Guys, I really hate these threads. Part of what gets me is I currently have three friends in this thread with different mindsets and the possibility that I can offend or upset them by having a differentiating opinion than they do upsets me. That being said
Nivro™,
screech,
disorder I love you all and will do so after this.
With that out of the way, let me say a few things that should be taken into consideration when doing these threads.
- Fact check, fact check, fact check.
- Post sources to back up your claim.
- Don't push yours or someone's opinion as fact.
- Name calling by both sides is way out of control.
Let's see what we have here...
We have a Daily Mail link, which is a tabloid newspaper from the United Kingdom, and who have a strong conservative bias and been proven to have a poor track record when it comes to fact-checking. And then to follow it up the article is written by Piers Morgan who is an editor for the Daily Mail, thus, by all means, makes this an editorial piece. Which by its very definition,
editorial literally means the opinion of the editor. From the surface, what this thread is making is a statement, but that statement is based on an opinion. Now before you say well there's statistics in that article being quoted, how can it be just an opinion? Well, let's see how it twisted a few things...
linkWithin minutes of President Donald Trump's first State of the Union speech, CBS News revealed their YouGov poll approval ratings on it.
Unsurprisingly, 97% of Republican speech watchers liked it.
More surprisingly, 72% of Independents liked it.
Staggeringly, 43% of Democrats liked it.
The meat of this article throws numbers out there, and the numbers it shows are cherry-picked and don't relay much. Its just one stat based off of an approximate 25 question poll and that one shows that nearly all Republicans that were surveyed liked the speech, nearly 3/4ths of Independents surveyed liked the speech, and less than half of Democrats surveyed liked the speech. This doesn't say much, it just shows that people with certain political beliefs and ideologies pretty much followed with what you can expect. These numbers don't add anything, especially to the thread which is supposed to be about Americans turning against Trump hating celebrities, these numbers show that Republicans like a Republican given speech. For reference,
here's a PDF of the poll showing the questions asked. When you look at the questions asked and responses, you can see there's a different range of numbers. I can say I largely enjoyed the Royal Rumble, doesn't mean I approve of everything that was done, there was a lot I didn't like, but as a whole I enjoyed it.
Following those stats in the article linked, it says:
"Overall, CBS reported that 75% of Americans approved of the speech.
For such a seriously divisive and polarising President, who is currently languishing with just 39% personal approval ratings, these were sensationally good results."
Mind you, it says approved of the speech and this shouldn't be seen that 75% of Americans approve of Trump, they approved of the speech, these are two vastly different things. And it even says right there:
75% approve of the speech
39% approve of Trump
Could this be the beginning of a new trend and see people change their mindsets? Sure. Could this also be one isolated incident? Sure.
The article then continues and says:
"Contrast this reaction with the instant and so tediously predictable blind rage spewed by the world's liberal celebrities on social media before, during and after the address.
From my own unofficial poll – i.e. my own eyes on Twitter – I'd say 99% of them were so furious at the speech they could barely think straight."
Piers specifically says and shows he's only using "liberal celebrities." This is bias, but nothing that should be surprising, we've already been shown that 43% of Democrats enjoyed the speech, should it be any surprise that celebrities who don't approve of Trump didn't enjoy the speech? And to tie this all in, how are "Americans are turning against Trump-hating celebrities and buying into the President’s American dream?" because according to Piers following his linking and listing of celebrity tweets, "For more evidence of this, look at Sunday night's Grammys that turned into a marathon political rally of epically dreary proportions. Ratings duly plunged 24% to an all-time low."
This is the big reveal? Americans are turning against Trump-hating celebrities because they didn't watch the Grammy Awards? And he says "plunged to an all-time low." All-time low what? Is it implying that it was the worst watched Grammy Awards? Seems it, but the worst watched episodes of the Grammy's were in 1975 & 1995. Ratings fluctuate and we shouldn't consider the ratings of a music award show to be the standard in measuring American politics. When was the previous low? In 2009 three weeks after Obama took office, what's the connection there? Nothing. All he has done is take two things involving celebrities and turn it into something it shouldn't be.
So what do we have? We have a very bias and misleading article being posted in a forum that's going to cause a lot of infighting and eventually get this thread locked, cool.
What's next? Speaking of the speech at hand, we could take everything he said and fact check it and see what has been proven false, proven true, and what kinda seems iffy. Again, because the speech was enjoyed doesn't make it good or truthful, like I said, I enjoyed the Rumble but there was a lot I didn't like, but I enjoyed it. Could I sit here and fact check it? Sure. Will I? Not here, it will fall on deaf ears and those who favor Trump will say everything I post is bias or unreliable like Slappy was doing in the election thread about a year back, even though I was careful to try and be as neutral as possible, the heart of the article wasn't being considered just automatically passed off because they didn't agree, much as I assume will happen again by others.
The next thing I want to talk about and hopefully shed light on is everyone in these threads doing the name calling and such. Both sides are so guilty of it that I choke on the irony of it every time. There's one thing I want to point out first in that, those that support and endorse Trump on this site and in general, you please, please, please, I beg you, please have to stop with the pointing out that liberals or non-Trump supporters here resort to name calling. The fact that Trump is by far a large culprit of name calling (Crooked Hillary, Little Rocket Man, Sloppy Steve, etc.) or
resorts to insulting on Twitter, is so thick with irony, but let me be clear, both sides do it, both sides need to stop. Conservatives, don't name call people who are name calling as a way to show they are name calling, you are stooping to their level. Liberals, Trump is president, accept it, use the saying "those who anger you control you" (or whichever form you know, the message is the same) and take the moral high ground, don't resort to name calling or insults, its cheap and easy, but it hurts your effort.
I assume you mean gremlin? Stop.
It may have been more of the disgusting display from the democratic party, mainly the grenlin Nancy Polosi.
Stop.
Really misinformed leftist idiots.
The first two people to start the name calling are in favor of Trump, stop. See above.
Another political thread ruined by the tolerant left. No wonder you lost...
Stop.
donald trump, retire bitch
Jay, really, please stop. They aren't coherent or eloquent, if I made a liberal-leaning thread based off of opinion like the last two threads here, the Conservatives will behave exactly the same as the Liberals do here, to say otherwise would be laughable. You seriously can't have one sentence in a two-sentence reply be that the right is good in these threads, then use the second sentence to insult the left.
Has anyone else noticed that right thinking participants in any political thread are coherent and eloquent, then the so called liberal/left pipe in and it’s all “ass” “fascist” “racist” blah blah blah!!! I can’t help but read their posts in a shrill high pitched squealing voice in my head, whilst imagining them sat at their desk in mummy’s near derelict crap hole house!
All of you stop. Learn to have decent civil debates without being smug or name calling. Educate yourselves and inform yourselves, but holy s**t stop what you guys are doing because it doesn't work.