[Morgoth]

Without soscial media we all would never have known each other, and that is a rather sad thought all in all. Except for Mat, I could live a long happy life not knowing that man exists.

[Mezla PigDog]

Obviously not saying the internet is a bad thing but there are a lot of people that don't have the first clue or interest about reading up on stuff. So they take the crap at face value and believe it.

I expect I've never read anything to make me change my opinion because I'm always right first time It's a curse.

[Macros]

The biggest problem with the internet and the social media side of it is peoole liking and sharing utter shite without reading it or checking if its remotely true. Then morons read it and believe it, provided it backs up their narrow mind views.
And Morgoth obviously

[Abyss]

I distinguish between Internet forums where an on topic discussion takes place, ie: this place, and social media in the twitter fb instagram etc sense where the exchanges are brief blurbs made for likes and retwits rather than to exchange views. I realize the generalization there and the exceptions, but on the point of how this US election campaign is playing out I think it's a valid distinction. Trump can tweet all the bullshit he likes but it doesn't save him when he's standing opposite Clinton for a debate.

What I find most interesting is the polarization this is leading to... Whatever percentage of the vote Trump gets when he loses in Nov essentially represents what percentage of the US he in all his racist misogynist xenophobic glory represents. Anyone who still votes for this man when all is said and done is truly saying something about themselves... I don't care how much anyone hates Clinton, the democrats, Mexicans, whatever... a vote for Trump says they are ok with fake walls, pussy-grabbing and tax evasion by the rich. The bigger the number, the scarier.

Also, this.

[HoosierDaddy]

I've never considered this forum to be "social media." It's a dedicated site to the Malazan books. Which requires someone to have at least read something.

Everything else is just what we do with it, but we all came here because we wanted to discuss books. Unlike random news site where people just go and shitpost for fun.

[worry]

Talking about books is socializing though. A book club is a social gathering, and a book forum is social media.

[Silencer]

Mezla PigDog, on 16 October 2016 - 12:59 PM, said:

Obviously not saying the internet is a bad thing but there are a lot of people that don't have the first clue or interest about reading up on stuff. So they take the crap at face value and believe it.

I expect I've never read anything to make me change my opinion because I'm always right first time It's a curse.

Heh, heard someone on a "documentary" last night state, with zero awareness "it's presented as historical fact so that's how I take it". Like, seriously, be a little fucking skeptical! XD

(yes, this "documentary" was Ancient Aliens, why do you ask? )

[worry]

For the record, the 2 you're talking about have been countered by a compulsive liar (http://www.politicus...erial-liar.html) and a random cousin's speculation (http://www.nbcnews.c...witness-n667311)

But that's only 2 out of 10: https://www.yahoo.co...-153559631.html

The People Mag journalist in particular has had 6 corroborators come forward, including coworkers, editors, and even a journalism professor she asked advice from: http://people.com/po...-named-sources/

[HoosierDaddy]

I Got Crabs, on 18 October 2016 - 09:32 PM, said:

Abyss, on 16 October 2016 - 04:59 PM, said:

I distinguish between Internet forums where an on topic discussion takes place, ie: this place, and social media in the twitter fb instagram etc sense where the exchanges are brief blurbs made for likes and retwits rather than to exchange views. I realize the generalization there and the exceptions, but on the point of how this US election campaign is playing out I think it's a valid distinction. Trump can tweet all the bullshit he likes but it doesn't save him when he's standing opposite Clinton for a debate.

What I find most interesting is the polarization this is leading to... Whatever percentage of the vote Trump gets when he loses in Nov essentially represents what percentage of the US he in all his racist misogynist xenophobic glory represents. Anyone who still votes for this man when all is said and done is truly saying something about themselves... I don't care how much anyone hates Clinton, the democrats, Mexicans, whatever... a vote for Trump says they are ok with fake walls, pussy-grabbing and tax evasion by the rich. The bigger the number, the scarier.

Also, this.

You are lumping all of us in with the very small % of who it's true of. The rest of us just don't want a proven crooked, scary, media owning She devil in the big chair. I'm not following news much in my state of withdrawal and pain and idk exactly how many women have come foward but the 2 I do know about are getting holes poked in their story by witnesses and family members. What he said was shitty and if there is audio and vid of him doing the act I'd burn him at the stake myself. The Stern tapes are laughable they actually made it on news but She owns them so no surprise. Trump is the only one that can keep Her out of the chair. Johnson can't, Stein can't. I was hoping Kaisch would do better. It's not labeled the most hated 2 canaditates going at each other in US history for nothing. I already wish 4 yrs have gone by already. To lump in everyone with above though no.

You do realize that "She devil" you refer to (and won't even name which serves zero purpose here) WILL be sitting in the Big Chair, right? What are you going to do?

You going to go to Mexico? They aren't exactly fond of Trump supporters therer.

You going to go to Canada? They are far more liberal than the US; you'd be terrified.

Frankly, any western country in the world will terrify you. I recommend the Philippines if you like crazy strong-men populists (which is obvious).

[worry]

The cousin thing is just more like, what the hell does he know? He's her cousin. I couldn't tell you 99% of the bad things that have happened to my cousins, including the closest ones. It's just weird that he's speaking on this topic at all. He's a non-entity. I did read about the invitation thing elsewhere though, and I'm not seeing it as pertinent either. She's not one of the people he sexually assaulted, she's one of the women he kissed out of nowhere. Women are very aware of (and in some cases, unfortunately, "used to") the fact that a sadly hefty proportion of men are skeevy. Gross incidents are common. It probably didn't click with her that it's part of his pattern of predatory behavior until the Access Hollywood audio.

[Silencer]

I Got Crabs, on 18 October 2016 - 09:32 PM, said:

Abyss, on 16 October 2016 - 04:59 PM, said:

I distinguish between Internet forums where an on topic discussion takes place, ie: this place, and social media in the twitter fb instagram etc sense where the exchanges are brief blurbs made for likes and retwits rather than to exchange views. I realize the generalization there and the exceptions, but on the point of how this US election campaign is playing out I think it's a valid distinction. Trump can tweet all the bullshit he likes but it doesn't save him when he's standing opposite Clinton for a debate.

What I find most interesting is the polarization this is leading to... Whatever percentage of the vote Trump gets when he loses in Nov essentially represents what percentage of the US he in all his racist misogynist xenophobic glory represents. Anyone who still votes for this man when all is said and done is truly saying something about themselves... I don't care how much anyone hates Clinton, the democrats, Mexicans, whatever... a vote for Trump says they are ok with fake walls, pussy-grabbing and tax evasion by the rich. The bigger the number, the scarier.

Also, this.

You are lumping all of us in with the very small % of who it's true of. The rest of us just don't want a proven crooked, scary, media owning She devil in the big chair.

So instead, you want a proven crooked, racist, sexist, fraudulent, corrupt, bullying, unstable, ego maniacal, corporate loving, rip-off artist and likely rapist in the chair? Yeah. Makes sense to me.

>.>

Its like wanting a babysitter, and taking the pedophile over the money launderer.

And I'm going to ignore the crap about you dismissing media outlets. Because you can just take that nonsense and go sit in the conspiracy corner with Nico. XD

[worry]

I don't think BK's vote is gonna turn the tide for either candidate. It's clearly a protest vote anyway, not an enthusiastic pro-Trump thing.

What's strange is the aversion to HRC in particular, like she's more corrupt than average. She just isn't. And anyway, since when does someone from Louisiana of all places have a strong aversion to "crooked" politicians?! You should be totally immune to that as a liability! It's like complaining "What do you mean my asbestos burger has lead in it?!"

[HoosierDaddy]

I Got Crabs, on 18 October 2016 - 10:33 PM, said:

At HD. I'm going to stay right where I am. Have I once said if SHE gets in I'm done with my country? Have I once ranted on like one of the crazy psychos that if SHE sits there we are all dead? Seriously where did that ramble come from lol , I don't believe so... Calling Her Her does have a purpose. It amuses me to do it and that's enough for me.

Also cause I express my not wanting this woman in office I'm sexists? I guess that's what strong man populist is supposed to mean? Never heard it before. Get outta here with (that's obvious) before I wet myself loln.

I never called you sexist. I said you demeaned them by not even using their name. You don't see us calling Trump "HIM", as if he's some other unknown source of danger.

You hate a candidate enough to depersonalize them, which is frankly scary. That is the first step to a very steep slope.

Saying you like strong-men is reflecting your current position.

It's pretty easy to explain these things, BK. You say them yourself.

I don't think you are evil, but I think you are unutterably and irrevocably biased against one of two parties, of which only one is actually qualified.

[Andorion]

I am reading the Reddit live thread about the 3rd debate, and Trump really does talk like a cartoon

They asked him about his economic plans not adding up and he said this:

Quote

I just left some high representatives of India. They're growing at 9%. China is 8%. We're growing at 1% and that's going down. We had an anemic jobs report, just before the election. It was so bad, I should win easily. The economy is stagnant. We've lost our jobs. We're not making anything anymore, relatively speaking. I've gotten to know so many people over the last year. They've cried when they see what's happened. Because of the bill her husband signed, that she blessed. NAFTA kicked in after they left, but boy did the American people suffer. Now she was TPP. She lied when she said she didn't call it the Gold Standard. And she lied.

Not a single answer in the bunch.

And India is at 7%.

This post has been edited by Andorion: 20 October 2016 - 01:53 AM

[Andorion]

He refused to say that he would accept the results of the election if he lost. That is scary.

He has not answered a single question that I have seen. He is deflecting everything.

He blames literally everything on Clinton, including stuff that she had no control over at all.

[Andorion]

How exactly is he he going to reduce debt, rebuild the military and implement huge tax cuts? Does he think money grows on trees? If you are going to rebuild domestic industry, you need to impose tariffs and taxes.

Sigh


To all the Americans here, best of luck for November.

[Andorion]

I Got Crabs, on 20 October 2016 - 02:43 AM, said:

Yep it's going to be nuts on the 8th watching it unfold. More viewers then Super Bowl Sunday prob. This is gonna be a Anti election. 2 most hated people in the country going for chair. I'm betting the vote count is going to be either bigger then any we have had or smaller. No way it's not on one of those ends.

Well I think that Republicans have been alienated recently with the sexual harassment issues, so I think you can expect a drop in voting from them, as they won't vote Trump, but won't want to vote Clinton either.

[worry]

I do think it was (by far?) the best of the four debates. It did get shouty a couple times, but it still seemed organized better and mostly on track. And Chris Wallace -- who got a lot of flack for his "I'm not a fact checker" attitude -- still did a solid job as a mostly hands-off moderator. Maybe that's cuz the questions were generally a lot better.

[worry]

That's relatively, mind you. Still no questions on poverty. Nothing on the environment. Nothing on social issues/civil rights/etc.

[EmperorMagus]

I just wish the moderators could just turn candidate's microphones off when required. Would solve all these immature interruptions and going over time.

Also, I didn't know who Chris Wallace was beforehand. I absolutely did not detect any bias in his moderation throughout and was quite surprised to see he was a Fox anchor.

Overall, it seems DT gets more infuriatingly stupid with every debate. At least the coke induced sniffles have ended though.