MAGAThread XIX: Hambergers, Noble Prizes, & Disinfectant

[Aureumterra]

What’s with threads on NS becoming circlejerks bashing the thread topic?

As for this place while I am hesitant to call this place an echo chamber, normaly we have a balance of other oppions

lol

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

As for this place while I am hesitant to call this place an echo chamber, normaly we have a balance of other oppions

lol

If you think this is too much of an echo chamber, you would be the prime candidate to actually do something about that by speaking up for your opinions. Instead, you type 'lol' sometimes and make snide remarks without much substance. There are plenty of people here who defend Trump with making sarcastic gestures, but very few who actually do the work of arguing their position.

[Rojava Free State]

lol

If you think this is too much of an echo chamber, you would be the prime candidate to actually do something about that by speaking up for your opinions. Instead, you type 'lol' sometimes and make snide remarks without much substance. There are plenty of people here who defend Trump with making sarcastic gestures, but very few who actually do the work of arguing their position.

Because they can't. Trump is so shit that you can't logically argue why he should be a president.

[Zurkerx]

Twitter labels Trump’s tweets with a fact-check for the first time

Twitter on Tuesday slapped a fact-check label on President Trump’s tweets for the first time, a response to long-standing criticism that the company is too hands-off when it comes to policing misinformation and falsehoods from world leaders.

The move, which escalates tensions between Washington and Silicon Valley in an election year, was made in response to two Trump tweets over the past 24 hours. The tweets falsely claimed that mail-in ballots are fraudulent. Twitter’s label says, “Get the facts about mail-in ballots,” and redirects users to news articles about Trump’s unsubstantiated claim.

The tweets, said Twitter spokesperson Katie Rosborough, “contain potentially misleading information about voting processes and have been labeled to provide additional context around mail-in ballots.”

Twitter’s actions come on a day when Twitter was facing a barrage of criticism over another set of Trump tweets. Earlier on Tuesday the widower of a former staffer to or Joe Scarborough has asked Twitter chief executive officer Jack Dorsey to delete tweets by President Trump furthering a baseless conspiracy theory about his wife’s death.

This is a developing story. It will be updated.

About damn time.

Jack Dorsey really will do literally anything except enforce the rules of his own website.

---

When will twitter slap a "possibly incorrect information" on this tweet ? Place your bets,

Never, if they can avoid it.

I actually like Twitter's approach on this for one very simple reason: it doesn't give what Trump wants. He wants Social Media companies to suppress him and his fellow Republicans: he needs a distraction. Sure, it means Twitter won't enforce its rules to the full extent, but it robs Trump of one of his narratives that so-called left-wing Social Media Companies are actively suppressing Conservative thought/opinion.

If I must say, I personally like Social Media adding fact checkers next to false claims though very crude and flat-out libel content (like that conspiracy theory of that woman) should probably be removed. Still, why award him the attention; just plaster fact checks on his tweets; everyone's tweets deemed "misleading or fake news".

[Picairn]

Because they can't. Trump is so shit that you can't logically argue why he should be a president.

According to Article 2, Section 1, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution and the 12th Amendment, the President shall be the person with the most votes from Electors. As Trump won the most Electors in the 2016 presidential election, he is fully entitled to be the President under the mandate of the Constitution.

Maybe Hillary should have campaigned harder in swing states and the Rust Belt.

[Rojava Free State]

Because they can't. Trump is so shit that you can't logically argue why he should be a president.

According to Article 2, Section 1, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution and the 12th Amendment, the President shall be the person with the most votes from Electors. As Trump won the most Electors in the 2016 presidential election, he is fully entitled to be the President under the mandate of the Constitution.

Maybe Hillary should have campaigned harder in swing states and the Rust Belt.

I know how he became the president. Im saying no one can argue why him being president is really a good idea.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

Because they can't. Trump is so shit that you can't logically argue why he should be a president.

According to Article 2, Section 1, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution and the 12th Amendment, the President shall be the person with the most votes from Electors. As Trump won the most Electors in the 2016 presidential election, he is fully entitled to be the President under the mandate of the Constitution.

Maybe Hillary should have campaigned harder in swing states and the Rust Belt.

You know that purposefully misreading someone's argument is not in itself a good argument, right?

[Picairn]

According to Article 2, Section 1, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution and the 12th Amendment, the President shall be the person with the most votes from Electors. As Trump won the most Electors in the 2016 presidential election, he is fully entitled to be the President under the mandate of the Constitution.

Maybe Hillary should have campaigned harder in swing states and the Rust Belt.

You know that purposefully misreading someone's argument is not in itself a good argument, right?

Who are you to decide what interpretation of an argument is correct?

[Vassenor]

You know that purposefully misreading someone's argument is not in itself a good argument, right?

Who are you to decide what interpretation of an argument is correct?

Because arguing against something that isn't actually what the person you're arguing with said, but you think is easier to attack than what they actually said is the definition of a strawman.

[Galloism]

Trump news – live: President threatens to close social media platforms after accusing Twitter of ‘stifling free speech’ for correcting his post

Threatening to do what would shut him up. Stable Genius At Work.

Tbh, the world would probably be better if he did.

[Galloism]

Who are you to decide what interpretation of an argument is correct?

Because arguing against something that isn't actually what the person you're arguing with said, but you think is easier to attack than what they actually said is the definition of a strawman.

I had a jolly good laugh.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

You know that purposefully misreading someone's argument is not in itself a good argument, right?

Who are you to decide what interpretation of an argument is correct?

What are you suggesting? That all left-wingers should be horse-whipped for merely having an opinion? That's horrific!

[Loben The 2nd]

Who are you to decide what interpretation of an argument is correct?

What are you suggesting? That all left-wingers should be horse-whipped for merely having an opinion? That's horrific!

Well since you put it like that.......

[Ifreann]

Jack Dorsey really will do literally anything except enforce the rules of his own website.

---

Never, if they can avoid it.

I actually like Twitter's approach on this for one very simple reason: it doesn't give what Trump wants. He wants Social Media companies to suppress him and his fellow Republicans: he needs a distraction. Sure, it means Twitter won't enforce its rules to the full extent, but it robs Trump of one of his narratives that so-called left-wing Social Media Companies are actively suppressing Conservative thought/opinion.

If I must say, I personally like Social Media adding fact checkers next to false claims though very crude and flat-out libel content (like that conspiracy theory of that woman) should probably be removed. Still, why award him the attention; just plaster fact checks on his tweets; everyone's tweets deemed "misleading or fake news".

The Trump campaign and their ilk will say that social media is suppressing conservative thought no matter what Twitter or any other social media campaign does to placate them. There is no conceivable course of action that can deny Trump a narrative he wants to push. Factual reality means nothing to the man.

[Gormwood]

I actually like Twitter's approach on this for one very simple reason: it doesn't give what Trump wants. He wants Social Media companies to suppress him and his fellow Republicans: he needs a distraction. Sure, it means Twitter won't enforce its rules to the full extent, but it robs Trump of one of his narratives that so-called left-wing Social Media Companies are actively suppressing Conservative thought/opinion.

If I must say, I personally like Social Media adding fact checkers next to false claims though very crude and flat-out libel content (like that conspiracy theory of that woman) should probably be removed. Still, why award him the attention; just plaster fact checks on his tweets; everyone's tweets deemed "misleading or fake news".

The Trump campaign and their ilk will say that social media is suppressing conservative thought no matter what Twitter or any other social media campaign does to placate them. There is no conceivable course of action that can deny Trump a narrative he wants to push. Factual reality means nothing to the man.

Such as coroner's reports for instance.

[The Grims]

The Trump campaign and their ilk will say that social media is suppressing conservative thought no matter what Twitter or any other social media campaign does to placate them. There is no conceivable course of action that can deny Trump a narrative he wants to push. Factual reality means nothing to the man.

Such as coroner's reports for instance.

Or a birth certificate.

[Zurkerx]

I actually like Twitter's approach on this for one very simple reason: it doesn't give what Trump wants. He wants Social Media companies to suppress him and his fellow Republicans: he needs a distraction. Sure, it means Twitter won't enforce its rules to the full extent, but it robs Trump of one of his narratives that so-called left-wing Social Media Companies are actively suppressing Conservative thought/opinion.

If I must say, I personally like Social Media adding fact checkers next to false claims though very crude and flat-out libel content (like that conspiracy theory of that woman) should probably be removed. Still, why award him the attention; just plaster fact checks on his tweets; everyone's tweets deemed "misleading or fake news".

The Trump campaign and their ilk will say that social media is suppressing conservative thought no matter what Twitter or any other social media campaign does to placate them. There is no conceivable course of action that can deny Trump a narrative he wants to push. Factual reality means nothing to the man.

Well,his base would eat it up but I'm talking about those that are skeptical and are leaning Trump: why give him the fuller narrative? By denying him the fuller narrative, those people will remain skeptical and thus, less likely to vote for him. Trump will always try to define the narrative, but he can only do so much when little is given.

[Zurkerx]

U.S. Says Hong Kong’s China Autonomy Is Gone, Sowing Trade Doubt.

This is actually one of the very few moves I agree with the Trump Administration though Trump will likely have to kiss his trade deal goodbye.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

though Trump will likely have to kiss his trade deal goodbye.

How bad, so sad.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

U.S. Says Hong Kong’s China Autonomy Is Gone, Sowing Trade Doubt.

This is actually one of the very few moves I agree with the Trump Administration though Trump will likely have to kiss his trade deal goodbye.

Shame someone nuked the Trans-Pacific Partnership, because that could have been a great counterweight to Chinese ambitions.

[Gormwood]

U.S. Says Hong Kong’s China Autonomy Is Gone, Sowing Trade Doubt.

This is actually one of the very few moves I agree with the Trump Administration though Trump will likely have to kiss his trade deal goodbye.

Shame someone nuked the Trans-Pacific Partnership, because that could have been a great counterweight to Chinese ambitions.

Obama Derangement Syndrome strikes again.

[The Emerald Legion]

lol

If you think this is too much of an echo chamber, you would be the prime candidate to actually do something about that by speaking up for your opinions. Instead, you type 'lol' sometimes and make snide remarks without much substance. There are plenty of people here who defend Trump with making sarcastic gestures, but very few who actually do the work of arguing their position.

Is there honestly a point in doing so?

A fair portion of this thread literally swallows anti-trump propaganda whole and refuses to shift away from a blatant fantasy land where you interpret everything he does in the worst possible light, while also openly believing in things that were made up and have been proven to be made up.

U.S. Says Hong Kong’s China Autonomy Is Gone, Sowing Trade Doubt.

This is actually one of the very few moves I agree with the Trump Administration though Trump will likely have to kiss his trade deal goodbye.

Shame someone nuked the Trans-Pacific Partnership, because that could have been a great counterweight to Chinese ambitions.

Just no. The TPP was toxic garbage.

[Gormwood]

If you think this is too much of an echo chamber, you would be the prime candidate to actually do something about that by speaking up for your opinions. Instead, you type 'lol' sometimes and make snide remarks without much substance. There are plenty of people here who defend Trump with making sarcastic gestures, but very few who actually do the work of arguing their position.

Is there honestly a point in doing so?

A fair portion of this thread literally swallows anti-trump propaganda whole and refuses to shift away from a blatant fantasy land where you interpret everything he does in the worst possible light, while also openly believing in things that were made up and have been proven to be made up.

Forgot the coronavirus is a Democratic hoax, thanks

[Vassenor]

If you think this is too much of an echo chamber, you would be the prime candidate to actually do something about that by speaking up for your opinions. Instead, you type 'lol' sometimes and make snide remarks without much substance. There are plenty of people here who defend Trump with making sarcastic gestures, but very few who actually do the work of arguing their position.

Is there honestly a point in doing so?

A fair portion of this thread literally swallows anti-trump propaganda whole and refuses to shift away from a blatant fantasy land where you interpret everything he does in the worst possible light, while also openly believing in things that were made up and have been proven to be made up.

Just because Trump said something was made up does not actually mean it was made up.

[Proctopeo]

Now, remember everyone, #JusticeForCarolyn!