• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

How fake news like CNN uses polls to engineer results.

EvMetro said:
It is as foolish to have faith in a news source as it is to dismiss it. We cannot know the real truth of our political landscape, and we are limited to triangulating the "most likely truth" from as news sources with as many partisan perspectives as possible. Consume them all, but believe none. Dismissing the content of an article, propaganda piece, or news story based purely on the fact that the source does not satisfy your confirmation bias is downright ignorant. I do not have faith in the Daily Kos or Salon, but I certainly do not dismiss any of their media simply because of where it came from. I readily consume Dailty Kos and Salon material, and then compare it to what I know from consuming Brietbart, Drudge, Info Wars, Chris Mathews, Rachael Maddow, and more. Consume them all, but believe none. Form your own opinion, but your opinion will be an ignorant one if you limit your media menu to what the lefty media presents. I am floored that you would dismiss the article in the OP, simply because it comes from a source that does not suit your confirmation bias. This kind of ignorance is why the lefty ship is sinking so fast.
Click to expand...

If it walks like a duck. It talks like a duck. Whenever I go and research these alternative media websites. The most I get out of such research just reaffirms my suspicions. That and I get a kick out of how some of these sites start:

In 2009, shortly after the blog was founded, news reports identified Daniel Ivandjiiski, a Bulgarian-born former hedge-fund analyst who was barred from the industry for insider trading by FINRA in 2008, as the founder of the site, and reported that "Durden" was a pseudonym for Ivandjiiski.[5][7][8][1] One contributor, who spoke to New York magazine after an interview was arranged by Ivandjiiski, said that "up to 40" people were permitted to post under the "Durden" name.[5] The website is registered in Bulgaria at the same address as that of Strogo Sekretno, a site run by Ivandjiiski's father, Krassimir Ivandjiiski.[9] Zero Hedge is registered under the name Georgi Georgiev, a business partner of Krassimir Ivandjiiski.[10]
Click to expand...

And then how renegade journalists that used to work for them now view them:

In April 2016, the authors writing as "Durden" on the website were reported by Bloomberg News to be Ivandjiiski, Tim Backshall (a credit derivatives strategist), and Colin Lokey. Lokey, the newest member revealed himself and the other two when he left the site.[1] Ivandjiiski confirmed that the three men "had been the only Tyler Durdens on the payroll" since Lokey joined the site in 2015.[1] Former Zero Hedge writer Colin Lokey said that he was pressured to frame issues in a way he felt was "disingenuous," summarizing its political stances as "Russia=good. Obama=idiot. Bashar al-Assad=benevolent leader. John Kerry=dunce. Vladimir Putin=greatest leader in the history of statecraft."[1] Zero Hedge founder Daniel Ivandjiiski, in response, said that Lokey could write "anything and everything he wanted directly without anyone writing over it."[1] On leaving, Lokey said: "I can't be a 24-hour cheerleader for Hezbollah, Moscow, Tehran, Beijing, and Trump anymore. It's wrong. Period. I know it gets you views now, but it will kill your brand over the long run. This isn't a revolution. It's a joke."[1]
Click to expand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_Hedge

Yes this information is from Wikipedia. Yes. That's how little research I had to do to confirm my suspicions.

Oftentimes your most disgruntled employees become the best whistle blowers :) I really get a kick out of it all.
 
Chomsky said:
Your source is total bull****, and their own embedded graph is evidence! :lamo


2017.01.17%20-%20Wapo%20-%20Polling%20Stats_0.JPG




View attachment 67212567


"39% call themselves independents, 32% identify as Democrats and 23% as Republicans, based on aggregated data from 2014."

Source: Pew Research: Party affiliation
Click to expand...

people aren't happy unless they get 60% of the poll for their group. I really honestly do believe that out of a random 1000 people 23% might be solid-Republicans a little more right wing than me. Policy wonks Neo Cons and the like. Our group has been dwindling since the Reagan era and we aren't attracting new voices. Just the Trump crazies and that's where my party is going in the future. I fear I won't have a platform where my major voting issues are front and center in 5-10 years.

Or maybe that's just me being a Republican in the tri-state area on the east coast. We are few and hard to come by and whenever I ask a Republican I know how they feel about such and such random Republican they don't like him/her. Be it Rubio (toss up, I know some who like him), Any of the Bush's, Paul Ryan, Romney, John Boehner, John McCain etc... It's rare to find people to talk to who actually don't spend the entire conversation insulting these individuals. So that's why I come here, and even on here that's so rare to see!
 
Last edited:
ModerateGOP said:
If it walks like a duck. It talks like a duck. Whenever I go and research these alternative media websites. The most I get out of such research just reaffirms my suspicions. That and I get a kick out of how some of these sites start:



And then how renegade journalists that used to work for them now view them:



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_Hedge

Yes this information is from Wikipedia. Yes. That's how little research I had to do to confirm my suspicions.

Oftentimes your most disgruntled employees become the best whistle blowers :) I really get a kick out of it all.
Click to expand...

You just stick with the news that satisfies your confirmation bias then.
 
EvMetro said:
You just stick with the news that satisfies your confirmation bias then.
Click to expand...

My bias against these sorts of sites are that they are bias and misleading! So Yeah. The fact that you still don't seem to understand this, proves my point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom