-->
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
October 21, 2017, 06:02:36 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
News: Endless Summer Quarterly
Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
+  The Smiley Smile Message Board
|-+  Non Smiley Smile Stuff
| |-+  The Sandbox
| | |-+  Politics: 2016 Lame Duck and 2017 New Administration
Pages: 1 ... 25 26 27 28 29 [30] 31 32   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Politics: 2016 Lame Duck and 2017 New Administration  (Read 42966 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Chocolate Shake Man
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2708


View Profile
« Reply #725 on: August 23, 2017, 07:38:35 PM »

I'm happy to engage with different points of view. But, to me, this makes more sense as a discussion, not just random points of view thrown around.

I also find it somewhat curious that you think this is an echo chamber of big govt love when, just a few posts above, I was arguing that an ideal society doesn't have a big government.
Logged
FatherOfTheMan Sr101
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2221


The Producer


View Profile
« Reply #726 on: August 23, 2017, 09:09:43 PM »

I suppose its more of an anti trump echo chamber, i worded my post badly
Logged

**   危険な空 - Dangerous Skies  **
https://mikeleroy.bandcamp.com/album/single
**MIKE LEROY MAKES IT SIMPLE**
https://mikeleroy.bandcamp.com/album/makes-it-simple
Chocolate Shake Man
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2708


View Profile
« Reply #727 on: August 24, 2017, 06:10:38 AM »

I suppose its more of an anti trump echo chamber, i worded my post badly

I was trying for weeks to get Sinister Smile to respond to a point but he appears to not be around.

Again, I'm quite happy to have political debate here but it's not a political discussion with multiple sides if one of the sides just throws in a pro-Trump message once every two weeks. And, for the record, I am flabbergasted that you are challenging the echo chamber by finding the bright side in the fact that "Trump hasn't passed a single bill of 10 he promised to pass in his first 100 days" despite Republicans controlling everything. To consider that as anything other than staggering incompetence is not providing an alternative perspective, it's just spinning for the sake of it.

It seems, though, as if Trump has moved away from those issues towards more politically-friendly topics, such as expanding wars.
Logged
Emily
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


View Profile
« Reply #728 on: August 28, 2017, 02:18:31 PM »

I agree that the main posters in this thread have in common a distaste for Trump, but that doesn't make it an echo chamber. The Captain, CSM and I all have expressed clear differences on multiple points.
Logged
SinisterSmile
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 103


View Profile
« Reply #729 on: August 31, 2017, 05:50:50 AM »

I suppose its more of an anti trump echo chamber, i worded my post badly

I was trying for weeks to get Sinister Smile to respond to a point but he appears to not be around.

Again, I'm quite happy to have political debate here but it's not a political discussion with multiple sides if one of the sides just throws in a pro-Trump message once every two weeks. And, for the record, I am flabbergasted that you are challenging the echo chamber by finding the bright side in the fact that "Trump hasn't passed a single bill of 10 he promised to pass in his first 100 days" despite Republicans controlling everything. To consider that as anything other than staggering incompetence is not providing an alternative perspective, it's just spinning for the sake of it.

It seems, though, as if Trump has moved away from those issues towards more politically-friendly topics, such as expanding wars.

My batsignal went off. What's good my friend?
Logged
the captain
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7133


View Profile
« Reply #730 on: August 31, 2017, 06:12:49 AM »

I agree that the main posters in this thread have in common a distaste for Trump, but that doesn't make it an echo chamber. The Captain, CSM and I all have expressed clear differences on multiple points.

If I agree, do I risk contributing to the echo chamber?  Grin
Logged

Demon-Fighting Genius, Patronizing Twaddler, Argumentative, Sanctimonious Prick, and Sensationalist Dullard, and Douche who (occasionally to rarely) puts songs here.

No interest in your assorted grudges and nonsense.
Chocolate Shake Man
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2708


View Profile
« Reply #731 on: August 31, 2017, 06:15:55 AM »

I suppose its more of an anti trump echo chamber, i worded my post badly

I was trying for weeks to get Sinister Smile to respond to a point but he appears to not be around.

Again, I'm quite happy to have political debate here but it's not a political discussion with multiple sides if one of the sides just throws in a pro-Trump message once every two weeks. And, for the record, I am flabbergasted that you are challenging the echo chamber by finding the bright side in the fact that "Trump hasn't passed a single bill of 10 he promised to pass in his first 100 days" despite Republicans controlling everything. To consider that as anything other than staggering incompetence is not providing an alternative perspective, it's just spinning for the sake of it.

It seems, though, as if Trump has moved away from those issues towards more politically-friendly topics, such as expanding wars.

My batsignal went off. What's good my friend?

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,24566.msg615645.html#msg615645
Logged
SinisterSmile
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 103


View Profile
« Reply #732 on: August 31, 2017, 06:20:46 AM »

I suppose its more of an anti trump echo chamber, i worded my post badly

I was trying for weeks to get Sinister Smile to respond to a point but he appears to not be around.

Again, I'm quite happy to have political debate here but it's not a political discussion with multiple sides if one of the sides just throws in a pro-Trump message once every two weeks. And, for the record, I am flabbergasted that you are challenging the echo chamber by finding the bright side in the fact that "Trump hasn't passed a single bill of 10 he promised to pass in his first 100 days" despite Republicans controlling everything. To consider that as anything other than staggering incompetence is not providing an alternative perspective, it's just spinning for the sake of it.

It seems, though, as if Trump has moved away from those issues towards more politically-friendly topics, such as expanding wars.

My batsignal went off. What's good my friend?

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,24566.msg615645.html#msg615645

I said what's 'good' my friend?
Logged
Chocolate Shake Man
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2708


View Profile
« Reply #733 on: August 31, 2017, 06:53:35 AM »

I suppose its more of an anti trump echo chamber, i worded my post badly

I was trying for weeks to get Sinister Smile to respond to a point but he appears to not be around.

Again, I'm quite happy to have political debate here but it's not a political discussion with multiple sides if one of the sides just throws in a pro-Trump message once every two weeks. And, for the record, I am flabbergasted that you are challenging the echo chamber by finding the bright side in the fact that "Trump hasn't passed a single bill of 10 he promised to pass in his first 100 days" despite Republicans controlling everything. To consider that as anything other than staggering incompetence is not providing an alternative perspective, it's just spinning for the sake of it.

It seems, though, as if Trump has moved away from those issues towards more politically-friendly topics, such as expanding wars.

My batsignal went off. What's good my friend?

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,24566.msg615645.html#msg615645

I said what's 'good' my friend?

I'm glad we had this exchange.
Logged
the captain
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7133


View Profile
« Reply #734 on: August 31, 2017, 07:22:13 AM »

Are we supposed to list everything good in the world? Long list.

Or everything good in politics at the moment? Short list.
Logged

Demon-Fighting Genius, Patronizing Twaddler, Argumentative, Sanctimonious Prick, and Sensationalist Dullard, and Douche who (occasionally to rarely) puts songs here.

No interest in your assorted grudges and nonsense.
SinisterSmile
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 103


View Profile
« Reply #735 on: August 31, 2017, 08:06:58 AM »

I suppose its more of an anti trump echo chamber, i worded my post badly

I was trying for weeks to get Sinister Smile to respond to a point but he appears to not be around.

Again, I'm quite happy to have political debate here but it's not a political discussion with multiple sides if one of the sides just throws in a pro-Trump message once every two weeks. And, for the record, I am flabbergasted that you are challenging the echo chamber by finding the bright side in the fact that "Trump hasn't passed a single bill of 10 he promised to pass in his first 100 days" despite Republicans controlling everything. To consider that as anything other than staggering incompetence is not providing an alternative perspective, it's just spinning for the sake of it.

It seems, though, as if Trump has moved away from those issues towards more politically-friendly topics, such as expanding wars.

My batsignal went off. What's good my friend?

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,24566.msg615645.html#msg615645

I said what's 'good' my friend?

I'm glad we had this exchange.

It's been too long
Logged
FatherOfTheMan Sr101
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2221


The Producer


View Profile
« Reply #736 on: September 01, 2017, 10:16:45 AM »

Finally ending DACA. Always thought it was a silly policy, why promote illegal immigration.
Logged

**   危険な空 - Dangerous Skies  **
https://mikeleroy.bandcamp.com/album/single
**MIKE LEROY MAKES IT SIMPLE**
https://mikeleroy.bandcamp.com/album/makes-it-simple
the captain
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7133


View Profile
« Reply #737 on: September 01, 2017, 10:35:43 AM »

Technically it wasn't promoting it, because that (illegal) immigration had already happened. The policy didn't carry forward to new arrivals.

I'm not advocating entirely open borders, and certainly agree that a state has the right (and to some extent, obligation) to protect its borders. But the people affected by DACA seem like a silly target, in that whatever costs they've had to America are most likely to be in the past, with their futures likely to be as contributors (based on the criteria for eligibility). If you're going to have stronger enforcement to keep our future, new arrivals, that can be more reasonably argued, since they are more likely to cost the country money in the short term. It's a legitimate argument to have. But to focus on these kids seems mostly just like a spiteful and political move to excite a base without having any particularly big effects or benefits.

It would be a political win for the president, though, among his base. I'll admit that. It's also a great example of why executive orders are pretty stupid. The amount of time and effort wasted on non-legislated directives that are made, unmade, made, and unmade for purely political reasons is absurd. I understand the frustration from presidents with legislatures not getting anything done, and I understand the political benefits to presidents. But that doesn't make it a huge waste of time, energy, and thus money.
« Last Edit: September 01, 2017, 10:44:06 AM by the captain » Logged

Demon-Fighting Genius, Patronizing Twaddler, Argumentative, Sanctimonious Prick, and Sensationalist Dullard, and Douche who (occasionally to rarely) puts songs here.

No interest in your assorted grudges and nonsense.
the captain
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7133


View Profile
« Reply #738 on: September 01, 2017, 10:57:23 AM »

Knowing there are several left-leaning people who participate in this forum, I'm curious to hear your impressions about AntiFa-type groups and their activities. Talk about them from whatever perspective you'd like: are they necessary? morally justified? just another crew of thugs? doing more harm than good (or good than harm)? getting too much hype? not being talked about enough? intellectually coherent?

(I'm happy to hear from the right-leaning people, as well. It's just a little less likely to be interesting, in that relatively strong opposition is almost a given from that perspective, whereas there are quite a few different opinions I've heard from the left. But by all means, weigh in.)
Logged

Demon-Fighting Genius, Patronizing Twaddler, Argumentative, Sanctimonious Prick, and Sensationalist Dullard, and Douche who (occasionally to rarely) puts songs here.

No interest in your assorted grudges and nonsense.
Chocolate Shake Man
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2708


View Profile
« Reply #739 on: September 01, 2017, 11:16:33 AM »

Finally ending DACA. Always thought it was a silly policy, why promote illegal immigration.

Because the thinking behind illegal immigration within the US typically amounts to this: we have the right to destroy somebody else's standard of living and people should not be allowed to escape from underneath our boot to come to an area not under threat of having their lives destroyed.

Consequently, anything that goes against that should be supported.
Logged
Chocolate Shake Man
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2708


View Profile
« Reply #740 on: September 01, 2017, 11:18:22 AM »

Knowing there are several left-leaning people who participate in this forum, I'm curious to hear your impressions about AntiFa-type groups and their activities. Talk about them from whatever perspective you'd like: are they necessary? morally justified? just another crew of thugs? doing more harm than good (or good than harm)? getting too much hype? not being talked about enough? intellectually coherent?

(I'm happy to hear from the right-leaning people, as well. It's just a little less likely to be interesting, in that relatively strong opposition is almost a given from that perspective, whereas there are quite a few different opinions I've heard from the left. But by all means, weigh in.)

I think it's a nuanced issue. I support the aspects that are performing effective counter-demonstrations. I don't find the "punching Nazis" mentality to be helpful.
Logged
FatherOfTheMan Sr101
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2221


The Producer


View Profile
« Reply #741 on: September 01, 2017, 11:19:16 AM »

Technically it wasn't promoting it, because that (illegal) immigration had already happened. The policy didn't carry forward to new arrivals.

I'm not advocating entirely open borders, and certainly agree that a state has the right (and to some extent, obligation) to protect its borders. But the people affected by DACA seem like a silly target, in that whatever costs they've had to America are most likely to be in the past, with their futures likely to be as contributors (based on the criteria for eligibility). If you're going to have stronger enforcement to keep our future, new arrivals, that can be more reasonably argued, since they are more likely to cost the country money in the short term. It's a legitimate argument to have. But to focus on these kids seems mostly just like a spiteful and political move to excite a base without having any particularly big effects or benefits.

It would be a political win for the president, though, among his base. I'll admit that. It's also a great example of why executive orders are pretty stupid. The amount of time and effort wasted on non-legislated directives that are made, unmade, made, and unmade for purely political reasons is absurd. I understand the frustration from presidents with legislatures not getting anything done, and I understand the political benefits to presidents. But that doesn't make it a huge waste of time, energy, and thus money.

For me personally, it isn't about the cost. It's about the principal and the safety issues. We have an immigration system to keep our country safe and circumventing that simply because you don't want to go through a long process (long because it needs to be) then you aren't acting in the best interest of your future nation.
Logged

**   危険な空 - Dangerous Skies  **
https://mikeleroy.bandcamp.com/album/single
**MIKE LEROY MAKES IT SIMPLE**
https://mikeleroy.bandcamp.com/album/makes-it-simple
FatherOfTheMan Sr101
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2221


The Producer


View Profile
« Reply #742 on: September 01, 2017, 11:22:25 AM »

Knowing there are several left-leaning people who participate in this forum, I'm curious to hear your impressions about AntiFa-type groups and their activities. Talk about them from whatever perspective you'd like: are they necessary? morally justified? just another crew of thugs? doing more harm than good (or good than harm)? getting too much hype? not being talked about enough? intellectually coherent?

(I'm happy to hear from the right-leaning people, as well. It's just a little less likely to be interesting, in that relatively strong opposition is almost a given from that perspective, whereas there are quite a few different opinions I've heard from the left. But by all means, weigh in.)

I think it's a nuanced issue. I support the aspects that are performing effective counter-demonstrations. I don't find the "punching Nazis" mentality to be helpful.

Do you consider these situations "effective counter-demonstration"(s)?
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-berkeley-far-left-protests-milo-20170830-story.html

(edited to fix the (s) )
« Last Edit: September 01, 2017, 11:23:18 AM by FatherOfTheMan Sr101 » Logged

**   危険な空 - Dangerous Skies  **
https://mikeleroy.bandcamp.com/album/single
**MIKE LEROY MAKES IT SIMPLE**
https://mikeleroy.bandcamp.com/album/makes-it-simple
SMiLE Brian
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7541



View Profile
« Reply #743 on: September 01, 2017, 11:26:26 AM »

Ending daca is just cold hearted, but what else do you expect from guy pandering to the alt-right... Roll Eyes
Logged

I don't see the point in punishing Brian's musical output solely because Mike wants to wow the President Elect with how long he can weeze "wheeeeeeen" into a microphone.- rab2591
the captain
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7133


View Profile
« Reply #744 on: September 01, 2017, 11:29:45 AM »

Technically it wasn't promoting it, because that (illegal) immigration had already happened. The policy didn't carry forward to new arrivals.

I'm not advocating entirely open borders, and certainly agree that a state has the right (and to some extent, obligation) to protect its borders. But the people affected by DACA seem like a silly target, in that whatever costs they've had to America are most likely to be in the past, with their futures likely to be as contributors (based on the criteria for eligibility). If you're going to have stronger enforcement to keep our future, new arrivals, that can be more reasonably argued, since they are more likely to cost the country money in the short term. It's a legitimate argument to have. But to focus on these kids seems mostly just like a spiteful and political move to excite a base without having any particularly big effects or benefits.

It would be a political win for the president, though, among his base. I'll admit that. It's also a great example of why executive orders are pretty stupid. The amount of time and effort wasted on non-legislated directives that are made, unmade, made, and unmade for purely political reasons is absurd. I understand the frustration from presidents with legislatures not getting anything done, and I understand the political benefits to presidents. But that doesn't make it a huge waste of time, energy, and thus money.

For me personally, it isn't about the cost. It's about the principal and the safety issues. We have an immigration system to keep our country safe and circumventing that simply because you don't want to go through a long process (long because it needs to be) then you aren't acting in the best interest of your future nation.

I understand that point of view, but again, that makes DACA a silly point of emphasis (other than maybe on principle). Safety issues are going to be minimal with these kids/young adults, presumably--no worse than American kids, anyway, as they've been vetted. Again, I think if it's about recent arrivals or not-yet-arrived immigrants, I think the argument makes more sense. This seems to be throwing out the baby with the bathwater to me. It's not the end of my world, by any means: not the hill I'd die on. But I can't imagine why it would be worth the right's time either, other than as an easy political victory because EOs are so (relatively) easy to undo and that base wants it.
Logged

Demon-Fighting Genius, Patronizing Twaddler, Argumentative, Sanctimonious Prick, and Sensationalist Dullard, and Douche who (occasionally to rarely) puts songs here.

No interest in your assorted grudges and nonsense.
Chocolate Shake Man
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2708


View Profile
« Reply #745 on: September 01, 2017, 11:31:31 AM »

Knowing there are several left-leaning people who participate in this forum, I'm curious to hear your impressions about AntiFa-type groups and their activities. Talk about them from whatever perspective you'd like: are they necessary? morally justified? just another crew of thugs? doing more harm than good (or good than harm)? getting too much hype? not being talked about enough? intellectually coherent?

(I'm happy to hear from the right-leaning people, as well. It's just a little less likely to be interesting, in that relatively strong opposition is almost a given from that perspective, whereas there are quite a few different opinions I've heard from the left. But by all means, weigh in.)

I think it's a nuanced issue. I support the aspects that are performing effective counter-demonstrations. I don't find the "punching Nazis" mentality to be helpful.

Do you consider these situations "effective counter-demonstration"(s)?
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-berkeley-far-left-protests-milo-20170830-story.html

(edited to fix the (s) )

No, I don't. But don't you think that I made that clear in the post you are responding to?
Logged
FatherOfTheMan Sr101
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2221


The Producer


View Profile
« Reply #746 on: September 01, 2017, 11:32:41 AM »

Knowing there are several left-leaning people who participate in this forum, I'm curious to hear your impressions about AntiFa-type groups and their activities. Talk about them from whatever perspective you'd like: are they necessary? morally justified? just another crew of thugs? doing more harm than good (or good than harm)? getting too much hype? not being talked about enough? intellectually coherent?

(I'm happy to hear from the right-leaning people, as well. It's just a little less likely to be interesting, in that relatively strong opposition is almost a given from that perspective, whereas there are quite a few different opinions I've heard from the left. But by all means, weigh in.)

I think it's a nuanced issue. I support the aspects that are performing effective counter-demonstrations. I don't find the "punching Nazis" mentality to be helpful.

Do you consider these situations "effective counter-demonstration"(s)?
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-berkeley-far-left-protests-milo-20170830-story.html

(edited to fix the (s) )

No, I don't. But don't you think that I made that clear in the post you are responding to?

This isn't about responding to violence, it's about silencing people they don't agree with.
Logged

**   危険な空 - Dangerous Skies  **
https://mikeleroy.bandcamp.com/album/single
**MIKE LEROY MAKES IT SIMPLE**
https://mikeleroy.bandcamp.com/album/makes-it-simple
Chocolate Shake Man
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2708


View Profile
« Reply #747 on: September 01, 2017, 11:37:31 AM »

Knowing there are several left-leaning people who participate in this forum, I'm curious to hear your impressions about AntiFa-type groups and their activities. Talk about them from whatever perspective you'd like: are they necessary? morally justified? just another crew of thugs? doing more harm than good (or good than harm)? getting too much hype? not being talked about enough? intellectually coherent?

(I'm happy to hear from the right-leaning people, as well. It's just a little less likely to be interesting, in that relatively strong opposition is almost a given from that perspective, whereas there are quite a few different opinions I've heard from the left. But by all means, weigh in.)

I think it's a nuanced issue. I support the aspects that are performing effective counter-demonstrations. I don't find the "punching Nazis" mentality to be helpful.

Do you consider these situations "effective counter-demonstration"(s)?
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-berkeley-far-left-protests-milo-20170830-story.html

(edited to fix the (s) )

No, I don't. But don't you think that I made that clear in the post you are responding to?

This isn't about responding to violence, it's about silencing people they don't agree with.

Fair enough. Yes, I don't agree with that tactic of Antifa either. I do think they are an important organization but I do have criticisms of some of their tactics.
Logged
the captain
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7133


View Profile
« Reply #748 on: September 01, 2017, 12:07:33 PM »

Technically it wasn't promoting it, because that (illegal) immigration had already happened. The policy didn't carry forward to new arrivals.

I'm not advocating entirely open borders, and certainly agree that a state has the right (and to some extent, obligation) to protect its borders. But the people affected by DACA seem like a silly target, in that whatever costs they've had to America are most likely to be in the past, with their futures likely to be as contributors (based on the criteria for eligibility). If you're going to have stronger enforcement to keep our future, new arrivals, that can be more reasonably argued, since they are more likely to cost the country money in the short term. It's a legitimate argument to have. But to focus on these kids seems mostly just like a spiteful and political move to excite a base without having any particularly big effects or benefits.

It would be a political win for the president, though, among his base. I'll admit that. It's also a great example of why executive orders are pretty stupid. The amount of time and effort wasted on non-legislated directives that are made, unmade, made, and unmade for purely political reasons is absurd. I understand the frustration from presidents with legislatures not getting anything done, and I understand the political benefits to presidents. But that doesn't make it a huge waste of time, energy, and thus money.

For me personally, it isn't about the cost. It's about the principal and the safety issues. We have an immigration system to keep our country safe and circumventing that simply because you don't want to go through a long process (long because it needs to be) then you aren't acting in the best interest of your future nation.

I understand that point of view, but again, that makes DACA a silly point of emphasis (other than maybe on principle). Safety issues are going to be minimal with these kids/young adults, presumably--no worse than American kids, anyway, as they've been vetted. Again, I think if it's about recent arrivals or not-yet-arrived immigrants, I think the argument makes more sense. This seems to be throwing out the baby with the bathwater to me. It's not the end of my world, by any means: not the hill I'd die on. But I can't imagine why it would be worth the right's time either, other than as an easy political victory because EOs are so (relatively) easy to undo and that base wants it.

By the way, it doesn't seem as cut and dry as the initial post on the topic makes it sound: the Washington Post has a story up right now that the president hasn't decided yet on what to do, and faces opposition within the House (including Speaker Ryan), the Senate (including Sen. Hatch), and his administration (including Gen. Kelly).
Logged

Demon-Fighting Genius, Patronizing Twaddler, Argumentative, Sanctimonious Prick, and Sensationalist Dullard, and Douche who (occasionally to rarely) puts songs here.

No interest in your assorted grudges and nonsense.
B.E.
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 261


View Profile
« Reply #749 on: September 02, 2017, 09:15:33 AM »

In other news, here's what I've been saying for 20 years, as a general pattern and for 1+ in the particular instance:

https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/33759251/2017-08_electionReport.pdf?sequence=3

^This link is broken.

Partisanship, Propaganda, and Disinformation: Online Media and the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election
https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/33759251/2017-08_electionReport_0.pdf?sequence=9

« Last Edit: September 02, 2017, 09:17:25 AM by B.E. » Logged
Pages: 1 ... 25 26 27 28 29 [30] 31 32   Go Up
Print
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines