The Biden Presidency

[Joe Blow]

Think the thread has nearly run it course, Biden won.

This thread is about the Biden Presidency. That hasn't even started yet.

 

[satanoperca]

What have you been reading on this thread, 15 pages about his presidency when he is not president yet.

It will be dead the thread, once he is President, as it has slowly been dying, given people have to accept the facts - the truth.

 

[Joe Blow]

What have you been reading on this thread, 15 pages about his presidency when he is not president yet.

The last fifteen pages, apart from some diversions, appears to be people talking about what they are anticipating from a Biden Presidency.

It will be dead the thread, once he is President, as it has slowly been dying, given people have to accept the facts - the truth.

I don't think anyone is seriously arguing that Biden will not be U.S. President in January. That much is clear.

 

[Joe Blow]

The last fifteen pages, apart from some diversions, appears to be people talking about what they are anticipating from a Biden Presidency.

Actually, I take that back. I just went and flicked through the thread.

While there are some posts that speculate about what a Biden Presidency might be like, most of the posts are:

• Those on the left bashing Trump and posting left wing propaganda
• Those on the right bashing Biden and Harris and predicting communism under Biden

This thread is actually a good example of the cesspit that political discussion on ASF has become. There are some intelligent posts but they are few and far between.

 

[satanoperca]

This thread is actually a good example of the cesspit that political discussion on ASF has become. There are some intelligent posts but they are few and far between.

Politics is just like shares and a share forum, you have to filter through the sh-----t to find the gold.

 

[Joe Blow]

Politics is just like shares and a share forum, you have to filter through the sh-----t to find the gold.

I'm starting to think that the problem with the political threads is that people can just post a link to some article on another website without explaining it, putting it in context, or adding their own thoughts.

I wonder how many posts we would get in political threads if posting external links wasn't permitted and you had to post your own thoughts, ideas and beliefs and support them only with your own arguments in your own words.

I suspect we would see dramatically fewer posts.

 

[PZ99]

I'm starting to think that the problem with the political threads is that people can just post a link to some article on another website without explaining it, putting it in context, or adding their own thoughts.

I wonder how many posts we would get in political threads if posting external links wasn't permitted and you had to post your own thoughts, ideas and beliefs and support them only with your own arguments in your own words.

I suspect we would see dramatically fewer posts.

It wouldn't make any difference. One poster was simply copying articles and posting them here without even citing the fake news source it came from which is why they're now on my ignore list.

IMO the only way to deal with this is to warn the offending poster(s) followed by a temporary ban if they keep doing it.

But like I said previously - taking the high road by using this new ignore app works for me because it prevents the aggro.

 

[satanoperca]

I'm starting to think that the problem with the political threads is that people can just post a link to some article on another website without explaining it, putting it in context, or adding their own thoughts.

I wonder how many posts we would get in political threads if posting external links wasn't permitted and you had to post your own thoughts, ideas and beliefs and support them only with your own arguments in your own words.

I suspect we would see dramatically fewer posts.

Great idea.

You should be able to quote a passage and provide a link only to the reference and then argue/discuss you case.

I agree, just inserting a document is not acceptable.

 

[basilio]

Just to clarify. When I post an article from The Shovel it is as Political Satire. Babylon Bee is also a political satire website.

Simply pointing out (with voluminous evidence) that Donald Trump is a lying, sociopathic, con man who has managed to convince 50 million plus US citizens to believe anything he says becomes tedious after a time. It is far more interesting (IMV) to get ones unpalatable political news from news/satirical sources like The Colbert Report, or Full Frontal which manage to accurately highlight the xhit xuckery of politics with a humorous bent.

Political satire is satire that specializes in gaining entertainment from politics; it has also been used with subversive intent where political speech and dissent are forbidden by a regime, as a method of advancing political arguments where such arguments are expressly forbidden.

Political satire is usually distinguished from political protest or political dissent, as it does not necessarily carry an agenda nor seek to influence the political process. While occasionally it may, it more commonly aims simply to provide entertainment. By its very nature, it rarely offers a constructive view in itself; when it is used as part of protest or dissent, it tends to simply establish the error of matters rather than provide solutions.

Political satire - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

List of satirical television news programs - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[basilio]

Political satire in Soviet Russia.

Krokodil - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Joe Blow]

Bas, everyone is tired of the relentless link posting to partisan sources and the pushing of political agendas. The fact that nobody can tell whether or not you are being serious when posting links to venues like The Shovel speaks volumes.

Maybe it's time for you to step back from the frenzied political posting. It has become an unhealthy obsession and frankly, I'm not prepared to put up with it anymore. I don' care if it's coming from the left or the right, it's just not something I want around here anymore.

If you wish to post your own thoughts on an issue you can, but the endless links to partisan sources needs to stop now.

 

[SirRumpole]

If you wish to post your own thoughts on an issue you can, but the endless links to partisan sources needs to stop now.

Exactly.

We can't have a debate with someone we can't converse with.

Other members own opinions are important and lead to interesting exchanges of views.

Where reputable sources are quoted, fair enough that also leads to debate, but propaganda should be out.

 

[basilio]

Exactly.

We can't have a debate with someone we can't converse with.

Other members own opinions are important and lead to interesting exchanges of views.

Where reputable sources are quoted, fair enough that also leads to debate, but propaganda should be out.

Thanks Rumpy . And having a constructive discussion with people on ASF on issues whether there are share and investment related, or more generally is the way to go.

I'm a bit disappointed that my quoting The Shovel and other political satire sites was viewed as propaganda. There can be a big difference which was why I political satire in more detail.

I would have thought that any review of my term term postings on ASF would show I am quite willing to discuss topics in more depth. But in that context I am also prepared to point out where other posters may be quoting quite erroneous information. And in practical terms that usually comes down to offering evidence that, for example, some video clips or claims are just fabricated or deliberately misquoted.

The use of reputable sources ? Sure. Who is willing to suggest which sources we should give credence to ?

 

[SirRumpole]

The use of reputable sources ? Sure. Who is willing to suggest which sources we should give credence to ?

Good point. A matter of opinion of course.

Well respected media organisations (getting fewer these days), independent journalists, academics who are experts in their fields.

More weight given to facts than opinions. Opinions based on evidence given more weight. The sort of stuff the journalists should be doing if they were doing their jobs.

 

[basilio]

Good point. A matter of opinion of course.

Well respected media organisations (getting fewer these days), independent journalists, academics who are experts in their fields.

More weight given to facts than opinions. Opinions based on evidence given more weight. The sort of stuff the journalists should be doing if they were doing their jobs.

Well respected media organisations (getting fewer these days)

Tricky perhaps ? Who is offering the "respect" ? When can we acknowledge that accurate reporting of events can come from many sources ?

Inside that statement is the realisation that even when media organisations report events that have happened - straight reporting - some people dismiss the report out of hand becasue it comes from MSM. That conversation has been around recently when for example the fact that a number of Trump legal cases against the election have been withdrawn (or lost) was arbitrarily dismissed becasue it came from MSM.

I find myself quoting news stories from News and even Fox News at times because the information as news is accurate and I hope I don't get the blowback of using "partisan" media sources.

 

[SirRumpole]

Tricky perhaps ? Who is offering the "respect" ?

When both sides of politics say the media organisation is biased you can be fairly sure it's not.

I don't know if there are any .

 

[moXJO]

The use of reputable sources ? Sure. Who is willing to suggest which sources we should give credence to ?

This here is the best quote you have delivered.

As you saw from a previous post. Even so called "reliable media" puts out unchecked propaganda pieces. A lot of the sources you like to post from are tainted.

Quoting from media unless its specific journalists with actual integrity. News is just a biased clickbait festival with leading narratives for their one eyed readers.

I think for political threads, its useless quoting entirely from links. Quoting from cnn or Guardian, even fox, newsmax, etc (especially when its opinions) is akin to propaganda. Its their to enforce an I'm right/ you're wrong mindset.

 

[basilio]

Biden Calls George Bush To Congratulate Him On A Well-Run Campaign

President-elect Joe Biden has put in a call to George W Bush, offering his commiserations, and congratulating him on a well-run campaign.

Ever the gentleman, Biden said he respected Mr Bush for a hard-fought campaign. “I just wanna say that it was a tough battle, it was a tough election campaign, and – although I didn’t see you all that much on the campaign trail, which was strange now that I come to think about it – I just want to say that you did a good job,” Biden told Bush while Jill Biden frantically mouthed the words ‘Donald Trump’ to her husband.

“Did you campaign much? I didn’t see you much out there. Maybe that’s something you should look into for next time,” Biden continued before Bush interrupted.

“Joe I’m going to stop you there. I’m going to get you Donald Trump’s number, so you can call him in person. But you have a great day.”

Biden Calls George Bush To Congratulate Him On A Well-Run Campaign

“Joe I’m going to stop you there"

www.theshovel.com.au

 

[IFocus]

So Biden will get 57 days to transition most incumbent's get 77 days.

I guess we wait until the senate is settled and or the influence Trump can wield out of office on the GOP.

So far elected Republicans have shown to be out and out cowards failing to defend their basic beliefs and positions against Trump

 

[satanoperca]

Not being that knowledgable on the GOP and senators of the Republican party, but a quick review showed me a whole lot of age-old white men, no diversity that might represent the consitents of the USA population, like more than 5% women, maybe a few people of another color, race or creed than angry white men losing their power while have issues with penile erections.