TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

The General US Politics Thread

Go To

Nov 2023 Mod notice:


There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.

If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines before posting here.

Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.

If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules when posting here.


In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.

Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM

SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#163226: Dec 19th 2016 at 7:11:28 AM

No, the issue with media bias is that there is a psychological effect - hostile media effect - that considers the disagreement between one's own (very likely slanted) opinion and the media's opinion (which may also be slanted, but not usually in the same way as one's own) as evidence of bias on the latter's part. You'll notice that pro-Trump people have been complaining about unfair media coverage as well.

It is not evidence of media bias, merely of one's own slant not being validated.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Silasw A procrastination in of itself from A handcart to hell (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
#163228: Dec 19th 2016 at 7:18:50 AM

I'd say that the diagram a few pages back showing that people have heard about the candidates does show a media bias, the main thing people knew about Clinton was the email stuff, a total non-scandal that should have been dismissed as nothing when it first came up.

Clinton winning the popular vote doesn't disprove that, it doesn't prove or disprove anything, if the media were biased against Clinton then she likely would have won the popular vote by a much greater margin with an unbiased press.

Yes I think the press were biased, biased towards "both sides are as bad as each other", which when one side is neo-Nazis is a pretty big bias.

Thing is that's kinda the way it is, that's the environment that exists, we can either try and suck up to the media so that they'll be less shitty towards our side (unlikely to work), try and regulate the media so that they have less influence/can't be as biased (seeing as the Dems control neither the House or Senate that's impossible) or accept that reality being what it is means that a Dem win has to vorcome not just the Republicans but also a hostile media that has a vested interest in acting like the Republicans and Democrats are equally bad.

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
PushoverMediaCritic I'm sorry Tien, but I must go all out. from the Italy of America Since: Jul, 2015 Relationship Status: watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ
I'm sorry Tien, but I must go all out.
#163229: Dec 19th 2016 at 7:20:40 AM

Nah, there were a LOT of factors going against Clinton: the fabricated E-Mail controversy, created by Russian hackers and perpetuated by the biased head of the FBI, news coverage creating a false equivalence between her and Donald, paid Russian trolls and fake news propaganda sites against her, and a humongous amount of voter suppression involving voters who would've voted for her in all the places she really needed them to.

Honestly, this was the Perfect Storm of circumstances that would lead to Hillary losing, and she still won the Popular Vote by an almost unprecedented degree. Trump cheated in literally every way he possibly could, and he still only won on a technicality.

SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#163230: Dec 19th 2016 at 7:22:31 AM

These news stories about Trump courtying with the Klan and his sexism, sexual assault and scam controversies must be a figment of my imagination then.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
blkwhtrbbt The Dragon of the Eastern Sea from Doesn't take orders from Vladimir Putin Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: I'm just a poor boy, nobody loves me
The Dragon of the Eastern Sea
#163231: Dec 19th 2016 at 7:26:23 AM

Those stories were quiet at best, while the Email "scandal" story never went away,

after evidence that it was absolutely nothing

That's the difference. The sexual assault actually happened.

You can't tell a true story for one side and a false one for the other and call it fair

Say to the others who did not follow through You're still our brothers, and we will fight for you
Lightysnake Since: May, 2010
#163232: Dec 19th 2016 at 7:26:49 AM

Clinton did get more negative press coverage.

You can't just go "well, I must have imagined the negative Trump stories." They existed, but that doesn't change all the times they uncritically aired his rallies, allowed his points to go unchallenged and gave Clinton worse media coverage.

"riticism dogged Hillary Clinton at every step of the general election. Her “bad press” outpaced her “good press” by 64 percent to 36 percent. She was criticized for everything from her speaking style to her use of emails.

As Clinton was being attacked in the press, Donald Trump was attacking the press, claiming that it was trying to “rig” the election in her favor. If that’s true, journalists had a peculiar way of going about it. Trump’s coverage during the general election was more negative than Clinton’s, running 77 percent negative to 23 percent positive. But over the full course of the election, it was Clinton, not Trump, who was more often the target of negative coverage (see Figure 1). Overall, the coverage of her candidacy was 62 percent negative to 38 percent positive, while his coverage was 56 percent negative to 44 percent positive."

Krieger22 Causing freakouts over sourcing since 2018 from Malaysia Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: I'm in love with my car
Causing freakouts over sourcing since 2018
#163233: Dec 19th 2016 at 7:26:59 AM

[up][up]To Americans with access to CNN and Fox News' TV content it may as well be.

edited 19th Dec '16 7:27:09 AM by Krieger22

I have disagreed with her a lot, but comparing her to republicans and propagandists of dictatorships is really low. - An idiot
Silasw A procrastination in of itself from A handcart to hell (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
#163234: Dec 19th 2016 at 7:29:49 AM

[up]X4 The fact that there were brief, shallow stories about horrible things Trump actually did compared to deep in-depth stories coverage of a Clinton non-scandal does not show a lack of bias, it shows that the bias wasn't all consuming, not that it didn't exist.

edited 19th Dec '16 7:30:29 AM by Silasw

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
Lightysnake Since: May, 2010
#163235: Dec 19th 2016 at 7:31:26 AM

[up] Precisely. The email story dominated Clinton's coverage. And every story from Wikileaks was reported on with Wikileaks' own spin dictating the conversation. Comey's indefensible final letter was given incredible play, and late deciding voters banked sharply for Trump. Coincidence? Doubt it.

FFShinra Since: Jan, 2001
#163236: Dec 19th 2016 at 7:34:49 AM

Again, focusing on bias is not going to help Dems do better later. It just makes them like the GOP is most times vis a vis the media.

Lightysnake Since: May, 2010
#163237: Dec 19th 2016 at 7:40:16 AM

Pointing out the very real issues that exist against the Democrats is not the same thing as the GOP's endless pity party about how unfairly they're treated when someone points out real issues that actually exist in their party or things they do.

Lightysnake Since: May, 2010
#163239: Dec 19th 2016 at 7:52:39 AM

This is, as Fighteer has once said, false centrism. One is a position that can-and has been-backed up with actual evidence.

One side claims media coverage is biased and can provide evidence of actual bias. The other side will claim it because...well, because it's reporting lightly on things that actually occur.

edited 19th Dec '16 7:54:06 AM by Lightysnake

Silasw A procrastination in of itself from A handcart to hell (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
#163240: Dec 19th 2016 at 8:01:58 AM

Shinra you're right that focusing on it isn't going to solve anything, but we need to at least acknowledge it, acting as if it didn't happen is going to leave us blindsided in two years time when the same media bias hits again. We can't solve it, but we can at least prepare for it.

edited 19th Dec '16 8:02:19 AM by Silasw

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
FFShinra Since: Jan, 2001
#163241: Dec 19th 2016 at 8:03:57 AM

Said bias was more Hil centric than Dem centric and she ain't gonna be running again. Do recall how much the media loved Bernie, despite how much of an actual long shot he was (and thats without getting into serious vetting of his policies).

[up][up]Fighteer is also not the best judge on bias, given his own proclivities.

edited 19th Dec '16 8:04:30 AM by FFShinra

Hodor2 Since: Jan, 2015
#163242: Dec 19th 2016 at 8:05:45 AM

@Shinra- That things are not necessarily helpful doesn't mean they aren't true (and I don't find your concern trolling particularly helpful either).

I've been thinking about this issue a lot lately- basically a divergence usually between what I'd call Sanders Supporters (note- in my experience these are still people who reluctantly voted for Clinton) and mainstream or even/especially liberal Democrats.

Basically and I guess obviously, the Sanders camp puts a lot of emphasis on the idea that Clinton was an awful candidate and downplays or denies the impact of Comey and the hacking. Conversely, Democrats of course place a large emphasis on those things. I've also noticed that similarly, the Sanders camp goes between excoriating Democrats for calling Trump's supporters racist (cf. Sanders' comments on political correctness a few weeks ago) and condemning Democrats for allowing a horrible racist to be elected due to choosing an awful candidate like Clinton.

I know my bias is obvious (liberal Democrat here).

What does strike me though is that while I do believe there's an importance in avoiding/correcting mistakes in the future, I think there's a a problem in how the "Sanders view" basically buys into the premise that Trump was selling something good to the American people (often ignoring that Clinton won the popular vote) and I think because they hate Clinton so much, it inclines them to see the hacking as karma, rather than looking at in the abstract as a horrific subversion of democracy. Ditto the Comey thing to a lesser extent (in terms of a subversion of democracy).

The other problem is that while of course it's possible to care about more than one thing, I think that the narrative about Clinton losing votes in various swing states often seems to ignore the voter suppression in those states.

I understand why some people really run with the idea of Clinton as awful- they sincerely believe it and fits their political views (just as the opposite take is obviously one I believe and which fits mine) but I think that the former view isn't helpful to the next fight because of how much it buys into Trump's premises. Like there has to be some way to take stock of why Clinton lost without having to accept a lot of ideas about Clinton being awful and the innocence of Trump supporters.

FFShinra Since: Jan, 2001
#163243: Dec 19th 2016 at 8:12:37 AM

What concern trolling? I sincerely believe focusing on the down ticket is how Dems win. Focusing on the media will lead to the same issues of trust the GOP rank and file currently has with the media, no matter how different the actual case may be.

M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#163244: Dec 19th 2016 at 8:13:01 AM

[up][up] I just think it's weird that some Sanders supporters claim that HRC's loss was due to her being a weak candidate while ignoring or downplaying the forces arrayed against her, and at the same time claim that Sanders was the better candidate despite losing the primaries by millions of votes. Of course, Sanders lost because of EVIL DNC sabotage (despite the lack of any actual concrete proof beyond some snide emails dated AFTER it was clear Sanders had no chance and was just wasting time) rather than because of his own glaring weaknesses as a candidate.

I mean, really, the guy who couldn't even beat HRC was supposed to easily win against the other guy who DID beat HRC?

edited 19th Dec '16 8:13:15 AM by M84

Disgusted, but not surprised
Hodor2 Since: Jan, 2015
#163245: Dec 19th 2016 at 8:15:54 AM

@Shinra- It feels like concern trolling because basically the last several posts have been your saying "there's no bias" and when people reply back with demonstrations of bias you reply "you shouldn't talk like that because it's not helpful". I don't totally know what your own political views are and it's not like you have to agree with those posters, but it's like you are telling them that their posts aren't helpful under the premise that you are "on the same side", which you don't actually seem to be.

Actually I'd say just the repeated dismissal of people's views as "not helpful" is the concern trolling.

edited 19th Dec '16 8:16:49 AM by Hodor2

Tbone511 Since: Dec, 2014
#163246: Dec 19th 2016 at 8:23:48 AM

[up][up] I am not certain if the A>B>C logic applies in politics.

For example, Ford defeated Reagan in the primaries, but lost to Carter in the election, whereas Reagan defeated Carter in the general election.

Swanpride Since: Jun, 2013
#163247: Dec 19th 2016 at 8:26:40 AM

Let's put it this way: In politics people tend to accuse other people of what they are doing themselves. They are projecting.

In addition, Trump is just an unbelievable liar and the press did next to nothing to call him out on this. It is the job of a journalist to point out falsehoods, but Trump got away with stuff which would be considered "Rufmord" (character assassination) over here in Germany...and is a punishable offense, btw.

blkwhtrbbt The Dragon of the Eastern Sea from Doesn't take orders from Vladimir Putin Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: I'm just a poor boy, nobody loves me
The Dragon of the Eastern Sea
#163248: Dec 19th 2016 at 8:27:03 AM

Yeh, but Trumpeteers would have latched onto Sander's "socialist" label and

never

let

go

I know plenty of people who just hear the very word and just shut down. If Sanders had run against Trump, Trump's margin of popular defeat may very well have been smaller.

Say to the others who did not follow through You're still our brothers, and we will fight for you
Lightysnake Since: May, 2010
#163249: Dec 19th 2016 at 8:29:53 AM

Did I or did I not talk about focusing on the down-ticket? Acknowledging a bias exists is not 'focusing on it.'

AngelusNox Warder of the damned from The guard of the gates of oblivion Since: Dec, 2014 Relationship Status: Married to the job
Warder of the damned
#163250: Dec 19th 2016 at 8:31:38 AM

For a certain group of people, Sanders was the personification of a Zionist Occupied Government with a Jewish plant placed to destroy the US from within.

Inter arma enim silent leges

Total posts: 417,856
Top