US Election November 5th

[Agent_zed]

Hilarious and terrifying in equal measure and goes to support the case that 'truth', where ever you find it is probably not as binary as we all would like it to be.

This is the point I keep re-iterating. I am getting the vast majority of my information directly from the horses mouth. There is no debate to be had when Donald Trump is the one saying the things he is saying. The same goes for JD Vance and the rest of the hangers on.

It is not some media bias or interpretation when Trump dances for 38mins at a rally, or yells that 'they are eating the dawgs..' at a debate.

This isn't some second-hand quote, he is on video in numerous interviews and events saying and doing these things and much much more.

 

[Jake]

I'm just firing up some popcorn so I can sit back and watch certain members of this thread now ignore all the factually recorded points you've made, before going on another evidence-free rant about virtue signallers, woke, lefties, socialists, Starmer, Democrats etc.

PS The Trump and import tariffs thing is really funny - whenever he talks about it he clearly seems to think that the importing (foreign) company pays the tariffs.

I think he thinks the exporter pays rather than the importer. And quite how he thinks that will help Americans is beyond me, but I guess inflation is a good thing - oh no I forgot inflation is a very bad thing that Biden did (albeit starting well before Trump's time in office ended). All clear and consistent and logical.

 

[Jake]

your belief that the right wing are planning civil uprisings if they don't get their way to derive an indirect slur on the right of the political spectrum.

It's not a belief you just need to listen to them spell it out in person.

 

[MikeJhn]

Not forgetting Biggus Dickus!

And his wife Incontina Buttocks

 

[Jacob]

It's not a belief you just need to listen to them spell it out in person.

https://www.google.com/search?sca_e...EAHR91CP4Q0pQJegQIERAB&biw=1258&bih=654&dpr=2

 

[ey_tony]

 

[Agent_zed]

View attachment 191450

Is that your 'evidence' of the disgusting behaviour of the left?

Was it a cover-up when in a deposition Trump was asked to identify the people in a photo and he pointed to a woman and said it was his Ex-wife Marla and the lawyer then pointed out it was E Jean Carrol that Trump was pointing at?

Or when he was found to have numerous classified documents at his home and refused to hand them back. Of course it was a setup.... except he claimed he had the right to have them. Can you see the problem there?

Funny how there are no Trump phone records during the Jan 6th riot.

 

[sploo]

View attachment 191450

I can't even tell if you've posted that seriously, or in jest; it's that disconnected from reality.

 

[Spectric]

I can't even tell if you've posted that seriously, or in jest; it's that disconnected from reality.

Is that not what american politics boils down to though, the reality gets ignored as the contenders have to put on the best circus with the most fanfare to win. whilst having to spend vast sums of money.

 

[Chris152]

Sounds like a full-time job to me. Can you give us some examples of where you go to find 'unbiased' information relating to current affairs?* BC'er was asked the same a few pages back but got all cryptic about it.

* In my opinion, it doesn't exist, but maybe that's just me.

Just a few examples, @ey_tony ? Or just one example? I'm genuinely interested.

 

[ey_tony]

Just a few examples, @ey_tony ? Or just one example? I'm genuinely interested.

For goodness sake...just pick up any copy of the Guardian or Independent either past or present to see what bias means in news reporting.
For the past few years I've had news items flash up on my phone and 99.9% of the time I could always recognise the news source if it came from the Guardian or Independent just by looking at the news headline let alone after reading the articles.

 

[sploo]

For goodness sake...just pick up any copy of the Guardian or Independent either past or present to see what bias means in news reporting.
For the past few years I've had news items flash up on my phone and 99.9% of the time I could always recognise the news source if it came from the Guardian or Independent just by looking at the news headline let alone after reading the articles.

I don't disagree, but for every Guardian or Independent there's the Sun, the Times, the Daily Mail, Fox News, GBeebies etc. Biased reporting is just an unfortunate reality of the world.

If we accept the bias in tone, the question then is how close to the actual truth is the content of the reporting; and I'd suggest that history would support the likes of the Sun/Mail/Fox News being further from reality than most other sources.

 

[Chris152]

For goodness sake...just pick up any copy of the Guardian or Independent either past or present to see what bias means in news reporting.
For the past few years I've had news items flash up on my phone and 99.9% of the time I could always recognise the news source if it came from the Guardian or Independent just by looking at the news headline let alone after reading the articles.

For goodness sake... I'm asking for the 'unbiased' sources of current affairs you said you use, above.

A reminder:
"I tend not to swallow the garbage put out by the left wing press such as the Guardian/Independent et al and the same applies to news from that of the right or news put out by both the BBC and ITV as from my past experience of them reporting events I'd have to say they're both biased and not to be trusted.
Instead I try to ascertain as many facts from news sources/information from beyond these shores through news sources which have no link either through prejudice or bias toward the UK's incumbent governments, that way I can draw safer conclusions than information from the British media or such as Wikipedia."

What are these sources?

 

[mudman]

I'm struggling to see that it does when read in the context of the overall post it was responding to.

Well if you can't see it, there's no point me explaining it.

I'd also question whether an interaction with members of an online gambling site is a reliable means of measuring the mood in the US.

Been trawling my posts? It's called the wisdom of the crowd, look it up.

Are there instances of the Democrats threatening civil unrest and the like if they don't win?

I dunno, are there? If one group is likely to threaten that sort of thing, then the opposing group will quite likely do it too.

 

[mudman]

It's not a belief you just need to listen to them spell it out in person.

Oh good grief. You have some evidence of something that is anecdotal if we go with an earlier definition from RobinBHM that you have used to come to a conclusion that you believe to be true. It is a belief same as I have a belief that the Earth is round.
But here, my belief is that you have completely missed the point and I have another belief that you are unlikely to either understand the point or will refuse to accept it anyway.

 

[John Brown]

Well if you can't see it, there's no point me explaining it.

Been trawling my posts? It's called the wisdom of the crowd, look it up.


I dunno, are there? If one group is likely to threaten that sort of thing, then the opposing group will quite likely do it too.

Surely if he could see it, there'd be no point in explaining it? What you wrote is nonsensical.

 

[John Brown]

Also, some random guy on an online gaming site is not relevant to the wisdom of crowds. More nonsense.
As for your last sentence...

 

[AJB Temple]

Personally I think all MSM is biased. The Telegraph has increasingly gone down market. The Times is just enrichment for Murdoch. The Guardian just ignores any news that does not suit it's mildly left wing agenda. The Independent has no real presence any more and anyway it isn't and never was. Even the BBC spins things and has a distinct position on Isreal & Palestine.

 

[mudman]

Also, some random guy on an online gaming site is not relevant to the wisdom of crowds. More nonsense.
As for your last sentence...

Betting odds, especially those obtained on the betting exchanges, are directly related to the number of people buying (backing) and selling (laying such as a bookie does) positions and is a good reflection of the probability of an outcome. It's quite a well known concept and applies to all sorts of markets including betting.

I'll admit my last sentence could have been worded better, but essentially, I don't know, not something I had looked into until now. But if one group would threaten violence in the event of a win by the opposite camp, then the supporters of the opposite camp are likely to threaten a violent response. In essence, it doesn't matter who threatens the violence, any threat will be likely met with a similar response.

By the way, I did a quick search for "us election who is threatening violence" and got a number of results that imply both sides are able to respond with acts of violence. This is part of an article from Reuters:

Oct 21 (Reuters) - - In York, Pennsylvania, a man accosted a group of people rallying for Vice President Kamala Harris’ White House campaign, punching a 74-year-old man in the head and calling another man a “n— supporter” as he fled.
In northern Michigan, an assailant enraged by his hatred of Donald Trump used an all-terrain vehicle to run over and injure an 81-year-old man who was putting up a yard sign for the former president’s reelection bid.

The recent attacks were among at least 300 cases of political violence identified by Reuters since Trump’s supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, including at least 51 incidents this year. With just two weeks to go before the Nov. 5 presidential election, the cases are part of the biggest andmost sustained increase in U.S. political violence since the 1970s.
Some of the violence has been reported widely, most notably two assassination attempts on Trump, a Republican. Other high-profile incidents include three shootings in recent weeks at a Democratic campaign office for Harris in Arizona.

Anyway, I ducked out of this thread once before and am doing so again, so feel free to reply but I won't be responding.

 

[MikeJhn]

Anyway, I ducked out of this thread once before and am doing so again, so feel free to reply but I won't be responding.

Until you come back again.