- Time
- Post link
If you have to post a fact check rebuttal that is way longer than the “opinion” piece, maybe don’t run the opinion piece in the first place.
This topic has been locked by a moderator.
WTF USA Today?
I mean, I guess they just wanted the ad revenue from having both the op-ed and the rebuttal. Or the Op-Ed process is looser than I thought. Still doesn’t sit right to have a sitting president write an op-ed to slam his political opponents.
USAToday tries to be non-partisan. They took lots of flak for an article suggesting Kabanaugh can’t be trusted around teen girls. Wouldn’t be surprised if running the editorial was done to try to make piece with done readers.
The blue elephant in the room.
If you have to post a fact check rebuttal that is way longer than the “opinion” piece, maybe don’t run the opinion piece in the first place.
I don’t see the objection to USAT including both. Running the president’s claims is simply reporting what an important, powerful figure is doing. Given their usual conservative slant (although not crazy-ass, like Fox), I’m actually impressed that they ran such a substantive rebuttal.
After reading Trump’s claims, I’m even more amazed anyone would vote for him. It should be totally laughable to anyone with even a modicum of intelligence. But a lot of Americans love him. We’re doomed… and not just by Trump. If Americans would elect Trump for president, imagine who/what else they’ll be voting for in the years to come.
"Close the blast doors!"
Puggo’s website | Rescuing Star Wars
People still buy USA Today? It’s the complimentary paper hotels and Amtrak stick under your door.
Where were you in '77?
People still buy USA Today? It’s the complimentary paper hotels and Amtrak stick under your door.
Hotels and Amtrak buy it!
The blue elephant in the room.
I don’t see the objection to USAT including both. Running the president’s claims is simply reporting what an important, powerful figure is doing.
No, that’s giving him another platform he doesn’t need to spew his lies. That’s different that reporting on what he’s doing.
After reading Trump’s claims, I’m even more amazed anyone would vote for him. It should be totally laughable to anyone with even a modicum of intelligence.
Have you read this thread?
In theory, if someone is saying idiotic things, the best defense is to just let the person spew their rubbish for everyone to see. For some reason, that approach doesn’t seem to be work against Trump. I acknowledge that it is possible that there is something fundamentally wrong with my brain, and in actuality he and his minions are correct and I just can’t see it.
"Close the blast doors!"
Puggo’s website | Rescuing Star Wars
He already has Twitter for that.
WTF USA Today?
I mean, I guess they just wanted the ad revenue from having both the op-ed and the rebuttal. Or the Op-Ed process is looser than I thought. Still doesn’t sit right to have a sitting president write an op-ed to slam his political opponents.
The fact check was posted almost a day and a half after the op-ed. Perfectly reasonable that FactCheck.org read the piece and asked to rebut (it was plenty of time for 3 people to write the rebuttal) rather than it being a coordinated release. Either way, I don’t see why it’s a problem. Presidential op-eds are nothing new.
If you have to post a fact check rebuttal that is way longer than the “opinion” piece, maybe don’t run the opinion piece in the first place.
Rebuttals are usually longer than the original piece because they often address one-off statements made in the original piece with lengthy responses.
I don’t see the objection to USAT including both. Running the president’s claims is simply reporting what an important, powerful figure is doing.
No, that’s giving him another platform he doesn’t need to spew his lies. That’s different that reporting on what he’s doing.
After reading Trump’s op-ed and the rebuttal, I don’t see how his lies are worse than any other politician’s. Seems to me that people base the lies they’ll accept on their opinion of the liar. If they like the liar and agree with their overall position, they’ll gladly accept the lie.
After reading Trump’s claims, I’m even more amazed anyone would vote for him. It should be totally laughable to anyone with even a modicum of intelligence.
Have you read this thread?
Is there anyone here who voted for or plans to vote for Trump? I wouldn’t blame them for keeping quiet given the vitriol they’d receive, but I don’t think one person has said they did or would.
What opinions expressed in this thread make you think that the authors are Trump supporters? So far, it appears that any idea that isn’t explicitly left-leaning qualifies one for the far-right label.
MTFBWY…A
Jay, as for that last part I think Frink is saying there are people with a modicum of intelligence who don’t only and always bemoan Trump as the worst thing since sliced bread. Thus you proved his point so to speak.
I applaud your wading in, as you rightly recognize some people find it fruitless to speak up.
The blue elephant in the room.
Jay, as for that last part I think Frink is saying there are people with a modicum of intelligence who don’t only and always bemoan Trump as the worst thing since sliced bread. Thus you proved his point so to speak.
That’s a more charitable interpretation than mine, but reasonable. Apologies if I misread.
MTFBWY…A
I suppose my statement only applies to relatively well-meaning people. An intelligent person could presumably choose to vote for Trump even if they believe that Trump is a harmful idiot, if he/she thought that regardless of that, Trump’s presence would result in a personal benefit to themself.
"Close the blast doors!"
Puggo’s website | Rescuing Star Wars
WTF USA Today?
I mean, I guess they just wanted the ad revenue from having both the op-ed and the rebuttal. Or the Op-Ed process is looser than I thought. Still doesn’t sit right to have a sitting president write an op-ed to slam his political opponents.
The fact check was posted almost a day and a half after the op-ed. Perfectly reasonable that FactCheck.org read the piece and asked to rebut (it was plenty of time for 3 people to write the rebuttal) rather than it being a coordinated release. Either way, I don’t see why it’s a problem. Presidential op-eds are nothing new.
If you have to post a fact check rebuttal that is way longer than the “opinion” piece, maybe don’t run the opinion piece in the first place.
Rebuttals are usually longer than the original piece because they often address one-off statements made in the original piece with lengthy responses.
True, I am sure there are plenty of examples in this thread where I have written a rebuttal that is longer than the original post.
I don’t see the objection to USAT including both. Running the president’s claims is simply reporting what an important, powerful figure is doing.
No, that’s giving him another platform he doesn’t need to spew his lies. That’s different that reporting on what he’s doing.
After reading Trump’s op-ed and the rebuttal, I don’t see how his lies are worse than any other politician’s. Seems to me that people base the lies they’ll accept on their opinion of the liar. If they like the liar and agree with their overall position, they’ll gladly accept the lie.
Perhaps, but Trump does lie, a lot.
After reading Trump’s claims, I’m even more amazed anyone would vote for him. It should be totally laughable to anyone with even a modicum of intelligence.
Have you read this thread?
Is there anyone here who voted for or plans to vote for Trump? I wouldn’t blame them for keeping quiet given the vitriol they’d receive, but I don’t think one person has said they did or would.
Most of those that would or did support Trump are long gone.
After reading Trump’s op-ed and the rebuttal, I don’t see how his lies are worse than any other politician’s. Seems to me that people base the lies they’ll accept on their opinion of the liar. If they like the liar and agree with their overall position, they’ll gladly accept the lie.
Perhaps, but Trump does lie, a lot.
Absolutely he does. It’s second nature to him. I think he places more value on results than honesty.
That’s really just another way of saying that he lies for what he perceives to be the greater good, which is why many politicians lie. They have what they think is a worthy goal and they stretch the truth (or tell outright lies) in order to achieve that goal. It’s only Trump’s delivery that makes him different.
MTFBWY…A
Jay said:
It’s only Trump’s delivery that makes him different.
Really?!
"Close the blast doors!"
Puggo’s website | Rescuing Star Wars
After reading Trump’s op-ed and the rebuttal, I don’t see how his lies are worse than any other politician’s. Seems to me that people base the lies they’ll accept on their opinion of the liar. If they like the liar and agree with their overall position, they’ll gladly accept the lie.
Perhaps, but Trump does lie, a lot.
Absolutely he does. It’s second nature to him. I think he places more value on results than honesty.
That’s really just another way of saying that he lies for what he perceives to be the greater good, which is why many politicians lie.
The problem is, what a politician might perceive to be the greater good, isn’t necessarily the greater good. Also I am not sure Trump cares for the greater good as much as cares about himself and $$$.
They have what they think is a worthy goal and they stretch the truth (or tell outright lies) in order to achieve that goal. It’s only Trump’s delivery that makes him different.
There is a lot more that makes him different from the average politician.
There is a lot more that makes him different from the average politician.
Jay said:
It’s only Trump’s delivery that makes him different.Really?!
Within the scope of how he uses rhetoric to get what he wants, yes. There are things outside his rhetoric that make him different, but within the context of lying for political gain, I don’t see how he’s all that different from what’s come before besides his chosen delivery.
He’s described in private conversations as exceedingly polite, even meek. Doesn’t fit at all with the portrayal of him being a monster and implies his public persona is what he feels it needs to be to accomplish his goals.
After reading Trump’s op-ed and the rebuttal, I don’t see how his lies are worse than any other politician’s. Seems to me that people base the lies they’ll accept on their opinion of the liar. If they like the liar and agree with their overall position, they’ll gladly accept the lie.
Perhaps, but Trump does lie, a lot.
Absolutely he does. It’s second nature to him. I think he places more value on results than honesty.
That’s really just another way of saying that he lies for what he perceives to be the greater good, which is why many politicians lie.
The problem is, what a politician might perceive to be the greater good, isn’t necessarily the greater good. Also I am not sure Trump cares for the greater good as much as cares about himself and $$$.
Agreed.
MTFBWY…A
So, in private he’s a Mr. Walker, but in front of a camera or rally crowd he’s a Mr. Wheeler? 😉
And if anybody gets that reference, I’ll be stunned.
Where were you in '77?
The only times I recall hearing people describe Trump as nice in person was when people met him for the first time. First impressions are unreliable. Don’t most long term acquaintances call him boorish, narcissistic, and idiotic?
There is a lot more that makes him different from the average politician.
Jay said:
It’s only Trump’s delivery that makes him different.Really?!
Within the scope of how he uses rhetoric to get what he wants, yes. There are things outside his rhetoric that make him different,
outside his rhetoric? what about on the bs he spews on twitter? I think that makes him different.
but within the context of lying for political gain, I don’t see how he’s all that different from what’s come before besides his chosen delivery.
How about how often he lies? How about how blatantly?
He’s described in private conversations as exceedingly polite, even meek. Doesn’t fit at all with the portrayal of him being a monster
He has only himself to blame for the portrayal of him being a monster.
and implies his public persona is what he feels it needs to be to accomplish his goals.
I don’t see how acting like an arrogant, smug, rude, chauvinistic, selfish jerk accomplishes anything.
The only times I recall hearing people describe Trump as nice in person was when people met him for the first time. First impressions are unreliable. Don’t most long term acquaintances call him boorish, narcissistic, and idiotic?
and what about the reports and rumors of him being unhinged behind the scenes, supposed coming from some within the administration?
SilverWook said:>
So, in private he’s a Mr. Walker, but in front of a camera or rally crowd he’s a Mr. Wheeler? 😉
So, what is wrong with mentioning the words “feminist agenda”? I think we have to agree that whether the agenda is good or bad, right or wrong, Feminists do have agenda. I think even feminists themselves would agree that they have an agenda. So why does using the words “feminist agenda” = “saying stupid shit”?
and here i thought you were going to drop it…
and here i thought you were going to drop it…
We can dream