Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Not Gish Gallop. Gish Gallop is for debate. At debate not time to respond to all point. Here all time you need to respond. So?For reference of those in the thread who might not understand the term, the "Gish Gallop" is when someone argues by putting forth a ridiculous number of claims in quick succession, usually without giving much of an argument about why any of them should be persuasive. If the other party tries to take on one point the "Gish Galloper" will usually not do much to defend it, but instead will suggest that all the other points collectively make so strong of argument that it doesn't matter if that individual point is weak.
It's a dishonest technique because the only way to deal with it is to conclusively dismantle every claim in the huge list (and the galloper will always demand that you provide more evidence in disproving his statements than he did in presenting them) which will usually take more time than the opponent has. Even if the opponent does manage to dismantle a good chunk of the claim, the galloper can simply spew forth another long list of weak arguments and claim that the weight of all of these are enough to prove his point.
The best way to deal with the strategy is to have both parties agree to focus on one issue, and make that the main topic of the discussion. If the galloper is allowed to select the topic of focus, he will presumably pick the strongest one. As such, if the galloper complains that all of his other points are stronger when his chosen argument is dismantled, the galloper will look either incompetent or dishonest, since it raises the question of why he didn't pick a stronger point if he knew that he had stronger points.
Not Gish Gallop. Gish Gallop is for debate. At debate not time to respond to all point. Here all time you need to respond. So?If this isn't a Gish Gallop then I've never seen one.
Maybe we could pick one piece of evidence from here that you feel is particularly strong and analyze it. Which would you suggest?
Birther Movement.
Say Nazi and KKK side have some "very fine people".
Anyone who has done media studies knows that 90% of what is reported in the media is opinion. Bias of facts is usually based on the personal views of the person who is doing the reporting. Editorials are purely the opinion of the writer and often has no relationships with fact. Anyone can write an editorial and not have to justify what they are saying because it is put forward as opinion. But the large proportion of readers will be led to think that the person who writes an editorial must know what he is talking about, when in fact, the person is giving the same opinionated views as their neighbor over the fence.Donald Tump has been a racist all his life
The first time the president’s name appeared on the front page of the New York Times, more than 40 years ago. “Major Landlord Accused of Antiblack Bias in City,” read the headline of the A1 piece on Oct. 16, 1973, which pointed out how Richard Nixon’s Department of Justice had sued the Trump family’s real estate company in federal court over alleged violations of the Fair Housing Act.
“The government contended that Trump Management had refused to rent or negotiate rentals ‘because of race and color,’” the Times revealed. “It also charged that the company had required different rental terms and conditions because of race and that it had misrepresented to blacks that apartments were not available.” (Trump later settled with the government without accepting responsibility.)
Over the next four decades, Trump burnished his reputation as a bigot: he was accused of ordering “all the black [employees] off the floor” of his Atlantic City casinos during his visits; claimed “laziness is a trait in blacks” and “not anything they can control”; requested Jews “in yarmulkes” replace his black accountants; told Bryan Gumbel that “a well-educated black has a tremendous advantage over a well-educated white in terms of the job market”; demanded the death penalty for a group of black and Latino teenagers accused of raping a jogger in Central Park (and, despite their later exoneration with the use of DNA evidence, has continued to insist they are guilty); suggested a Native American tribe “don’t look like Indians to me”; mocked Chinese and Japanese trade negotiators by doing an impression of them in broken English; described undocumented Mexican immigrants as “rapists”; compared Syrian refugees to “snakes”; defended two supporters who assaulted a homeless Latino man as “very passionate” people “who love this country”; pledged to ban a quarter of humanity from entering the United States; proposed a database to track American Muslims that he himself refused to distinguish from the Nazi registration of German Jews; implied Jewish donors “want to control” politicians and are all sly negotiators; heaped praise on the “amazing reputation” of conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, who has blamed America’s problems on a “Jewish mafia”; referred to a black supporter at a campaign rally as “my African-American”; suggested the grieving Muslim mother of a slain U.S. army officer “maybe … wasn’t allowed” to speak in public about her son; accused an American-born Hispanic judge of being “a Mexican”; retweeted anti-Semitic and anti-black memes, white supremacists, and even a quote from Benito Mussolini; kept a book of Hitler’s collected speeches next to his bed; declined to condemn both David Duke and the Ku Klux Klan; and spent five years leading a “birther” movementthat was bent on smearing and delegitimizing the first black president of the United States, who Trump also accused of being the founder of ISIS.
Donald Trump Has Been a Racist All His Life — And He Isn’t Going to Change After Charlottesville
Another accusation. Any evidence to discuss?
What is standard for racist? Birther Movement is racist to many. But what you require?While I agree it was somewhat ridiculous, in what way is this racist?
To my knowledge, Trump did not say this. He was saying that it wasn't just white supremacists who were protesting the removal of the monument, but others as well.
While I agree it was somewhat ridiculous, in what way is this racist?
To my knowledge, Trump did not say this. He was saying that it wasn't just white supremacists who were protesting the removal of the monument, but others as well.
While I agree it was somewhat ridiculous, in what way is this racist?
To my knowledge, Trump did not say this. He was saying that it wasn't just white supremacists who were protesting the removal of the monument, but others as well.
While I agree it was somewhat ridiculous, in what way is this racist?
To my knowledge, Trump did not say this. He was saying that it wasn't just white supremacists who were protesting the removal of the monument, but others as well.
Post #69 please.Anyone who has done media studies knows that 90% of what is reported in the media is opinion. Bias of facts is usually based on the personal views of the person who is doing the reporting. Editorials are purely the opinion of the writer and often has no relationships with fact. Anyone can write an editorial and not have to justify what they are saying because it is put forward as opinion. But the large proportion of readers will be led to think that the person who writes an editorial must know what he is talking about, when in fact, the person is giving the same opinionated views as their neighbor over the fence.
The bias of reporting and editorial depends on the political views of the top executives of the media organisation. If the top executives of a prominent Newspaper or television news network are politically opposed to Donald Trump, then content of their newspaper or television news reporting will be biased toward material that would Trump in a negative light, when the facts may reveal that there is quite another side of the story which has been ignored or suppressed. Of course, there is always political pressure from Washington on the chief executives of the media to report the way they want. They may say it is "for the good of the country" but in reality it is only for the "good" of their own political party and its policy to discredit any president or political leader who does not "toe their line". One example of this is a recent picture of Trump with his mother and father who are dressed in KKK robes. What does this suggest? That Trump is a KKK supporter? But that picture was either taken many years ago, or has been photoshopped to make it appear that way. The facts may reveal that Trump's parents may no longer be KKK supporters and that Trump never was. But that side of the story is suppressed to maintain the view that Trump's racist views disqualifies him from the role of President.
The point is that the only information you have is from the media and by all accounts it is biased against Trump, so I take most of it with a pinch of salt.Post #69 please.
Yes. Only way you can hear is media. So nothing ever true unless you want true. Make own reality.The point is that the only information you have is from the media and by all accounts it is biased against Trump, so I take most of it with a pinch of salt.
The point is that the only information you have is from the media and by all accounts it is biased against Trump, so I take most of it with a pinch of salt.
And where Trump's own words are quoted...??
Even a person's own words can be quoted and twisted out of their context to mean something different to what was intended. It's like quoting a Scripture out of context. The best way to interpret a verse of Scripture is to start 10 verses before and continue reading 10 verses after.And where Trump's own words are quoted...??
Anyone who has done media studies knows that 90% of what is reported in the media is opinion.
Especially them!Even direct quotes from Trump himself?
Go ahead and pick some of the quotes out of the linked articles and explain them in context. This should be entertaining.Even a person's own words can be quoted and twisted out of their context to mean something different to what was intended. It's like quoting a Scripture out of context.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?