McCain: Dictators 'get started by suppressing free press'

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sy_Noe
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
How many times do we have to keep going over this?

Yes the people spoke and 54% spoke against Donald Trump as the media more or less predicted the popular vote to be. And being wrong in a few states such as PA, MI, and WI out of 50 states, hardly constitutes being 100% wrong. But feel free to keep believing that. Democrats believed they had a lock on the EC too. Don’t get too overconfident with 1% wins in a few states. Pendulums swing.
I have to ask you. Who wins the ball game, the one who puts more points on the score board or the one who has more fans in the stands.?

The presidency is won on electoral college votes not popular vote. Senators, congressmen, governors are by popular vote within the individual state. Not so for election of the president.
 
Trump isn’t suppressing free press, he is simply calling them out when they run such biased and deceptive reporting.
The problem is that Trump now has free reign to call ANY critical reporting of him (even if it is 100% valid) “fake news.” That’s extremely dangerous.
 
I have to ask you. Who wins the ball game, the one who puts more points on the score board or the one who has more fans in the stands.?

The presidency is won on electoral college votes not popular vote. Senators, congressmen, governors are by popular vote within the individual state. Not so for election of the president.
I don’t disagree that Mr Trump won the Presidency by winning the EC. What I dispute is his claim that his win was the big win he thinks and keeps telling the American people that it was. He won 3 states that were deciding factors by only about 1%. It certainly was not the biggest since Reagan. It certainly was not the biggest for a Republican since Reagan. In fact since 1972, it was actually the 3rd smallest after GW Bush and Jimmy Carter. The Cubs won the 2016 WS. But it even took them extra innings in game 7 to eek out a 1-run victory on the scoreboard.

(No offense Cubs fans to the Cubs. They are truly a good team and should be in the NL mix again this yr) 🙂
 
The problem is that Trump now has free reign to call ANY critical reporting of him (even if it is 100% valid) “fake news.” That’s extremely dangerous.
people who stay informed and do their homework, know what is fake and what is real. The press is challenged right now. THEY are the ones suppressing the truth and caught in it up to their eyeballs.

Hillary won the Margaret Sanger award in 2009. Do you know who Margaret Sanger was? A quintessential racist and eugenicist. Look her up as well as those terms. Don’t take my word for her winning the award. Look it up and look up Margaret Sanger… And Hillary was delighted to get the award.

I sure didn’t hear anything about it during the campaign. Why not?

Can you imagine if Trump won the KKK award, what Hillary and the press would have done with that and him as a result? We wouldn’t have even had to have an election. It would be no contest.

Do you know what organization came from Margaret Sanger? Planned Parenthood. Obviously Hillary is a huge supporter of planned parenthood as well

Hillary and her party had no qualms calling her opponents racist as well as a whole laundry list of insults for those who disagreed with her and them. The press would have had a field day if Trump took the kkk award.

The press is highly selective with reporting the facts. THAT is suppression of truth
 
people who stay informed and do their homework, know what is fake and what is real.
Only if they work outside of their own bubble.
Hillary won the Margaret Sanger award in 2009. Do you know who Margaret Sanger was?
The unsavory aspects of Sanger’s background are widely known. On the other hand, the organization that she founded is viewed favorably by some 60% of Americans. Hard to imagine a story on this award as having legs. On the other hand, the KKK is seen very negatively by most Americans. This is why accepting an award from them would be newsworthy.

If you are looking for a press to promote your personal perspectives, then you are likely to be disappointed.
 
people who stay informed and do their homework, know what is fake and what is real. The press is challenged right now. THEY are the ones suppressing the truth and caught in it up to their eyeballs.

Hillary won the Margaret Sanger award in 2009. Do you know who Margaret Sanger was? A quintessential racist and eugenicist. Look her up as well as those terms. Don’t take my word for her winning the award. Look it up and look up Margaret Sanger… And Hillary was delighted to get the award.

I sure didn’t hear anything about it during the campaign. Why not?

Can you imagine if Trump won the KKK award, what Hillary and the press would have done with that and him as a result? We wouldn’t have even had to have an election. It would be no contest.

Do you know what organization came from Margaret Sanger? Planned Parenthood. Obviously Hillary is a huge supporter of planned parenthood as well

Hillary and her party had no qualms calling her opponents racist as well as a whole laundry list of insults for those who disagreed with her and them. The press would have had a field day if Trump took the kkk award.

The press is highly selective with reporting the facts. THAT is suppression of truth
Hillary this and Hillary that. Hillary is not the POTUS. I don’t know which is more tiresome. The devotees of Trump deflecting to Hillary or to Obama when they can’t offer any other defense of whom they follow. :yawn:
 
Only if they work outside of their own bubble.

The unsavory aspects of Sanger’s background are widely known. On the other hand, the organization that she founded is viewed favorably by some 60% of Americans. Hard to imagine a story on this award as having legs. On the other hand, the KKK is seen very negatively by most Americans. This is why accepting an award from them would be newsworthy.

If you are looking for a press to promote your personal perspectives, then you are likely to be disappointed.
Good points.
 
I don’t disagree that Mr Trump won the Presidency by winning the EC. What I dispute is his claim that his win was the big win he thinks and keeps telling the American people that it was. He won 3 states that were deciding factors by only about 1%. It certainly was not the biggest since Reagan. It certainly was not the biggest for a Republican since Reagan. In fact since 1972, it was actually the 3rd smallest after GW Bush and Jimmy Carter. The Cubs won the 2016 WS. But it even took them extra innings in game 7 to eek out a 1-run victory on the scoreboard.

(No offense Cubs fans to the Cubs. They are truly a good team and should be in the NL mix again this yr) 🙂
Point taken.

White Sox fans have the bragging rights. They won the WS in 2005 in four straight games. 🙂
 
The problem is that Trump now has free reign to call ANY critical reporting of him (even if it is 100% valid) “fake news.” That’s extremely dangerous.
He’s always had that freedom, as has every President before him, and every other citizen. The problem isn’t Trump calling out fake news, the problem is the news media reporting fake news. This didn’t start with Trump’s presidency. Some of us are old enough to remember the fake news story about George Bush’s National Guard service.
 
Hillary this and Hillary that. Hillary is not the POTUS. I don’t know which is more tiresome. The devotees of Trump deflecting to Hillary or to Obama when they can’t offer any other defense of whom they follow. :yawn:
I don’t remember calls of suppressing the press whenever Obama went on his tirades about talk radio and Fox News.
Selective outrage anyone?
 
The problem is that Trump now has free reign to call ANY critical reporting of him (even if it is 100% valid) “fake news.” That’s extremely dangerous.
Oh, really? Nah, I don’t think so.

It is just a matter of opinion, his and the media respectively. Perhaps, that is how this whole free press played out. He is free to call them out if he disagrees with them. Let’s the people decide.

It is only dangerous if he shuts down their networks or stop their license which I think he cannot do.
 
Yes, you have been talking about stuff, but when asked for specifics … crickets.
I gave the example of France and their laws silencing criticism of abortion, and Australia with laws like 18C targeting people like Archbishop Julian Porteous and those who speak out against same sex marriage or abortion being accused of ‘hate speech’ and targeted by the law. I can give more examples.

As for protestors inciting violence at Trump rallies.

2016 Donald Trump Chicago rally protest - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Donald_Trump_Chicago_rally_protest

Trump supporters did not shut down any Clinton rallies. And the cruel irony being when protestors shut down Trump’s rally, it was again blamed on Trump.

I hope this has helped

God Bless

Thank you for reading
Josh
 
I gave the example of France and their laws silencing criticism of abortion, and Australia with laws like 18C targeting people like Archbishop Julian Porteous and those who speak out against same sex marriage or abortion being accused of ‘hate speech’ and targeted by the law. I can give more examples.
Sorry to be come back to the topic of the thread, but we were talking about McCain’s comments about Trump - IOW the US.
As for protestors inciting violence at Trump rallies.
Wait a minute… no shifting sands…
Originally Posted by 2 RollinStoned
“We have to put a stop to the idea that it is a part of everybody’s civil rights to say whatever he pleases.” –Adolf Hitler
Sounds like the Hate Speech laws I have been talking about, the protests and riots at University campuses and exactly the sort of thing Clinton would incite.
While your link does refer to an anti-Trump protest at a university campus, it does not support the serious charge of incitement by Clinton. Assimilation of politicians to Hitler has, btw, been explicitly forbidden on this forum.
 
Selective outrage indeed.
There is a clear matter of proportion involved. When you refer to the press, not simply as wrong or partisan, but as ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE, a clear line has been crossed.

So yes the outrage is selective; it is applied when the POTUS makes outrageous remarks.
 
There is a clear matter of proportion involved. When you refer to the press, not simply as wrong or partisan, but as ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE, a clear line has been crossed.

So yes the outrage is selective; it is applied when the POTUS makes outrageous remarks.
You mean when he makes what YOU think are outrageous statements. I happen to agree wih the President’s assessment of the media. They have been the enemy of the American people for a long time pushing a liberal agenda while pretending to be objective.
 
You mean when he makes what YOU think are outrageous statements. I happen to agree wih the President’s assessment of the media. They have been the enemy of the American people for a long time pushing a liberal agenda while pretending to be objective.
Exactly. They have always pushed the liberal agenda. They are just upset the POTUS is republican and has the guts to call them out on their biased unfair reporting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top