What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[LaCroix]

Then first you need to concede your original "far from the truth" post was dog poo. 

And there's nothing in my post that could be used as support for the claim they're biased, so unless "it" refers to something completely unrelated to our discussion, no, "it" does not mean they're biased.

I suspect we're using two different definitions of the word "bias."

also, I was never saying "the news is literally not telling the truth. it's literally reporting fake news." people don't actually believe the NYT is reporting literally fake news. they can still not trust it because it's reporting a viewpoint they don't buy. the way truth is presented and by whom has an impact, psychologically. I could say the same truth here and some people wouldn't believe it, but if another poster like minsky were to say it, then those same people would believe it.

[Admiral Yi]

I suspect we're using two different definitions of the word "bias."

also, I was never saying "the news is literally not telling the truth. it's literally reporting fake news." people don't actually believe the NYT is reporting literally fake news. they can still not trust it because it's reporting a viewpoint they don't buy. the way truth is presented and by whom has an impact, psychologically. I could say the same truth here and some people wouldn't believe it, but if another poster like minsky were to say it, then those same people would believe it.

Awesome.  So not literally far from the truth, but rather, what?  Figuratively far from the truth?

[LaCroix]

no, exaggeration/different intended meaning than you think/whatever you want. you're stuck on the words I said in one post. I've made like five posts now, all mostly getting at the same concept. write in your head my original post to be consistent with the follow-up posts

[Berkut]

Yi, you are a fucking hero.

[katmai]

Yi, you are a fucking hero.

well, that or a masochist.

[Admiral Yi]

no, exaggeration/different intended meaning than you think/whatever you want. you're stuck on the words I said in one post. I've made like five posts now, all mostly getting at the same concept. write in your head my original post to be consistent with the follow-up posts

If I'm going to replace your words with whatever words I want, what exactly is the point of reading your posts and responding to it?  I can do that by myself. Are you telling me not to pay any attention to your arguments?

[LaCroix]

no, exaggeration/different intended meaning than you think/whatever you want. you're stuck on the words I said in one post. I've made like five posts now, all mostly getting at the same concept. write in your head my original post to be consistent with the follow-up posts

If I'm going to replace your words with whatever words I want, what exactly is the point of reading your posts and responding to it?  I can do that by myself. Are you telling me not to pay any attention to your arguments?

no, I had an intended point. but, as what happens sometimes on this board, my point gets misconstrued because of focus on particular words I use. when we debate over the course of like six hours and you don't give me much clarification throughout the way on what you think I'm arguing, if it seems like we're not understanding something, then I can only go off so much

[grumbler]

yes, and what people referred to was part of jobs's mentality/complex/defense mechanism/whatever you want to call it of twisting reality and truly believing in his own made up version of the truth, if (for example) to temporarily to sell an idea via reality distortion effect. deep down, that wasn't anything different than him refusing to believe his daughter was actually his

Wow.  Talk about a "reality distortion field!"    I don't think that Apple products were really part of a plan to "temporarily sell an idea," and Lisa Jobs spent a lot of her childhood living with Steve Jobs.  It did take him nine years to acknowledge her, but that's nothing like Trump insisting that the National Park Service pictures lie when they show that fewer people were at his inauguration, or insisting that he saw thousands of Muslims celebrating in the streets of New York on 9/11 (even though no one else saw them), or... 

Jobs's "reality distortion field" made others share Job's often-seemingly-impossible visions, and thus achieve them.  Trump's reality distortion field is entirely internal, and only he is affected.

[LaCroix]

It did take him nine years to acknowledge her, but that's nothing like Trump insisting that the National Park Service pictures lie when they show that fewer people were at his inauguration, or insisting that he saw thousands of Muslims celebrating in the streets of New York on 9/11 (even though no one else saw them), or... 

Jobs's "reality distortion field" made others share Job's often-seemingly-impossible visions, and thus achieve them.  Trump's reality distortion field is entirely internal, and only he is affected.

the success of a mentality that created something like the reality distortion field doesn't impact what that mentality is. that jobs had something similar and it worked out doesn't mean the two of them aren't doing something similar.

[grumbler]

the success of a mentality that created something like the reality distortion field doesn't impact what that mentality is. that jobs had something similar and it worked out doesn't mean the two of them aren't doing something similar.

I ran this through my gibberish-English translator and it still came out gibberish.  Is it possible to get an English translation?

[Admiral Yi]

no, I had an intended point. but, as what happens sometimes on this board, my point gets misconstrued because of focus on particular words I use. when we debate over the course of like six hours and you don't give me much clarification throughout the way on what you think I'm arguing, if it seems like we're not understanding something, then I can only go off so much

If you write something other than what you really meant, that is not a case of anybody misconstruing anything.  That is a case of you not writing what you meant.

I know exactly what you were trying to say now.  You wanted to make a point about media bias.  Unfortunately you tried to make that point through an indefensible and ridiculous piece of polemic.

[Eddie Teach]

Grumbler is a Jobs fanboy on top of his Brady worship? Ugh.

[LaCroix]

disagree on indefensible, but that's a matter of opinion

[LaCroix]

If you write something other than what you really meant, that is not a case of anybody misconstruing anything.  That is a case of you not writing what you meant.

also, it's misconstruing once the other person understands what I'm trying to say but continues to stick to the words I used. I agree I could be more clear with the words I use, but I usually attempt to elaborate/clarify when asked.

[Admiral Yi]

disagree on indefensible, but that's a matter of opinion

Feel free to defend it.  So far you haven't tried.