A very bad impeachment hearings day for Donald Trump

  • Thread starter Thread starter macska
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’ve often found that when you’ve lived in or even visited a country for a while you find all kinds of gross errors and misunderstandings in your home country’s newspaper reporting of that country.
 
Anonkun:
but my point still stands that if you are getting news from another country at least 75% of the “facts” being reported are merely liberal opinion masquerading as such.
You can of course assert this opinion. But it comes across as an attempt to belittle feedback of non-US folks that might not favour Mr Trump.
Your attempt to characterize the mainstream media in foreign countries as “non-US folks” is quaint in a devilishly addlepated sort of way. I live in Canada, those “non-US folks” up here should be belittled. They deserve belittlement.

Might not favour Mr Trump?” I had to guffaw.
 
Last edited:
Nope. It is about the truth.
If the inquiry had been about the truth both sides would have been allowed to call whomever they chose to testify. Those hearings were never about the truth; they were about creating a perception. Apparently they were not even successful at that. Opinions might have been reinforced, but very few were changed.
 
You said that so definitively, almost got me to forget it is an arbitrary brutum Fulmen assertion.
 
You said that so definitively, almost got me to forget it is an arbitrary brutum Fulmen assertion.
I said it because it seems pretty clear that it’s true. Oh darn.

A Gallup poll conducted the first two weeks of November – also before this week’s testimony – indicated that 45 percent of independent voters supported impeaching and removing the president – with 53 percent opposing the move. That’s a switch from October, when the previous Gallup survey put the split at 53-44 percent.

… another poll shows that a majority — that’s right: a majority — of black voters are dead set against impeachment.
 
If the inquiry had been about the truth both sides would have been allowed to call whomever they chose to testify
Yes, it was awful that Trump blocked Mulvaney, Pompeo, et al. from testifying
 
Opinions might have been reinforced, but very few were changed.
That’s so often the case in politics. If there is a way to see the facts in a light that supports one’s favourite “team”, we do it. We hate to admit our team (or “guy”) is rather less than we’d hoped.
 
A gallop poll?.
The FiveThirtyEight average for support among independents topped out at 47.7 percent in late October. It sank to 41 percent during the hearings. Last week’s Politico / Morning Consult poll found that voter opposition to the impeachment inquiry is at its highest point since it started asking the question: “Today, 47 percent of independents oppose the impeachment inquiry, compared to 37 percent who said the same one week ago.” (National Review)
 
They might have very sound reasons for their opinions. You seek to completely discount what they have to say because they dislike Trump? Perhaps they have a great reason. You seek to prevent consideration of that reason before evaluating the merits.
 
People don’t have unlimited time. Most of us have actual lives. To cite the same “republicans” who have been vocally opposed to Trump since he announced his candidacy is to not offer anything new. Provide some criticism from enthusiastic Trump supporters and perhaps it will gain more traction. People do not (nor should they) have so little going on in their lives that they can consider everything article thrown up here, and when distilling which ones to consider, anti-Trump articles from the National Review are always going to get tossed. Perhaps Krystol has a valid point now and then. But he has put himself in the position of being ignored, and that is his own fault.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top