US Politics Thread

[Gabriel]

 

[Vic]

Wow, I think he is 29 years old? I don't remember hearing somebody this articulate and eloquent in any modern US political debate setting.

If words like that don't stir you then you are either brainwashed beyond saving or dead inside. Unfortunately, many state GOP reps seem to be determined to demonstrate to the average voter that they tick both of those boxes.

Well, not since Obama.

 

[bluethrunthru]

FFS

 

[Gabriel]

 

[BlueMoonAcrossThePond]

AllSides | Balanced news via media bias ratings for an unbiased news perspective

See issues and political news with news bias revealed. Non-partisan, crowd-sourced technology shows all sides so you can decide.

www.allsides.com

I read all sides. No one here has a monopoly on the truth.

As the late senator from New York, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, famously quipped, "You're entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts." And therein lies the problem with your self-proclaimed, "neutral" analysis. The Right now traffics largely in lies and distortion - facts be damned.

By way of analogy, attempting to provide an "unbiased view" of Democratic versus Republican opinion is - in most instances - akin to giving equal weight to both sides of a debate about whether or not the earth is only a few thousand years old. On the one hand you have science and overwhelming proof - on the other you have fact-free, zealous opinion.

The mission of AllSides, seems to be to categorize each news outlet as Right, Central or Left-leaning - and then to provide "balanced" coverage by citing articles from each outlet - let the reader decide what's true. Continuing the analogy - the science-based 4 billion (or so) years-old earth position would be given equal coverage versus the 2000-years-old earth belief. AllSides lets you decide - just read both sides and form an opinion. Which is patently ridiculous.

Why is this ridiculous? It's because the reader is extremely unlikely to be in any sort of position to judge carefully established fact from opinion, misinformation and lies - the reader is likely not an expert on the subject matter. The reader is thus put into the position of having to rely on the veracity of each news source, thereby giving equal weight to fact versus opinion.

As an aside, my own brother is now an "expert" on climate change and vaccine efficacy having "thoroughly researched" both topics on Twitter. AllSides is to its viewers as Twitter is to my brother.

Who founded AllSides and what might their bias be?:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AllSides
and
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Groseclose

And here's a gem from AllSides:
https://www.allsides.com/news/2021-...lnerable-believing-pseudoscience-new-research

AllSides is a site who's goal is to advance conservative opinion under the guise of neutrality - seeking to undermine science as biased and therefore, not trustworthy. As "proof" of their neutrality they offer articles from different sides on any number of topics regardless of fact - the message is that you personally are a better judge of fact than subject matter professionals.

 

[bluethrunthru]

 

[BlueMoonAcrossThePond]

I suggest the judiciary do it. A system of meritocracy and promotion like in other countries.

I rather like this idea much more than the current system in the USA.

Still - that system might suffer. What happens under that system when radical judges come into power? What checks that?

Anyhow, I somewhat disagree with you that America's judicial system is forever fucked - I think that we'll sort it out.

 

[feelymcfeel]

FFS

I take solace in the fact that most of this generation will be dead soon.

 

[SWP's back]

 

[Manc in London]