This made me kinda sad today...

[Hotdog]

No I haven't! I've been waiting for the "buy one abortion get another abortion half-off" promotion. Has it started yet? I love #owningthecons. Even though I'm a man and I still love getting abortions, just to see the republican snowflakes get so triggered.

Is there an BLM protest somewhere? I really feel like blocking a highway.

By the way, have you gotten your abortion yet this month?

Dont get that abortion just yet. New York just made it so you can wait til that "thing" is full grown. So you have some more time to think about it. Plus its funner when its full grown.

 

[Alfalfa]

Dont get that abortion just yet. New York just made it so you can wait til that "thing" is full grown. So you have some more time to think about it. Plus its funner when its full grown.

Full grown?? I've been looking for legal ways to get rid of you.

 

[Zombie]

Those 57th trimester abortions are my favorite.

 

[Hotdog]

No. I was stating a simple fact. Educated city folk lean liberal. Academia leans liberal. Thus, you are correct, journalists, who are mainly educated city folk, lean liberal, and consequently have a liberal bias.

I know you like to create your own reality, dismissing any information that doesn't fit. But I was explaining why you happened to be right in this case.

Generally speaking, this is true.



No, you did not fix the above truism by @Alfalfa at all. The "problem" here is that you are unaware of one of the fundamental truths of American history, a truth that has a very long history in the United States. It's a generalization, but one that is very noticeable if one simply knows something about our history: urban America tends to be liberal and rural America tends to be conservative. This didn't start in the 2016 election, it is something at the very heart of our culture wars, and it has been with us for much of our history. Here is some listening and reading material that can be used to begin to familiarize yourself with this basic fact of American history. It's really an inescapable fact:

https://ehistory.osu.edu/videos/fault-lines-urban-rural-divide-america-history-talk-podcast

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/commentisfree/2018/jul/04/us-rural-urban-divide-historical-roots

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/thought-matters/the-urbanrural-divide-dee_b_11353228.html

Now, I live in the most densely populated state in the union. Most people here in RI are living in that densely urban belt that runs from Boston to Washington. Overwhelmingly liberal and Democratic. But, I can travel less then 20 miles west from the urban area of RI that surrounds Narragansett Bay and I am in a different world altogether. One dominated by country Western style bars and conservative rural values. Right here in the tiniest state of all. Our rural towns tend to vote Republican, our urban towns and cities are heavily Democratic.

The urban-rural divide, politically, and culturally, is one of the fundamental facts of our history. So it's a mistake to dismiss or correct what @Alfalfa pointed out. He hit upon a fact that runs through our history, and it certainly was noticeable in the 2016 election and is absiolutely fundamental in our culture wars.

You guys are right. I dont disagree that the west and east coasts are more liberal. These are also the places with all those, liberal arts, journalism, and gender studies degrees. Of course these people dont actually produce any goods and services. We just get to be lectured on how to live, by them. So that's the justification for them existing.

Im glad Alfalfa agrees that the media leans left. We can have more reasonable discussions when one side is willing to admit the truth.

But first I want to take one more jab at ya.

Do you know why the coasts lean more left? Because they live in a place where its more play time land, and less work. You know, make movies, sing, draw, sell nonsense stuff, smoke some weed, play on the water, complain, riot, play some more, commit some crimes, riot again, blog, lecture the country etc.. Basically, you can choose to not live in reality, because no one else is there either. Self feeding monster.

Haha. Its funny, cause its so true.

 

[Hotdog]

I’d love to see a study conducted that evaluated the # of passports and countries visited of rural and conservative residents vs urban and liberal residents. I’d be especially interested in the # of passports and countries visited between Trump voters and Clinton voters.

I have a feeling that those who share Trump’s worldview typically haven’t traveled to many places around the world. Overall, I think conservatives isolating themselves from the rest of “real America” has taken them out of step with the modern and multicultural society we see today in the 21st century. Imo, conservative and rural Americans could do themselves a favor by ceasing to blame immigrants and women on their plights and look themselves in the mirror.

Im in Los Angeles right now observing the culture.

I just took that from the Santa Monica Pier yesterday.

Going on a cruise to my favorite place Mexico on Monday. Ill share some pictures

 

[Alfalfa]

Do you know why the coasts lean more left? Because they live in a place where its more play time land, and less work. You know, make movies, sing, draw, sell nonsense stuff, smoke some weed, play on the water, complain, riot, play some more, commit some crimes, riot again, blog, lecture the country etc.. Basically, you can choose to not live in reality, because no one else is there either. Self feeding monster.

I know it's a jab, and not fully serious. But the reason is probably the opposite of what you described. Rural people are typically more communitarian types who value traditions over change. Communities need tribal elements for them to naturally exist, and rural communities are more homogeneous and more tight nit. Cities require a more individualistic mentality so that people who have nothing to do with each other can co-exist. So there's pressure against traditionalism, and toward individualism and liberalism (which is the moral system where individual liberty is the primary concern).

 

[Alfalfa]

I know it's a jab, and not fully serious. But the reason is probably the opposite of what you described. Rural people are typically more communitarian types who value traditions over change. Communities need tribal elements for them to naturally exist, and rural communities are more homogeneous and more tight nit. Cities require a more individualistic mentality so that people who have nothing to do with each other can co-exist. So there's pressure against traditionalism, and toward individualism and liberalism (which is the moral system where individual liberty is the primary concern).

Refer to my post on the alt-right, which you mercilessly mocked. The reason someone like Bannon doesn't think having an excellent GDP is worth it if we're going to have so many foreigners around is because you cannot build a community based on economic productivity. But you can on ethnic identity.

 

[Hotdog]

Refer to my post on the alt-right, which you mercilessly mocked. The reason someone like Bannon doesn't think having an excellent GDP is worth it if we're going to have so many foreigners around is because you cannot build a community based on economic productivity. But you can on ethnic identity.

I love having "foreigners" around an coming to this country. Ive always made that clear. Im all for immigration. Ive said loosen the immigration laws allow people to become citizens eaiser. But I do believe im legal immigration. People running around without "legal" status is not a good thing. Im not for the wall either. I may, lean right on some things, but not so much on that. Its a mix I guess.

 

[Hotdog]

No. I was stating a simple fact. Educated city folk lean liberal. Academia leans liberal. Thus, you are correct, journalists, who are mainly educated city folk, lean liberal, and consequently have a liberal bias.

I know you like to create your own reality, dismissing any information that doesn't fit. But I was explaining why you happened to be right in this case.

 

[Red]

View attachment 6650

I've long been an admirer of the late American historian and Librarian of Congress, Daniel Boorstin. I was taken by his description of why Americans have always disdained/disliked/distrusted so-called intellectuals. He argued that America grew and developed as a series of frontier experiences and frontier environments. Beginning on the east coast. On the frontier, practical skills were of utmost value. Intellectual pursuits were of no value at all in such settings, where survival had to be the prime focus, not study of the literati or so-called intellectual pursuits. Thus, while the settled societies of Europe accepted the existence of an intellectual class, in America such a class was viewed as not only elitist, but contributing nothing of value. Of course, once settlements were more stable, and no longer dealing with things like natives resisting the loss of land, with its associated wars against the colonists, centers of learning, like Harvard were established. Yet Americans retained their disdain for intellectuals, and it has continued to the present day.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_J._Boorstin

Now, in the early 21st century, we are witnessing distrust toward all authority. Political authority, religious authority, scientific authority. It's an age of Everyman and the internet. I've joked in the past that we will get to the point that, should we need major surgery for any reason, might as well chose someone off the street to perform said surgery. Who needs trained doctors. Just another educated elite.

My own wife "accuses" me of being an intellectual, as if it were a dirty word. Disdain. But what she and many Americans apparently miss is that intellectuals are not elites. They are people for whom the "world of ideas" is what draws them in, the world of ideas is what they most love. I've always enjoyed studying, for instance, intellectual history, the ideas that take hold at any given time in history, and the rejection or acceptance of ideas through time. I'd rather talk about philosophy then more practical concerns. Put me in an ivory tower, and I feel like I am in my element, surrounded by books, surrounded by ideas, surrounded by minds eager to learn and talk about ideas. This is not elitism. It just describes another way of approaching the world. If it's the world of ideas that invigorates one, one should not have to apologize for such an interest.

 

[One Brow]

Do you know what else Ive noticed about the left when they protest? They are overwhelmingly white. We can debat all sorts of things, but this is undeniable. Do you agree with this statement? Thats easily provable.

Depends on the group. I have yet to see a BLM protest that was overwhlemingly white. On the other hand, anyone who pays attention to actual left-wing media (as opposed to CNN, for example) is well aware of complaints that black people sometimes feel excluded/ignored by various feminist or LGBT groups. Anyone who says there is no racism on the left is fooling themself.

Why do you think that is? Isnt it a paradoxical conundrum? People protesting white privilege while being guilty of white privilege themselves? Shouldn't they just punch themselves in the face to try and solve the problem? (metaphorically speaking)

I think it is because we are all human, and human thought processing using multiple cognitive shortcuts, regardless of your political affiliation. Far from a conundrum, this is exactly what one would expect to see from most theories of human bias. Those who follow the skeptical media are familiar with the concept of always checking your own assumptions, including your own privilege. It was only a couple of months ago that DasJazz reminded me of mine.

When that happens, a person can either be defensive and deny it happen, or try to understand and correct themself.

 

[One Brow]

Fixed. I finished your sentence.

The older, wealthier, more family, and more experience I get, the more leftist I seem to become.

 

[One Brow]

View attachment 6650

Full marks for including a version of Illuminati I have not played.

 

[One Brow]

The 2016 election polls were crazy wrong were they not? Why is it so hard to believe these studies could be off? What's the difference?

The 2016 polls were not crazy wrong. The only wrong part was when people falsely assumed there would be independence (that is, no relationship) in how people voted in states sharing various characteristics.

In the 2 weeks leading up to the election, 538 consistently gave Trump between 30% and 35% chance of winning. As any experience Titan player can tell you, you do occasionally win with that type of chance.

 

[One Brow]

Dont get that abortion just yet. New York just made it so you can wait til that "thing" is full grown. So you have some more time to think about it. Plus its funner when its full grown.

I'm not surprised you opposed abortions to save the mother's life/health, and that you insist mothers carry dead fetuses around inside them, which are the types of abortions the New York law allows after 24 weeks.

 

[One Brow]

Im glad Alfalfa agrees that the media leans left. We can have more reasonable discussions when one side is willing to admit the truth.

There is a difference between "journalists lean left" and "the media leans left".

 

[Keefe]

Lulz at Hack disparaging the west and east coasts. The irony.

 

[Gameface]

There is a difference between "journalists lean left" and "the media leans left".

And a huge difference from news outlets manufacturing stories and hiding the truth.

 

[Ron Mexico]

Why should I have to jump through a bunch of hoops to prove something that is undeniably true? Im not making some shocking claim. Who are these two sides battling each other and why do they seem to always be saying the same things said from certain news outlets and not others? Why do they they defend certain news outlets? Right in your own post you just gave away that you see it too with the Fox News comment. Why are we playing games? Lets just skip past what has been established and work on other things. Fox news leans right. Yes. And pretty much every other big news corporation leans left. Thats just the way it is.

Btw, If you read through this thread I bet you would find I linked more times to CNN and any other leftist site than I did Fox news. I rarely tune into them. I get my news from a built in app on my phone that Google installed. Its called smart news. It just links a bunch of news stories. I click on them regardless of who is publishing. I then go to youtube and listen to independent media to hear different opinions on it. I dont take any journalists at their word anymore. They have destroyed their credibility.

How about we play a game. You post an article's full text involving politics. Just copy the text. Has to be from Fox News or the Huffington Post. Leave off the title and who wrote it. Ill guess which outlet its from.

Of course you would know if it was from Fox news or not. Fox news doesnt just have a bias, they have the dishonest practice of including opinions/propaganda into news stories. Its one thing to have opinion pieces its another to purposely deceive people by mixing the two together. CNN is a crappy news source due to their looking for sensationalism in their articles. But there are plenty of good news organizations. Good reporters maybe lean left or right but know how to report news properly. Any journalist worth anything can report facts and news without putting their opinions into it. But there are plenty of people who lean right that work for every major news outlet.

So you read news and then find peoples opinions on actual news and trust that? Makes sense. I would rather read news, find their sources and get more facts about it and form my own opinion but to each their own.

 

[Alfalfa]

Of course you would know if it was from Fox news or not. Fox news doesnt just have a bias, they have the dishonest practice of including opinions/propaganda into news stories. Its one thing to have opinion pieces its another to purposely deceive people by mixing the two together. CNN is a crappy news source due to their looking for sensationalism in their articles. But there are plenty of good news organizations. Good reporters maybe lean left or right but know how to report news properly. Any journalist worth anything can report facts and news without putting their opinions into it. But there are plenty of people who lean right that work for every major news outlet.

So you read news and then find peoples opinions on actual news and trust that? Makes sense. I would rather read news, find their sources and get more facts about it and form my own opinion but to each their own.

One can argue that bias exists in what stories get picked up. For example, I would read Breitbart back in 2016 to see what they're up to. And they would have a ton of stories about violence against the police. They saw that as a counter to all the stories about police abuse that we see in mainstream media.

Ideological leaning affects what people see as newsworthy.