[GT] US election - It's 2020, what could possibly go wrong?

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by troutman

Rachel and Brian Williams are first rate.

I will add Chris Hayes to that list as well.

Smart AF and humorous at times.

[Dion]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1348077057687875585

[Fuzz]

More unstable? Is that even possible?

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

No they won't. Almost no one pays over 50% income tax - only people living in California making large sums of money. And obviously no one pays 100% income tax, so no one will pay "all of it back". Furthermore, a lot of people who make large sums of money employ tax planners who take steps to reduce their taxable income as much as possible, so they might keep all of it.

If the strategy is to claw it back next year, treating it as income doesn't come close to being good enough. It needs to be subject to special rules to ensure that the higher your household income, the less you keep.

Simple solution to this. Make every dollar from Covid relief count as $2 or maybe even $3 of taxable income for taxation purposes.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

More unstable? Is that even possible?

Also why test it?

Let’s be honest- we have passed (by a country mile) the whole “is he stable” threshold for what should be acceptable for a president. Not that it matters, he’s gone in such short time anyway.

[Shin Pad]

I find that you can't just depend on one channel for all your news. Depending on the slant of the channel (right wing or left wing), it's seems that they conveniently leave out info or over report other info, to get their bias across. So, I go to both CNN and Fox, then I check out BBC, CBC, CTV, Global and the Globe and Mail. Between them all, you can get full story and the bias from all sides.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

More unstable? Is that even possible?

Nukes or war are the only scenarios I see it being used. Maybe, maybe if trump publicly encourages an insurrection at Biden’s inauguration.

Otherwise, zero chance IMO.

[Mathgod]

For opinion pieces I usually listen to a variety of outlets to get different perspectives, but at the top of that list is David Pakman, whose takes are nuanced and well-thought-out most of the time.

[Looch City]

Browsing the news and I just realized something....wtf ever happened to the Tik Tok ban? Trump was literally banned on TikTok before he could ban them??

Absolutely hilarious, he's such a failure and a loser.

[photon]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1348061830976065540

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by Looch City

Browsing the news and I just realized something....wtf ever happened to the Tik Tok ban? Trump was literally banned on TikTok before he could ban them??

Absolutely hilarious, he's such a failure and a loser.

This was one of my favorite headlines from a couple months ago.

TikTok says the Trump administration has forgotten about trying to ban it, would like to know what’s up

https://www.theverge.com/2020/11/10/...n-ban-deadline

[#-3]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

Simple solution to this. Make every dollar from Covid relief count as $2 or maybe even $3 of taxable income for taxation purposes.

If your intent on going after the universal programs this way, could you just lower the tax brackets for 1 year?

Not specific, just round numbers for ease;
Instead of 0% under $20K, do 0% under $17K.
Instead of 10% $20-$50k, do 10% $17-$47K
Instead of 15% $50-$100k, do 15% $47-$97K
......

Same effect, but simpler than adding a line to tax returns, and reminding people to claim it.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Shin Pad

I find that you can't just depend on one channel for all your news. Depending on the slant of the channel (right wing or left wing), it's seems that they conveniently leave out info or over report other info, to get their bias across. So, I go to both CNN and Fox, then I check out BBC, CBC, CTV, Global and the Globe and Mail. Between them all, you can get full story and the bias from all sides.

PBS is probably the most old-school example of journalistic integrity today.

https://www.pbs.org/about/producing-...ial-standards/

[bob-loblaw]

Forbes is taking a stand against companies that hire Trump's talking heads.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1348113390837899264

Here's a link to the post by the Forbes Chief Content Officer.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/randall...p-accountable/

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by MoneyGuy

I’ve had a few people tell me they hate CNN and it’s not to be trusted and I’m trying to figure out why. Some possible reasons....

-It’s biased - yes, with respect to Trump and the GOP, but while I may not excuse that bias in normal times I’ll give the anchors, reporters and commenters a big pass here because Trump is so obviously deranged and dangerous that he needs to be taken down.
-CNN shows the same footage over and over again (my wife’s complaint) - legit, I think, but footage such as the Capitol takeover is so important.

I like CNN and it’s my main source of information, with Daniel Dale and the many great reporters and anchors. I wish I could get it on my iPad for free; it’s not worth the $30-whatever a month for the very little I’d use (I get it from my cable provider).

CNN kind of pioneered the "news entertainment" genre. They brought in over-the-top production and sensationalized things in order to make the news interesting. I didn't see them as very biased when they started. They used to both cheer and pile on Bush and Clinton probably to the same degrees. They loved George Bush during Desert Shield.

But then FOX News came in, and since then, the networks seemed to have taken sides in order to carve out separate niches. I know I am biased and I do believe that CNN is better than FOX, but they are partly responsible for FOX, Newsmax, OAN, and so on.

I recall during the Atlanta unrest in the summer, Killer Mike spoke about Ted Turner and said that he loves him and is thankful for everything he has done for the city, but also said Karma is a bitch.

I kind of think of CNN like I do Wikipedia. It's a great place to start because of the volume of information it provides, and for the most part the information is correct, but you have to keep a questioning mindset at the same time.

I will also say that there is a big difference between the international and domestic reporting. Their international reporting is top notch IMO.

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by Shin Pad

I find that you can't just depend on one channel for all your news. Depending on the slant of the channel (right wing or left wing), it's seems that they conveniently leave out info or over report other info, to get their bias across. So, I go to both CNN and Fox, then I check out BBC, CBC, CTV, Global and the Globe and Mail. Between them all, you can get full story and the bias from all sides.

I agree with this 100%. I listen to the broadest spectrum I can. The critical issue is that understanding what's going on around you isn't just about understanding the facts of an issue, but understanding how different people are perceiving what's going on. You need to understand the many different realities that are generated in different communities if you want to understand how/why events matter and how people are going to respond. Every group buys into their own reality, but it's the interactions between those realities that shape outcomes.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Haha.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1347886612227772417

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by dammage79

CNN is amazing at one thing and one thing only, covering major breaking news. It eliminates all opinion and bias and just reports what they're seeing and hearing. And they're usually the first to get information during events as well. 9/11, it was CNN for me. The Japan earthquake, CNN. Pretty anything happening live as it happens, CNN. No other substitute IMO.

As far as anything else for news consumption like catching up on the day, cbc or ctv news Channel.

I don't watch news for opinion.

Fareed Zakaria is an awesome show I think. He’s great.

[FurnaceFace]

My complaint about CNN is the overuse of one term “Breaking News”.

BREAKING NEWS ...
we have more BREAKING NEWS when we return
BREAKING NEWS that we talked about hours ago

Sorry, but isn’t that the definition of news? It’s new information people should be aware of. BREAKING NEWS seems to have come along around the same time as FAKE NEWS. Hopefully both can die.

[Sluggo]

Cable news and older was already in a steep decline long before Trump. Ironically, Trump gave them a dead cat bounce over the past several years and if it calms down to Obama levels, news organizations will be folding faster than the DC police.

Thought of this after posting...

Much like Youtube killed off MTV. CNN, Fox, et al. will transform even more into sports commentary bordering on old men yelling at clouds or reality shlock like other cable networks have already become.