Quote (Thor123422 @ Sep 28 2020 12:41pm)

Yeah, because he's constantly run on "drain the swamp" and "I'm such a great businessman". Then when records come out that he hasn't tried to drain the swamp at all and he's actually been a bad businessman who's about to get financially screwed that's big news.

The media should not be "fair". They should not be neutral. They should be objective. Neutral means "The Cardinals have 12 points, the Red Sox have 6 points, but we can't say who's winning". Objective means "The Cardinals have a strong lead over the Red Sox". A neutral media does not do it's job. When the media calls out Trump for being a bad leader, they're being objective. When they call Trump out for breaking norms and being corrupt, they're being objective. When they call out hypocrisy, they're being objective. The reason Trump gets more negative coverage is because he constantly does shitty things, he constantly makes bad decisions, and constantly antagonizes people.

The media would not be doing their job to report "Joe didn't pay much taxes on a book deal" with the same veracity as "Trump has lost a ton of money, paid less taxes than the average worker, and is a few years from financial devastation as hundreds of millions of dollars of loans come due".

Quote (ofthevoid @ Sep 28 2020 11:48am)

This tax story has no new or controversial details. It's a hit piece close to election, similar to 20 women coming out 2 months before calling Trump a rapist before November elections during the last cycle. And we'll continue to get these probably right up to election day.

That's the part that rubs me the wrong way. It's this type of trying to control my perspective with selective hit pieces that has agitated me and put in a for-Trump camp. People that are intelligent and think for themselves are bothered when some entity is trying to mold how they should think or feel about things, as if we're not capable enough to do that on our own.

Quote (Thor123422 @ Sep 28 2020 12:51pm)

I think the real issue here is you have a tendency to think you're being manipulated any time something comes out that contradicts your opinion, and then you instinctively go the other direction.

This is something called the backfire effect, and think you would benefit from doing some reading on it so you can recognize when it's happening to you.

Quote (ofthevoid @ Sep 28 2020 11:59am)

There's ample proof out there that shows the media has had a substantial bias against Trump, comparatively speaking with other presidents. It predates his lash backs against them that many point to as the reason why the media is hostile towards him.

As soon as he become the nominee, there were dozens of hit pieces launched, ranging from calling him a rapist, white supremacists to a Russian spy. Like how the fuck is someone to remain respectful to people and organizations that started from such a debased point of view?

Quote (Thor123422 @ Sep 28 2020 01:02pm)

He literally opened his campaign with the "they're rapist" comments (effectively saying they're rapists until proven otherwise). It is impossible for the "media bias" to predate his divisive actions because he launched his campaign with it.

Quote (ofthevoid @ Sep 28 2020 12:05pm)

He said some are rapists. A point that's factually true. MSM headlines: "Trump calls immigrants rapists". Words have meanings, even omitting some seemingly insignificant adverbs could alter the meaning of something. You think MSM editors left out that adverb in accident?

Quote (ofthevoid @ Sep 28 2020 06:48pm)

This tax story has no new or controversial details. It's a hit piece close to election, similar to 20 women coming out 2 months before calling Trump a rapist before November elections during the last cycle. And we'll continue to get these probably right up to election day.

That's the part that rubs me the wrong way. It's this type of trying to control my perspective with selective hit pieces that has agitated me and put in a for-Trump camp. People that are intelligent and think for themselves are bothered when some entity is trying to mold how they should think or feel about things, as if we're not capable enough to do that on our own.

Quote (Thor123422 @ Sep 28 2020 01:08pm)

He said they're rapists, some maybe are good people.

The implication here is they should be assumed rapists until proven otherwise.

If a BLM leader said "Cops are rapists. Well some maybe are good people" you would freak out about how they called cops rapists.

Quote

"When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best," Trump said. "They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."