Why isn't John Lewis Racist?

[_EAllusion]

Report: Russian propaganda effort spread fake news

Russian propaganda effort helped spread ‘fake news’ during election, experts say

Media Wakes Up To Russia's 'Fake News' Only After It Is Applied Against Hillary

The reality behind Russia's fake news

Report on Russian hacking: ‘Case of fake news & propaganda’

So what, specifically, was the fake news that was spread? (I'm operating under the assumption that "fake" = "untrue," of course)

It's tons of stories Shades. The "Fake News" in question is the modern, more sophisticated version of the conservative chain email. It's the stuff that AmyJo was posting here before the election.

My personal favorite was that the Pope endorsed Donald Trump for president (he didn't). Another popular one that comes to mind was that a FBI agent hot on Clinton's email trail was suspiciously found dead in a murder-suicide. (That didn't happen.)

I'm not positive, but I think the most popular one was that Wikileaks revealed Clinton sold weapons to ISIS then lied under oath about it.

These stories got massive readership from largely conservative audiences. Polling strongly suggests it influenced their opinions, though it is hard to know how that translates into vote differentials. We also now know Russia was using its cyber-resources to pump them up.

[_EAllusion]

Like, when you hear a conservative talk about how dishonest Clinton is, chances are they aren't referring to her tendency to delicately prevaricate about previous positions she held in order to pander to what polls well in the moment. Chances are greater they mean that she's a international criminal who is selling weapons to terrorists and evading the law through perjury with a string of murders in her wake. It's important to know that, and Russia at a minimum gave this phenomenon a nudge.

[_Maksutov]

selling weapons to terrorists and evading the law through perjury

Sorry, having flashbacks...

[_Jersey Girl]

What about half fake news like when they said Trump wasn't going to visit the African American museum in DC then cancelled the plans due to a scheduling conflict and people were all over the place about how he never meant to visit the museum because he's a racist POS and all?

Maybe that's not fake. More like half baked.

[_Maksutov]

What about half fake news like when they said Trump wasn't going to visit the African American museum in DC then cancelled the plans due to a scheduling conflict and people were all over the place about how he never meant to visit the museum because he's a racist POS and all?

Maybe that's not fake. More like half baked.

I get really really tired of ethnic and racial outrage. I keep looking for people to start focusing on our common problems and issues instead of endlessly subdividing ourselves over differences real and imagined. How in the world are we going to ever get anything done if we're tip toeing around and whispering to each other because somebody might get mad?

[_Mayan Elephant]

....... largely conservative audiences. Polling strongly suggests.....

OH MY DEAR GOD!

[_Mayan Elephant]

.....an exit poll from the election I posted in another thread a minute ago, it found that 94% of Trump voters.......

OH MY DEAR GOD IN HEAVEN!

[_EAllusion]

.....an exit poll from the election I posted in another thread a minute ago, it found that 94% of Trump voters.......

OH MY DEAR GOD IN HEAVEN!

Yes, you don't believe in polling. You've said this several times. Your main argument to justify this stance is that polling in the 2016 election was, on aggregate, off by 1.8% give or take a few 10ths of a percent. If it helps you, assume the poll in question is wildy off all in favor of the opposite conclusion and subtract 10 points from its finding. So, instead, let's say it's 84% of Trump voters find him to be honest and trustworthy. Does the points I make with that number still hold? Yes, yes they do.

[_EAllusion]

What about half fake news like when they said Trump wasn't going to visit the African American museum in DC then cancelled the plans due to a scheduling conflict and people were all over the place about how he never meant to visit the museum because he's a racist POS and all?

Maybe that's not fake. More like half baked.

Trump now has an extensive pattern of saying he will do something he probably has no intent on doing, getting a ton of positive headlines that take the form of Trump says "I will do X," then backing down on that promise with subsequent retractions not getting nearly as much limelight. It's actually depressing that media system can be hustled in such a simple-minded, two-bit way.

As a result, he's lost the benefit of the doubt when he says he will do something positive, then whoops!, he's no longer gonna do that thing. If the museum visit example was sincere, maybe Trump shouldn't have cried wolf so many times. Another recent example is that Trump said he was got to cut inauguration ceremonies short, not because his team is having a hell of a time finding big-name people to participate in it, but because he needs to get to work right away. Then, Trump said he's gonna take the weekend off right away. Sincere schedule change? Maybe. But why trust a serial liar?

[_Jersey Girl]

What about half fake news like when they said Trump wasn't going to visit the African American museum in DC then cancelled the plans due to a scheduling conflict and people were all over the place about how he never meant to visit the museum because he's a racist POS and all?

Maybe that's not fake. More like half baked.

Trump now has an extensive pattern of saying he will do something he probably has no intent on doing, getting a ton of positive headlines that take the form of Trump says "I will do X," then backing down on that promise with subsequent retractions not getting nearly as much limelight. It's actually depressing that media system can be hustled in such a simple-minded, two-bit way.

As a result, he's lost the benefit of the doubt when he says he will do something positive, then whoops!, he's no longer gonna do that thing. If the museum visit example was sincere, maybe Trump shouldn't have cried wolf so many times. Another recent example is that Trump said he was got to cut inauguration ceremonies short, not because his team is having a hell of a time finding big-name people to participate in it, but because he needs to get to work right away. Then, Trump said he's gonna take the weekend off right away. Sincere schedule change? Maybe. But why trust a serial liar?

Did you follow the story in question? Did you also follow the story about how he met with Steve Harvey? Are you aware of how much racist criticism Trump took regarding the cancellation intersecting with his retaliatory Lewis tweets? Are you aware of the racist criticism that Steve Harvey took?

All of these stories converged and not only does Harvey come up what was the word, oh yeah, a coon, but Trump comes up like a racist POS who doesn't give two damns about visiting the African American museum in DC on MLK Day when what he actually did on MLK Day was MEET with MLK 3!

This is the crap I'm talking about with the press and might I add, celebrities who don't know crap. I am NOT Trump's biggest fan, trust me, I'm not. But this divisive crap jerks around the public and detracts with how this guy is attempting to address major issues.

Not only that, the press is simply fixated on Trump being on Twitter. Granted, the man needs to get the hell off Twitter, but why harp on "how much time" he spends on Twitter when it takes scant seconds to tweet out a couple of lines? Read the comments section of Twitter reports, people are obsessed with how much time he spends on Twitter. How much time has he spent meeting with experts in their respective fields?

Do you think you're being manipulated by the media? Because I sure as hell think we are and I find it offensive to the max.