The News as We Once Knew It Is Dead

[Legion]

No, but "Jeff Ronset Corp," who ever the hell they are, and why am I asking you don't know, produced it, and Yuri whoever he is, had no say on what Jeff decided to include, edit out, or frame, if you don't know who your sources are "copy and paste" you don't know their reliability, called common sense, try it sometime

Here's another one - no "Jeff Ronset":

[Flash]

So you say.

Post the links to these alleged "main stream (credible) news sources" you supposedly read that you claim exhibited no bias toward President Trump and - according to you - declined to treat the allegations as fact.

I'll understand if you can't, naturally.

I did not say "no bias." I said they did not report the campaign had colluded but only reported there was an investigation.

One source is my local Hearst newspaper, another is the Houston Chronicle, and the Washington Post.

If you have stories in which they said the president colluded please include a link (other than editorials).

[Legion]

One source is my local Hearst newspaper, another is the Houston Chronicle, and the Washington Post.

So you say.

If you have stories in which they said the president colluded please include a link.

You made the claim, it’s yours to defend. Another who doesn’t backup their statements, thanks.

[Flash]

You don't speak for others.

Have you seen the Podesta art collection?

Sorry, all reasonable, informed people know the pizzagate story was just wacko. They were supposedly in the basement of a building with no basement.

Do you mean Podeesta's emails with the "coded" messages?

[Legion]

Sorry, all reasonable, informed people know the pizzagate story was just wacko.

You don't get to make that determination for everyone else.

[jacksonsprat22]

If you get your news from television, you are not getting the news...

Agree.

[Doc Dutch]

Sorry, all reasonable, informed people know the pizzagate story was just wacko. They were supposedly in the basement of a building with no basement.

Do you mean Podeesta's emails with the "coded" messages?

You don't get to make that determination for everyone else.

Agreed. He can't make it for the whackos because they are insane. You, OTOH, are free to swallow the story right up to the root.

[Legion]

Agreed. He can't make it for the whackos because they are insane. You, OTOH, are free to swallow right up to the root.

He can't make it for for anyone but himself. Nor can you or I.

[Doc Dutch]

He can't make it for for anyone but himself. Nor can you or I.

The only person claiming he did is you.

[Doc Dutch]

There's no such thing as a "scientific" poll.

https://www.khanacademy.org/humaniti...c-opinion-data

Disagreed and your own link proves you wrong since it never says what you claim.

Here, try this lesson and see why you are wrong: https://www.khanacademy.org/partner-...tical-thinking

[Legion]

The only person claiming he did is you.

I doubt that. Anyone with a rudimentary grasp of the English language can read his post, in which he clearly seems to be speaking on behalf of "all reasonable, informed people", who apparently are the people he chooses to apply those attributes to.

Sorry, all reasonable, informed people know the pizzagate story was just wacko.

On a purely semantic level that statement is ridiculous.

He's entitled to his personal opinion, and I respect it. He doesn't get to speak for a class of unnamed individuals (defined by their agreement with his opinion, apparently) in a self-aggrandizing manner in order to congratulate himself.

[Legion]

Disagreed and your own link proves you wrong since it never says what you claim.

Here, try this lesson and see why you are wrong: https://www.khanacademy.org/partner-...tical-thinking

I don't recall stating that the link I provided "proved" anything. I made the resource available for those who may be interested in the subject of polling/public opinion surveys.

Thanks for the link. I'll look at it sometime.

IMO there cannot ne a "scientific" poll because it would be impossible to apply the scientific method to something so subjective as an opinion survey.

[Doc Dutch]

I doubt that. Anyone with a rudimentary grasp of the English language can read his post, in which he clearly seems to be speaking on behalf of "all reasonable, informed people", who apparently are the people he chooses to apply those attributes to.



On a purely semantic level that statement is ridiculous.

He's entitled to his personal opinion, and I respect it. He doesn't get to speak for a class of unnamed individuals (defined by their agreement with his opinion, apparently) in a self-aggrandizing manner in order to congratulate himself.

Soooooo if someone says "Sorry, all reasonable, informed people know 2 + 2 = 4" are you going to have another conniption saying they don't speak for everyone? WTF are you on, son?

Sorry, all reasonable, informed people know the pizzagate story was just wacko. They were supposedly in the basement of a building with no basement.

Do you mean Podeesta's emails with the "coded" messages?

[Legion]

Soooooo if someone says "Sorry, all reasonable, informed people know 2 + 2 = 4" are you going to have another conniption saying they don't speak for everyone? WTF are you on, son?

Move those goalposts!

[Doc Dutch]

I don't recall stating that the link I provided "proved" anything. I made the resource available for those who may be interested in the subject of polling/public opinion surveys.

Thanks for the link. I'll look at it sometime.

IMO there cannot ne a "scientific" poll because it would be impossible to apply the scientific method to something so subjective as an opinion survey.

Translation: I was shitting out smoke hoping people were as stupid as I am and didn't read it.

I know, son. Most people have you figured out. Do you ever wonder why not even the RWNJs tolerate you very much?