I definitely agree with your first paragraph, also agree with 2 party systems being a problem - the UK suffered from Tony Blair’s Conservative Party AND the Conservative Party for way too long - and would like to see a Liberal Party back in UK politics. I also suspect most Americans would like to see a Liberal Party as the Democrats are sliding more left than some are comfortable with, however you then seem to have your own clear judgement derailed by your anger at Trump - I don’t think Trump’s going to win, but I can see that a heck of a lot of people voted for him and they’re not going to change their views overnight.
1 Like
Journalists are people. That does not mean all news is equally biased. Seems to me that a much bigger issue than liberal bias (probably not a huge thing, cf this study, https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/6/14/eaay9344), is bothsidesism, whereby news outlets feel they have to offer contrasting viewpoints even if only one side has evidence. Eg on climate change. There aren’t two sides on that: there’s the evidence, and there are people who make claims based on wishful thinking. That has been a huge issue under Trump. The word “lie” has been studiously avoided by the mainstream newspapers even when that’s obviously what is meant. The NYT gave a platform to the ridiculous authoritarian views of Tom Cotton, to give the appearance of being neutral. it’s a challenge for journalists to figure how to avoid giving a platform to hate speech and lies and deliberate misinformation, and they haven’t always succeeded. But it is very tough to do.
2 Likes
Kinda true for me in terms of parties. I lean left on social issues but right on fiscal with social issues being more important to me.
At any rate feel like yeah… For a more moderate stance the two behemoths in the room don’t really line up.
I wonder sometimes, if we had 4 parties representing the “light” and “hard” versions of the current 2 parties, how might the votes go.
3 Likes
Ever. They aren’t ever going to change their views
How exactly is my judgement derailed by my anger Charles? The fact that 70 million people voted for him?
I agree to a certain extent. The bias I see the most in the ‘liberal’ press is that of subject choice, and how the subject is then approached. Funny thing is I’d never have called either the NYT or the Washington Post liberal in the past. Perceptions change. I don’t think Tom Cotton is a very good example of bothsideism BTW. Seems to me a case of the one token ‘conservative’ voice. A bit like trump likes to show his one black supporter to the world.
That’s why I cited that article suggesting there’s reason to think the choice of subject is not left leaning…
Reuter’s and AP are fine but not magical powers great. I wrote a piece last year about a news story based on a historical / cultural discovery sort of in my specialty area, in which the reporting was very bungled (misunderstanding the academic research and misstating some facts). The first source was Reuter’s, and it led to dozens of misleading stories in European (Italian and German) as well as US and U.K. media outlets. It wasn’t bias; it was ignorance and rushing. It takes time to do really great reporting on complex issues. But there are wonderful journalists out there working hard and I’m truly grateful to them.
I’ve done a bunch of interviews in my irl self, with podcasters as well as mainstream media. The NYT people really do great detailed smart homework and fact checking, a lot more, in my experience, than most other outlets, including both left and right leaning podcasts. But of course there is huge variety.
2 Likes
There’s how your anger is derailing your judgement. Trump and ‘his one black supporter in the World’.
So are you angry at black people that support Trump?
Or are you of Joe’s opinion that if a black person doesn’t vote for him, etc.?
We ALL have to accept that others don’t think the same way as us, and can’t just blithely condemn.
1 Like
Yes absolutely. I have a couple of his books on my Amazon wants list currently 
1 Like
I’ll have to look into the Warren Plan, thanks for that. Interested to hear your take on Rogan - sounds like you’re not keen?
Not at all am I angry at black people for voting for Trump. That’s what you make of it. I am angry at Trump yes. And I am scared how easily people are fooled by him. Whatever colour. He’s lying in plain daylight and people suck it up. I’m not condemning anyone but mr. Trump himself.
2 Likes
I think it’s terms like ‘narcissistic psychopath’ and ‘dangerous lunatic’ that I find problematic as I simply don’t see it and it’s hyperbolic. Unlikable, arrogant, buffoon, certainly, but I just don’t see the monster that many do. And I find it concerning how much hate people have for 1 man and I don’t think it’s happened naturally, it’s been purposely created. And when these terms are used they paint a picture of those that vote for him. This is not useful and quite dangerous in itself in my opinion. It’s part of what I consider the lefts responsibility in the degeneration of the current political climate. And the ‘one black voter’ comment. Sorry, I’m really not sure what the point of that was either 
But we all think differently, that’s life. We learn from these conversations.
1 Like
Yep - totally agree. Nobody wins with manufactured hatred.
1 Like
There was an interesting piece on why Black men may have voted for trump. It depends on what they identify more as, a man, or a black person. Black men who identify themselves based on gender over race were more likely to vote for trump because of the image of strength he portrays. They aren’t focused on what trump does for Black people. They are focused on what he does for men.
4 Likes
I agree the terms I use are counterproductive in a discussion like this. Still I think they are true and I don’t agree that by using them I say that his voters are like that too. Neither do I think my thoughts are being manipulated by ‘the left’. What’s left anyway? Left and right are obsolete notions. I don’t hate his voters and I don’t hate Trump but I do think he is mentally ill and I have thought that for a very long time, long before he went into politics.
Trump is quite an expert in manufacturing hate himself btw. He’s a would be autocrat. That’s what these sort of people do. Just like Lenin, Hitler. Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, Pinochet, Videla, Suharto, Orban, Duda, Lukashenko, Milosevic, Putin, Mobutu, Mugabe, and 100 others do and have done. Ow, here I go again. Sorry.
1 Like
I guess a lot of how we perceive people and politics is down to our own upbringing and experience. I’m sure that I read that you grew up around a lot of left wing politics in your family, which would lead you to some of the beliefs that you have. I grew up in a relatively conservative family which would possibly explain some of my views (although I don’t consider myself conservative).
But again, it’s this exageration of his character that I just cannot get over. Trump is not in the slightest bit comparible to Hitler, Stalin etc.
I do agree that he likes to stir up a bit of hate himself tho, there’s no denying that.
And I do respect your opinion.
2 Likes
I haven’t done much reading on it, but my family and I have been discussing for years why our male family members who are Mexican American are Conservative and, more recently, Trump supporters. Thankfully, some of the younger ones have changed their thinking, but we were suspecting that the machismo aspect was the driving force behind their ideology. Do you happen to know what publication it was where you read this? I’d be interested to check it out.
1 Like
Let’s quickly look at this similarities between Stalin and Trump. I love when people don’t see this because I found it absolutely fascinating. To start, Trump has what we like to call an authoritarian following-his followers are ones that for better use of a term-need a daddy. They need to be told everything is going to be okay while also being told what is right from wrong.
To begin with though…both Stalin & Trump both have giant egos, which are the bedrocks of the personality cults. One of the best biographers of Stalin writes that “his Messianic egotism was boundless.” Trump’s egotism is also limitless as indicated by such statements as “I’m very smart. My life has proven that I’m smart”; “I get along with everybody… Everybody loves me” and “my whole life is about winning. I always win.” If you’ve ever known a narcissist, you can draw similarities. He is the hero of every story. All ideas, big or small, flow through him now that he is President.
Second, both men think of those who would challenge their inflated views of themselves as enemies. Stalin had the power to kill many of them- Trump does not and simply makes statements like this one: “I would never kill them, but I do hate them…Some of them are such lying, disgusting people.” (This was said at a Michigan rally)
Third, both men are extremely suspicious and power-hungry and therefore intolerant of any opposition, however slight it might be.
Fourth, both men have relied on fear to increase and solidify support. Railing about enemies all around, domestic and foreign, has been one method both men have used. In his 1956 Secret speech, Khrushchev said “mass arrests and deportations of many thousands of people, execution without trial and without normal investigation created conditions of insecurity, fear and even desperation.” Sound familiar?
I could go on and on. The comparison are uncanny. It’s the type of leader trump is…everything he does is calculated. to sum Trump up in one line it would have to be… “who do you believe, me or your lying eyes?” 
1 Like
No, that hasn’t convinced me at all. They shared some character traits. That’s pretty much what I got from that
1 Like