 hours a week has time to figure out the context? It makes no sense to me that they wouldn't attempt a deep dive to ensure they are reporting accurately.

Ridiculous hyperbole. There fact that you see it this way speaks to your remarkable bias and lack of interest in understanding nuance.

Fine please present to me a summary of Keith Olberman's ideology and the ideology of rachel Maddow. I have listened to both reporters and haven't seen a difference.

So what is your opinion on Trump spreading these ridiculous "Haitians are eating the dogs" conspiracy
It's not a serious statement and just some hyperbole to show the resources are strained in springfield due to immigration.

or that Joe Biden is withholding aid from republican areas lie that he just made up out of pure projection? 
I am only aware of criticism of Fema money being earmarked for migrants instead of being used how intended for example to aid hurricane victims. Do you think Fema money should be spent for non emergencies or are you against that and think Fema money should be used responsably?
#40
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@WyIted
please link me to a video showing the full context of this quote. This sounds like another retarded lie like the inject bleach thing.

SO a political commentator who has the free time to study this 12 hours a day, because they don't have a real job somehow misses this but me who works 75 hours a week has time to figure out the context? It makes no sense to me that they wouldn't attempt a deep dive to ensure they are reporting accurately.
From where they stand they have a much better handle on the context than you do. Again, when you talk about context you're talking about the few sentences before and after he used the word bloodbath. They're taking into account the full context, which includes everything he's done and said over the past few years which has gotten increasingly worse along with his refusal to do or say anything meaningful to correct the misunderstandings people like you allege. That's not how someone who doesn't have these predolictions behaves.

Fine please present to me a summary of Keith Olberman's ideology and the ideology of rachel Maddow. I have listened to both reporters and haven't seen a difference.
I don't need to break down people's political ideologies to emphasize that no two people believe 100% the same thing on every single issue. Again, the Borg are not real.

So what is your opinion on Trump spreading these ridiculous "Haitians are eating the dogs" conspiracy
It's not a serious statement and just some hyperbole to show the resources are strained in springfield due to immigration.
So you started this thread because it bothers you that people who have huge audiences fail to live up to your ethical standards with regards to being truthful, but when the man who has the largest megaphone on earth claims that a specific group of people in a specific place are engaging in a specific and heinous act... Well you just don't think that's serious and hand waive it away as hyperbole even as these very people have now had to keep their kids home in fear for their safety because of the death threats they've received as a result. Wow.

Not a single thing about his comments there talked about strained resources. You're making that up entirely because you can't accept Trump for what he is so you have to make stuff up to justify your continued support for him. This is the sane washing everyone continues to point out.

or that Joe Biden is withholding aid from republican areas lie that he just made up out of pure projection? 
I am only aware of criticism of Fema money being earmarked for migrants instead of being used how intended for example to aid hurricane victims. Do you think Fema money should be spent for non emergencies or are you against that and think Fema money should be used responsably?
Stick to the subject. I'm not talking about his other lie that disaster relief funds were taken from FEMA to house migrants, I'm talking about his brazen lie that the Biden administration was withholding aid and resources from red areas because he only wanted to help his own voters. A lie that is not only patently falseand easily disprovable, but a remarkable example of projection since it has now come out that Trump's own team during his first term had to show Trump a map of California and show that Orange County residents voted for him before he would approve any federal assistance for the wild fires they were experiencing. As usual, every allegation with him is a confession.
Topic's author
#41
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,466
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@Double_R
Bro the youtube video was about rioting from.him swimming. Remember in 2016 he won and artifacts was going around and attacking people with red hats? See bike lock guy. I knew you were lying thanks for showing the video to confirm

I don't need to break down people's political ideologies to emphasize that no two people believe 100% the same thing on every single issue. Again, the Borg are not real.
Thank you for admitting their ideologies are indistinguishable  


it away as hyperbole even as these very people have now had to keep their kids home in fear for their safety because of the death threats they've received as a result. Wow
This is a lie. Remember I am one of these people and I would know if I am inclined to call in death threats. I am not.

Trump's own team during his first term had to show Trump a map of California and show that Orange County residents voted for him before he would approve any federal assistance for the wild fires they were experiencing. As usual, every allegation with him is a confession.
This is an absurd and obvious lie lol. 
#42
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@WyIted
Bro the youtube video was about rioting from.him swimming. Remember in 2016 he won and artifacts was going around and attacking people with red hats? See bike lock guy. I knew you were lying thanks for showing the video to confirm
Trump: "I don't think we'll have a problem in terms of election day I think the bigger problem is the enemy from within"

Trump wasn't talking about rioting and he didn't say a thing about 2016, you're just making shit up. The comments Trump made just before that were talking about the towns being inundated and he went on to specify who the "enemy from within" was calling them out as "radical left democrats" which is relatively tame considering what he normally calls any democrat who opposes him, so if we're assessing his words logically this adds up to exactly what I said it did.

I don't need to break down people's political ideologies to emphasize that no two people believe 100% the same thing on every single issue. Again, the Borg are not real.
Thank you for admitting their ideologies are indistinguishable  
We weren't talking about ideologies genius. We were talking about your claim that "all... 100% agree with each other on every single thing" and whether it was ridiculous hyperbole. And it is. 

it away as hyperbole even as these very people have now had to keep their kids home in fear for their safety because of the death threats they've received as a result. Wow
This is a lie.
Meanwhile, area residents say, many Haitians are feeling more afraid as each day passes. The viral posts are being amplified across social media and by international news organizations, which spread the claims even farther. S.P., a community activist, said families have been calling her all morning saying they are scared. 

“People are very afraid for their lives,” S.P. said. “Many families are starting to think of leaving Springfield after last night and some kids aren’t even going to school because of fear of being attacked.”

Trump's own team during his first term had to show Trump a map of California and show that Orange County residents voted for him before he would approve any federal assistance for the wild fires they were experiencing. As usual, every allegation with him is a confession.
This is an absurd and obvious lie lol. 
"Mark Harvey, who was Trump’s senior director for resilience policy on the National Security Council staff, told E&E News on Wednesday that Trump initially refused to approve disaster aid for California after deadly wildfires in 2018 because of the state’s Democratic leanings. 

But Harvey said Trump changed his mind after Harvey pulled voting results to show him that heavily damaged Orange County, California, had more Trump supporters than the entire state of Iowa.

“We went as far as looking up how many votes he got in those impacted areas … to show him these are people who voted for you,” said Harvey.
Topic's author
#43
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,466
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@Double_R
I know some random.people make claims. Some Haitians lying about reviewing death threats. We don't do death threats bro and now this lie that Trump refuses to help blue areas while simultaneously being a Democrat up until like 10 years ago okay. 

The establishment hate this guy like they would hate any ethical person 
#44
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@WyIted
So in other words; everyone is lying, they’re all just out to get Trump; and every news report that says anything bad about Trump can be dismissed out of hand, even when it’s coming directly from Trump’s senior director for resilience policy on the National Security Council staff who is willing to put this allegation on the record.

Meanwhile… Black Insurrectionist on Twitter says he spoke to someone who says Tim Walz sexually assaulted her and that’s proof that it’s true.

The logic pretzels you twist yourself in to justify your beliefs has got to be tiring.
Topic's author
#45
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 5,466
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@Double_R
So in other words; everyone is lying, they’re all just out to get Trump; and every news report that says anything bad about Trump can be dismissed out of hand, even when it’s coming directly from Trump’s senior director for resilience policy on the National Security Council staff who is willing to put this allegation on the record.
The allegation sounds cartoonishly evil. It doesn't seem realistic.

#46
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@WyIted
It matches to literally everything we know about this man, not from second hand reporting, but by listening to his own words complied over years. He's literally talking about "the enemy from within". This is a man who has been unmistakably transparent that he sees anyone who disagrees with him as an enemy and not only doesn't see anything wrong with retaliation, but thinks it's just how power works.

Do you seriously think someone who admits out loud that he's endorsed political candidates not because he thinks they would do great things for their constituents but because he expected them to be good to him personally really cares about serving the public?

When he was asked what he thought about the civil rights icon John Lewis his immediate response was not to talk about the great things he had done and the sacrifices he's made, but to wine about how he didn't come to his inauguration.

When a guest in the oval office sat there and told him her insane story of how her husband was torchered and murdered, Trump's response was to ask her "and where is he now"?

These are just completely random examples off the top of my head. I could give you literally hundreds more.

Very, very, serious question: What does this man need to to show you who he is? How is it that despite everything he's made transparently clear about himself you still think it's easier to believe his own white house aid would make up a story like this than to believe this is who Trump is?