YOU GOT SOME PROOF? Actual Proof? like a article that is not twitter or your own mouth?
-
Friendly reminder: The politics section is a place where a lot of differing opinions are raised. You may not like what you read here but it is someone's opinion. As long as the debate is respectful you are free to debate freely. Also, the views and opinions expressed by forum members may not necessarily reflect those of GBAtemp. Messages that the staff consider offensive or inflammatory may be removed in line with existing forum terms and conditions.
Joe Biden Wins - Becomes 46th president of the United States
- Thread starter yusuo
- Start date
- Views 435,596
- Replies 7,444
- Likes 45
- Status
....oh...I think you dropped your tin hat... Hurry before the MLB I starts spying on you
....oh...I think you dropped your tin hat... Hurry before the MLB I starts spying on you
Heh, are ad hominems all you got?
oh no its starting the Cannibals are eating Each other..That MAGA for you.. and don't know how to post a twitter link.
Pray to your God like the cyclops did in the Odyssey when his eye got stabbed out, and Odysseus' lie that his name was Nobody led to his buddies not coming to help him! XD
.. A) you either lost your mind. B) you have been so embarrassed that you deflecting..
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2015
- Messages
- 10,199
- Trophies
- 1
- Location
- Glasgow
- Website
- www.rockstarnorth.com
- XP
- 16,177
- Country
That was just the oddessy quote though, sure the other comments she/he made would deserve that treatment, but that was just a gameing quote,
Because it would have created a media frenzy during the elections, that would have overturned these elections, potantially, based on nothing - but family affiliation. To be exact - rumors on the importance of that affiliation.
It would have overloaded peoples 'decisions' with at that point - highly emotional fluff.
But at the same time, the voluntary censorship during the election, has to be 'overturned' at a later stage with people looking into the matter, otherwise the media system would not work. (Should be independent, should be investigative...)
If you remember the thread at the time, some of us had a debate on the question if facebook should be allowed to censor the source out of distribution. And the answer is - probably yes, if it is not relevant to the election in a direct sense -
but would be in a loaded story sense. Essentially where people would 'feel' this is wrong, and vote based on that feeling, and family association.
I know that you'd probably want exactly that - but its not how democracy is supposed to work. You vote for the guy. Not his son, not their business affiliations, not their drug using past, and not them selling their name around for 'access' to their father.
Which is disputed, btw. If the meeting took place, or not. It probably did. That doesnt mean that a sweetheart deal came out of it. And it especially doesnt mean that a sweetheart deal came out of it, that 'will hurt america'.
The logic roughly goes as follows: All the 'country X took over our country, by collusion and blackmail' accusations are generally overblown. This is not how this usually works. Simple reason, if you are Trump (lets take him as an example, but it shouldnt matter - this is regardless of the person in office), and you have children to feed - the 'direct access to the decision structure' becomes instantly more valuable for people in the local business circles, than in the non domestic ones. Its merely a factor of, there would be so many 'US interests' (which is international globalist interests) willing to pay just for access alone, that any money a foreign interest would allocate to bribe a person would become insignificant in return. (There is also high risk related to bribing... And the outcome isnt optimal. You want 'real partnerships' preferably. Those last longer.)
Even when theoreticized as a foreign interest play those that are/may be aiming at that form of gaining influence, usually are low funded, high risk, high reward influence deals. It simply doesnt pay to bet on one person. It pays more to create networks. F.e.
At the same time, media has to remind 'powerstructures' that influence peddling is not ok, that they will still take pride in finding those cases and exposing them.
-
Read up on Vladislav Surkov a little. Even though he is russian, and I dont exactly want to stir up all those tropes again - on the political strategy level its pretty much common at this point to 'play both sides' or just assume that perception is reality.
It would be far too easy to compromise lets say - the son of a future leader of the free world, and then leak incrementing information exactly one and a half weeks before the election, and thus highjack the democratic deliberation process, using highly emotional content - including rumors.
Thats why media decides when to publish a story.
The question to ask is - will it 'endanger the decision structures in my country - if Bidens son got pampered by foreign Industry moguls?' and the likely answer to that is no.
Regardless of how much you scream corruption blackmail - in reality, you can just ignore the blackmail (if done, it would hamper potential relations with a country for quite a long while - especially if the potential became public (like in the Hunter Biden case)) - hence it is always better to try to be buddy buddy with - especially important countries. And in the 'bribes for Hunter' regard - there is much more bribe money left within US moneyed interests to flush out all foreign attempts. And for a person in power it pays much more to cosy up with them, because it gains you a structural advantage in your own country (your friends will be very impressed...) that can birth dynasties, and last for years.
There is never really the danger for the US as a system to be 'bought out' by russia or china.
But there is a very real danger, of being able to release 'highly emotional 'amoral' content' one and a half weeks before an election to manipulate the outcome.
You have to mitigate this. Which is why media can and will delay certain stories. But maybe report on them - even in depth - later. Its just - the timing. The issue cant be 'unrolled' in one and a half weeks. Correct information can not spread throughout your public in one and a half weeks, ... which means, you could manipulate the popolus with the 'emotionality' of content.
The democratic decision process depends on people informing themselves, and then making a decision for what they believe will be best in their lives. If you try to cancel that out with "childmolestor" or "china puppet" - you are circumventing the intended process, if you can do that targeted - thats manipulation.
(Would only work with high emotional content, that would really rile up the public.)
-
Oh, btw - what facebook did there (temporary censorship), might come back into play in a big way in the future again. The EU currently talkes about giving social media companies above 45mio users "gatekeeper" responsibilities again. So they would make them responsible for what is spread on their networks. And I'm not sure I'd oppose that.
The entire notion that - those were just technical entities, that should be free of any responsibility, and 'impartial' on everything, was just not viable.
People need the gatekeeper function. They have no ability to differenciate between important, and sensationalistic (in mass), so its time, that it comes back. Make the decisions transparent - but dont say that they arent needed.
src for the last part: https://www.dw.com/en/eu-unveils-landmark-law-curbing-power-of-tech-giants/a-55939862
Educating people, to become better consumers of news, simply doesnt work to the level where you would be able to handle the emotional impact, of a 'Hunter bought of by foreign interests' story, if seeded one and a half weeks before elections.
Last edited by notimp,
Except that Trump was well on his way to winning either way until things conveniently "stopped" in the middle of the night, and suddenly, a bunch of votes all came in for Biden! And let's not forget the workers trying to keep poll watchers out and cover the windows to buildings, either!
Almost like they got something to hide...
Becuase of mail in voters! There come in slowely, and are some of the last vote to count, so, thats why a biden wave came, because of mail in ballots takeing longer to see and come! Jesus, thats one thing almost everyone knows about!
Trends in vote counting change all the time. Not presidents that were ahead in the first half of the election count, but not during the second half existed in the past.
The narrative was that 70% of the votes in state were counted at one point and Trump was ahead by 'several points' and that that then flipped, and that that 'never happens'. But thats not an argument you hear in democratic elections. You count all the votes.You dont claim you won the trend, and thereby you have won the election.
(The other way around - its possible. You can claim, that you won the election and thereby influence the trend (in reporting at least, or the outcome in the primaries.)
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- No one is chatting at the moment.
