Tombstone. The Epitaph and The Nugget.
Not good Ishy. Stick to the plan. “America” is meaningless.
You fronted the idea. I’m curious what you think.
- Profit
Your turn.
Excellent debate! Well done all around.
That is indeed the #1 goal.
In our current political climate, sowing dissension and melodrama makes for good profit, and Donald certainly drives that market to healthy profit margins. Is there ever a point when the press realizes it may be risking the goose as it collects those golden eggs? Or is this another example of short term thinking?
Ahhh… these people are like flatworms. You can cut them in two with decisive debate and you just have two new lib worms.
There is no “winning”, no concessions, no changing of opinions.
We do it to hone our debate skills . Not sure why you think I hurt myself but if I did it wouldn’t be the first time I cut myself while sharpening my debate blade.
I’m glad we agree it is not some more noble objective.
I think the division of the country always has and will continue to ensure there’s little danger of killing the goose. And if it ever is, they can simply re-format. You add in confirmation bias in both camps and the danger basically becomes non-existent.
The parties are purified. Each party has their media feeding them their pablum.
I also think the concept of fake news has destroyed the once viable alternative of the blogger or whatever they called it.
Short-term thinking is, unfortunately, what most business is all about. For the print media, it might be the best practice as well.
You just lost.
1 Like
You mean everyone will go on thinking what they were thinking before this thread was started?
No, I mean you just lost.
And had I won, what would have been the observable evidence of that “win”?
hmm interesting. can you show where he says:
“trade wars are easy to win”
“the media is evil”
“the media is the enemy of the people”
?
thanks. : )
Is it in the best interest of the nation for the POTUS to repeatedly call its press an “enemy of the people” for personal benefit? There’s never been a universal and enthusiastic confidence in the media, but it’s at an all time low now, across the political spectrum. For all its faults, is it a positive or a negative in a free society for its leader to denounce and denigrate the press? Is there the potential for disaster in creating conditions which might eventually undermine the 1st Amendment?
My post saying so.
1 Like
If you’re going to make a claim that we can declare someone “an enemy of the people” based on them behaving “against America’s best interests”, you better damn well have some objective way of showing that
Else we’re well on our way to the same types of tinpot governments that have dominated human history.
I’ll take the first: “When a country (USA) is losing many billions of dollars on trade with virtually every country it does business with, trade wars are good, and easy to win. Example, when we are down $100 billion with a certain country and they get cute, don’t trade anymore-we win big. It’s easy!”
Bolded for your convenience.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/969525362580484098
There is no “nation”, there are 12. For the alliance that supports him, of course there’s a benefit to discrediting the propaganda wing of your opponent - or “enemy” if you will. It’s absolutely essential to gaining and maintaining moral authority. Ted Koppel telling Hannity he’s “bad for America” for example.
Mine is a positive. Yours is a negative. For my America.
We do not remotely live in a “free society”.
What do you think is going to happen to make this a 1st Amendment issue?
Hyperbolic hysteria.
