Politics Deal Coming Soon- Special Counsel Investigation Prediction Thread

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Further

Further

Guy
Joined
Sep 20, 2008
Messages
11,099
Likes
4,039
Points
113
Everyone seems to predict different outcomes. What say you?


My DCS (deal coming soon): Within 2 weeks we will see the first indictments specifically related to the DNC hack and knowledge of the emails before the release.
 
My prediction: nothing will make a difference or matter. Nothing anyone does matters anymore. Unless Trump is caught on tape murdering someone nothing will change.

He tweets screaming misspelled words about tv personalities and no one even cares anymore.
 
calvin natt said:
My prediction: nothing will make a difference or matter. Nothing anyone does matters anymore.
Click to expand...
disagree ....this election was a serious wake up call....young folks need to start voting...candidates win with 19 percent of the vote these days from people under 30...need to bring some younger officials to govt and get the old farts out of the system that have been the problem all along.
 
riverman said:
disagree ....this election was a serious wake up call....young folks need to start voting...candidates win with 19 percent of the vote these days from people under 30...need to bring some younger officials to govt and get the old farts out of the system that have been the problem all along.
Click to expand...

That’d be great. I have no confidence.
 
riverman said:
disagree ....this election was a serious wake up call....young folks need to start voting...candidates win with 19 percent of the vote these days from people under 30...need to bring some younger officials to govt and get the old farts out of the system that have been the problem all along.
Click to expand...

I agree with the bolded.

Voters under 30 don't need a wake up call.
We're told to shut up and fall in line.

The kids who walked out of class for 17 minutes were told something similar.
'Shut up and get back to class'.

People will wake up one day realizing the divisions they tried so hard to instill in their children.
Just don't mean squat to young people.
 
riverman said:
fuck em.....do what you can...somebody stops following the Blazers doen't mean I ever will
Click to expand...

14 years ago: Martha Stewart jailed because her financial adviser told her bad news was coming and she sold $230K in stock.

Today: Carl Icahn dumped ~$32M in stock in a company reliant on steel imports in the days before Trump announced steel tariffs

Nothing matters.
 
honkicracker said:
I agree with the bolded.

Voters under 30 don't need a wake up call.
We're told to shut up and fall in line.

The kids who walked out of class for 17 minutes were told something similar.
'Shut up and get back to class'.

People will wake up one day realizing the divisions they tried so hard to instill in their children.
Just don't mean squat to young people.
Click to expand...
the last two lines. something i pray for all the time. can't possibly like them enough.
 
honkicracker said:
I agree with the bolded.

Voters under 30 don't need a wake up call.
We're told to shut up and fall in line.

The kids who walked out of class for 17 minutes were told something similar.
'Shut up and get back to class'.

People will wake up one day realizing the divisions they tried so hard to instill in their children.
Just don't mean squat to young people.
Click to expand...
I’ve been extremely impressed with the younger generation lately. And not just those with whom I agree politically. The young man from the school shooting who was against gun restrictions also spoke well and voiced his opinion well. I think the upcoming generation is going to be more proactive and less likely to fall for the same BS to which the older generations has fallen prey.
 
Last edited:
Further said:
I’ve been extremely impressed with the younger generation lately. And not just those with whom I agree politically. The young man from the school shooting who was against gun restrictions also spoke well and voiced his opinion well. I think the upcoming generation is going to be more proactive and less likely to fall for the same BS to which the older generations has fallen prey.
Click to expand...

I hope they bring news gathering back to a place where it’s not left or right leaning but just reporting the news. Ultimately that is on us as a society though because we pay more attention to the radical then the factual.
 
South East said:
I hope they bring news gathering back to a place where it’s not left or right leaning but just reporting the news. Ultimately that is on us as a society though because we pay more attention to the radical then the factual.
Click to expand...
I think that ship kinda sailed, nationally. When it comes to mass media, someone, somewhere is going to be editing the thousands of "newsworthy" things that happen every day in every town across America and the world and distilling it into an hour, or a 2-minute clip, or whatever. That/those editor(s) are going to be the arbiters of the world and national news you see. For a while, you could trust that by reading, say, Washington Post, Washington Times, WSJ, London Times and the IBJ you could get a pretty good flavor of every big story with every slant looked into. And then get your local paper for who went to whose 12th birthday party or that the stoplights on Wiggins Avenue need to be repaired. I don't think you can do that anymore, when even CNN/NYT/WaPo are deliberately burying stories that don't further their agenda in the name of ratings. Hell, I can't even trust Al-Jazeera anymore after the Arab Spring.
 
BrianFromWA said:
I think that ship kinda sailed, nationally. When it comes to mass media, someone, somewhere is going to be editing the thousands of "newsworthy" things that happen every day in every town across America and the world and distilling it into an hour, or a 2-minute clip, or whatever. That/those editor(s) are going to be the arbiters of the world and national news you see. For a while, you could trust that by reading, say, Washington Post, Washington Times, WSJ, London Times and the IBJ you could get a pretty good flavor of every big story with every slant looked into. And then get your local paper for who went to whose 12th birthday party or that the stoplights on Wiggins Avenue need to be repaired. I don't think you can do that anymore, when even CNN/NYT/WaPo are deliberately burying stories that don't further their agenda in the name of ratings. Hell, I can't even trust Al-Jazeera anymore after the Arab Spring.
Click to expand...
dewey beats truman.jpg
It's really not a new thing in the media.....even going back to the Wild West they fabricated stories of hero cowboys and outlaws...the National Enquirer has done it blatantly forever...Hoover faked his participation in arrests....Nixon lied about many, many things during Vietnam...this I saw first hand...I've always felt everyone needs to filter the news spin cycle and make their own sense of it...or not. I've always felt truth was a traffic light...red, yellow and green....follow the green and you'll keep moving forward
 
A small part of the problem is that now that most of us don't have physical newspapers anymore, the line between the news and the editorial pages has become blurred (in the reader's mind). Far too often here someone will quote an opinion piece and claim it is evidence of media bias.

barfo
 
barfo said:
Far too often here someone will quote an opinion piece and claim it is evidence of media bias.
Click to expand...

Ah come on barf, you are defending media bias! Geez man, you have to be in the brig living on piss and punk not to see it.
You can rotate through channels, not to escape it, but to get a different flavors. Some don't even have news, just local spin. Calling it editorials is implying credibility.
 
MarAzul said:
Ah come on barf, you are defending media bias!
Click to expand...

Nope. Media bias does exist, and I'm not defending it. However it is less prevalent than people currently believe.

Calling it editorials is implying credibility.
Click to expand...

Nope. That statement suggests you don't understand the difference between editorials and news. You are chewing on a dog toy and saying "this banana is not ripe".

barfo
 
I agree, for the most part. 20 years ago when I was (required to) reading 3 papers a day, I could count on editorials to be just that. An example:

The Clinton impeachment vote in the House reported by the NYT (front page at the time, I can only grab the link). While not how I like to read my news (the reporting of emotions and the like seemed odd), it was pretty balanced and factual. This editorial from the same week, however, assigns motives, "sticks up" for the President's use of missile strikes, etc. It gives one a different perspective that if you were, say, listening to Trent Lott speak at the time, but that's what you signed up for when reading a NYT editorial.

Today's NYT front page:
Trump Divides His Blue-Collar Base With Steel Tariff Plan
Around the World, Threats of Retaliation Against U.S. Exports
A Week That Leaves Even Trump’s Supporters Confused
Trump Pushes G.O.P. to Oppose Funding Hudson Rail Tunnel
Trump Embraces a Trade War, Which Could Undermine Growth
Each one of those runs with uncertainty and assigns motive to fact, rather than reporting on the story it reports on the President's role in it. The story wasn't "Steel Tariff Plan, line-by-line." Or "What economists say the tariff means".
Not "Hudson Rail Tunnel funding still in negotiations."
Not "Trump's Tariff May Cause a Trade War". It could just as well not undermine growth. But these opinions are now being pushed on the front page. The blatant changing of words and misattribution of a quote by CNN a couple of weeks ago (changing the quote from "illegal" to "undocumented" while still quoting the police) is another aspect, but I know CNN is for entertainment. NYT is supposed to be a paper of repute (since they famously asked to not be called a "paper of record" years ago)
 
BrianFromWA said:
I agree, for the most part. 20 years ago when I was (required to) reading 3 papers a day, I could count on editorials to be just that. An example:

The Clinton impeachment vote in the House reported by the NYT (front page at the time, I can only grab the link). While not how I like to read my news (the reporting of emotions and the like seemed odd), it was pretty balanced and factual. This editorial from the same week, however, assigns motives, "sticks up" for the President's use of missile strikes, etc. It gives one a different perspective that if you were, say, listening to Trent Lott speak at the time, but that's what you signed up for when reading a NYT editorial.

Today's NYT front page:
Trump Divides His Blue-Collar Base With Steel Tariff Plan
Around the World, Threats of Retaliation Against U.S. Exports
A Week That Leaves Even Trump’s Supporters Confused
Trump Pushes G.O.P. to Oppose Funding Hudson Rail Tunnel
Trump Embraces a Trade War, Which Could Undermine Growth
Each one of those runs with uncertainty and assigns motive to fact, rather than reporting on the story it reports on the President's role in it. The story wasn't "Steel Tariff Plan, line-by-line." Or "What economists say the tariff means".
Not "Hudson Rail Tunnel funding still in negotiations."
Not "Trump's Tariff May Cause a Trade War". It could just as well not undermine growth. But these opinions are now being pushed on the front page. The blatant changing of words and misattribution of a quote by CNN a couple of weeks ago (changing the quote from "illegal" to "undocumented" while still quoting the police) is another aspect, but I know CNN is for entertainment. NYT is supposed to be a paper of repute (since they famously asked to not be called a "paper of record" years ago)
Click to expand...
I always thought the NYT was business first...business being profit...they publish articles and pay for them..sometimes with a disclaimer...but you're right about editorials getting front page ink...I think it's the internet and sheer amount of info cranked out by the minute...newspapers are just not really up to speed so have to walk stories back pretty often. Now they are more and more geared for online consumption than the periodical form which took some time to put together...in the end you have to trust a journalist to be honest and I guess we do that a lot until proven we can't. I'm not getting my news from Bill Maher or Bill O'Reilly..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top