tropo

1 hour ago, simple1 said:

What are the 'lies' with Twitter's fact check content of the two trump posts?

You can do some work too... state his facts and I'll counter them for you.

26 minutes ago, Tie Dye Samurai said:

Lets just examine that...why is fact checking so scary for the Trump supporters. If the fact checks are lies, they will be exposed...if the facts checks are true then Trump will be exposed...I mean we are just trying to shed light on the truth, right? At the end of the day the truth is what is important, correct? So what is wrong with fact checking...and if Trump does not like being fact checked, why shouldn't he delete his account and move on to more "accurate" platforms to distribute his message instead of trying to censor free speech? Freedom of speech surely allows for fact checking....right? 

No, wrong. The problem is that fact checking is not fact checking at all. It's a political activist with an agenda pretending to be a fact checker. I indicated who was responsible for the fact checking in a post above.

2 minutes ago, robblok said:

Politicians might lie but I never seen a president that lied as much as Trump and does as many U turns as Trump. Constantly lying shifting the blame even burning allies to keep himself safe. 

 

Trump really is the worst, I normally don't really care about American presidents one way or the other but the things this one says and does is so extreme and stupid that i formed an opinion about it.

 

Yes your right part of the problem is a two party system. I already said that could be a possible reason for voting for him even when they realize he is a liar and a cheat. 

I'm just having trouble with your first comment: "politician might lie".

The goal of any politician is to be popular and to win elections. I don't think they "might lie". I think it is a certainly.

Most countries struggle with a 2 party system. We have the same problems in Australia. We don't have much of a choice on election day.

3 minutes ago, Tie Dye Samurai said:

I was wondering...if Trump is not happy with Twitter....in the competitive market place that is social media platforms, why doesn't Trump just delete his Twitter account because he is obviously dissatisfied with them now and take his business and millions of followers elsewhere? Then POTUS would not have to suffer the slings and arrows of this indignity inflicted upon him by Twitter and their deranged leftist agenda of thinking for yourself. I mean how dare somebody choose to put ALTERNATE FACTS up for the world to see....I mean if the truth is out there, surely people can look at the fact check links and think for themselves....but at the end of the day, If The Donald is not happy, he should go to another social media provider for his information distribution needs. I am sure many many platforms would love to be the Official Media Presence of Donald Trump. Then he can tell them what to do, how to do it and when it needs to be done. Surely the fake news leftists deranged outlet of Twitter will whither and die on the vine (no pun intended), all tweets will forever and always be classified as fake news and Big Orange will have slayed yet another Enemy Of The People. Then he can get to work on eradicating the real enemy...Toronto and their newspaper.

 

"When you buy a TV, you don't buy Sony if you want RCA." - The Transvestite Hooker in Risky Business

 

 

Or stay with Twitter and have them discontinue adding politically biased fact-checks that are lies. That's the easiest way forward.

The person in charge of this so called "fact-checking", called "head of site integrity" is Joel Roths, an anti-Trump, political activist.

Let's explore some of his best work:

Roth also once referred to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell as "bag of farts" and donated to Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign in 2016.

On January 22, 2017 Roth tweeted: "The 'you are not the right kind of feminist' backlash to yesterday’s marches has begun. Did we learn nothing from this election?"

That same day, Roth also wrote to Twitter: "Yes, that person in the pink hat is clearly a bigger threat to your brand of feminism than ACTUAL NAZIS IN THE WHITE HOUSE."

Roth's anti-Trump posts resurfaced Wednesday and prompted many to question the Twitter employee's personal integrity.

In July 2017, Roth tweeted: "How does a personality-free bag of farts like Mitch McConnell actually win elections?"

A year before that he wrote: "I'm just saying, we fly over those states that voted for a racist tangerine for a reason."

In September 2016, Roth admitted he donated $100 "to Hillary for America" - adding in his tweet: "We can't f*** around anymore."

2 minutes ago, Opl said:

All Trump needs from his followers is to be constantly praised ( "Thank You Mr President", etc..)  , this is an insult to their intelligence - 

All presidents enjoy praise. It's an ego driven job. Even after their terms are over, they are concerned about their legacies. 

5 minutes ago, stevenl said:

His next sentence did change the meaning of his first sentence. But also see his reply, where he confirms your interpretation is correct.

No it did not change his opinion on Trump voters. There's no need for you to bat for Robblok as he has a high IQ and can easily defend himself.

1 minute ago, robblok said:

Yes that is exactly what I said, voting for a habitual liar is not a smart thing to do. Unless you disagree that voting for a habitual liar is a stupid thing to do. 

 

I know for a fact I am more intelligent then at least half the Americans. Given the fact that my IQ has been tested between 124 and 135 (8 different tests). Given that the average IQ is around a 100 so its a safe bet.

 

This however does not mean I am brighter then each and every Trump voter. You know how averages work. 

 

Point was more how could anyone vote for someone like Trump who lies constantly. I gave one reason for smart people to vote Trump and that was that if they thought it was better to have an mental midget of a president who lies as a habit then a democrat. 

 

It just blows my mind that people can still defend the liar. 

 

 

I don't think you're putting your touted IQ to good use.  

Americans, come election time, usually have the choice of two candidates. Most, if not all politicians lie. Either way, they will likely end up with someone that lies no matter who they vote for. Taking your suggestions into consideration, not voting at all would be the best option, lest one gets labelled as unintelligent by smart people like you with very high IQs.

2 minutes ago, stevenl said:

No, that's not what he said, you're omitting the 'hated the other side more'part. But still, you're proving his point.

 

He said, quote: "I think Trump voters are not really bright". Nothing that was said after that changes the meaning of this statement.

As for your last sentence, "but still, you're proving his point". Would you care to elaborate? Bear in mind I am not an American voter, which, if you'd be paying attention. you would have known.

40 minutes ago, The Barmbeker said:

You know, what billions of flies are eating, right?

Dosen't make it a good foodsource, though!

He is a pathological liar and a lot of other things nasty!

Get over it!

We are actually discussing a "fact check" on Trump's tweet.

It was not a "fact check", but an opinion and politically motivated.

Fact-checkers say there is no evidence that mail-in ballots are linked to voter fraud. This is a lie as there is evidence to back up the President's claim. It's a lie and political censorship.

1 hour ago, robblok said:

More people voted against him as for. Yes he won but can you call it a democracy when more people vote for someone  and you still lose. I think Trump voters are not really bright but then again maybe some of them voted for him only because they hated the other side more. But its one of the least intelligent presidents ever (and that says a lot if you include Bush Jr). 

 

 

So you're saying on a public forum that 46.09% of the American voting public, or 62.8 million Americans are "not really bright"... because that's exactly what you just said.

At least we know you think you're more intelligent than at least 62.8 million Americans LOL. Could you take a guess at what percentage of Democrat voters are bright according to the same criteria?

12 hours ago, stevenl said:

Topic at hand, quite a few bipartisan and Republican and even Trump investigations have shown Trump to be wrong.

 

Your second paragraph is nonsense on the virus, is nonsense on the Twitter statement and is totally over the top in the china comparison.

On the topic of nonsense - both your first and 2nd paragraph fit that description rather well, but there's no need to flame. If you don't agree with something, explain why you don't agree. 

6 hours ago, mikebike said:

Apparently you do not understand the first amendment.

Don't stop there. Explain why I don't, why you do and where I went wrong.  

39 minutes ago, Opl said:

What would Trump Presidency be without Twitter?

Is Twitter so big and important that it cannot be replaced?

3 hours ago, Tug said:

It’s about time!

Yes, what a great idea - bring on the censorship and let Twitter decide what are the facts.

4 hours ago, tribalfusion001 said:

They seem quite determined in HK and quite rightly so.

Fantastic. You can count the bodies until the borders are no more. Merely collateral damage in a country where life is very cheap.

It's easy to sit here and write about it, but your life won't be at risk... as you're merely and armchair commentator... and cheer squad of course.

1 minute ago, tribalfusion001 said:

If/when this bill goes through and Chinese army or police start shooting at Hong Kong protesters then things are going to escalate very quickly. Tiananmen Square protests are from a different age, but this social media world especially in HK are going to be difficult for the CCP to control. I think quite a few countries are ready for a trade war with China.

That's wishful thinking. I wonder what you would do if you were there with the guns pointed at you.

China will survive a trade war. It's the other countries that will suffer - Australia is a good case in point.

19 minutes ago, tribalfusion001 said:

Is the South China Sea also part of the PRC, plenty of flashpoints coming up for the CCP.

I don't believe the South China Sea island building and military bases are a flash point. They were declared illegal while Obama was still president. He conveniently ignored it. The Trump administration talked about it a few times, then dropped it. 

China is well and truly embedded there now and very comfortable. The Philippines extended their welcoming arms, and everyone is happy. They let the Philippine fishermen fish on what was technically their own territory and there shouldn't be any more problems. Who's going to challenge them now?

9 hours ago, Just1Voice said:

China will not stop until it has crushed HK beneath it's military boot heel. 

Yes, it's all over, but did anyone have any doubts?

I'm all for people standing up for their rights, but unfortunately, it won't work in China. Sometimes accepting defeat is the best option.