4 ms·

> If there was any reason to believe that the authorities were "altering the narrative" or trying to hide information then I would agree with you Most of the U

> If there was any reason to believe that the authorities were "altering the narrative" or trying to hide information then I would agree with you Most of the US disagrees with you on that one. They have since the polls predicted Hilary would win in a landslide. The authorities and the press constantly lie about even the little things now. Why should we trust anything they have to say?

krapp 7y ago
Most of the US didn't even vote for Trump, so I doubt most of the US believes the Trump camp line that the press fabricated poll and vote data in order to "rig the election." An inability to predict the future is not evidence of fraud. And believing the press and authorities constantly lie about everything, even small details - things which they would have no practical reason to lie about - is going well past practical skepticism. You're not even accusing the media of getting details wrong here, or failing to properly research, but constant, pathological, willful malice. That level of extremist paranoia might be fine for T_D or 4chan, and it's uncomfortably common here, but most of the US actually doesn't agree with you in this case.
- ScottFree 7y ago
  You can try to make this about partisan politics all you want. It doesn't apply here. The polls are either right or they're wrong. And they were wrong. So massively wrong that Hillary supporters were blindsided on election day. That sort of thing shakes even the most steadfast authoritarian. edit: This cracks me up. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20688904 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20688904
  - krapp 7y ago
    You made it partisan here: >Most of the US disagrees with you on that one. They have since the polls predicted Hilary would win in a landslide. The implication, given the context of the rest of your comment and the subthread (that the media always lies and is covering up the truth about the Epstein incident,) is that the media falsified the election poll results. After all, it wouldn't be the first time election polls were wrong. That's been a thing since at least "Dewey Defeats Truman." You could have picked any number of incidents to illustrate media bias or the media getting something wrong, but you fixated on something directly out of the Trump playbook. >That sort of thing shakes even the most steadfast authoritarian. Who's an authoritarian? Do I hear a dog-whistle?
    - ScottFree 7y ago
      > You made it partisan here: No, I didn't, nor did I implicate anything near what you're suggesting. I'll thank you to stop putting words in my mouth. > Do I hear a dog-whistle? Thank you for reminding me why I stopped posting here.

krapp 7y ago

Most of the US didn't even vote for Trump, so I doubt most of the US believes the Trump camp line that the press fabricated poll and vote data in order to "rig the election." An inability to predict the future is not evidence of fraud. And believing the press and authorities constantly lie about everything, even small details - things which they would have no practical reason to lie about - is going well past practical skepticism. You're not even accusing the media of getting details wrong here, or failing to properly research, but constant, pathological, willful malice. That level of extremist paranoia might be fine for T_D or 4chan, and it's uncomfortably common here, but most of the US actually doesn't agree with you in this case.

ScottFree 7y ago
You can try to make this about partisan politics all you want. It doesn't apply here. The polls are either right or they're wrong. And they were wrong. So massively wrong that Hillary supporters were blindsided on election day. That sort of thing shakes even the most steadfast authoritarian. edit: This cracks me up. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20688904 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20688904
- krapp 7y ago
  You made it partisan here: >Most of the US disagrees with you on that one. They have since the polls predicted Hilary would win in a landslide. The implication, given the context of the rest of your comment and the subthread (that the media always lies and is covering up the truth about the Epstein incident,) is that the media falsified the election poll results. After all, it wouldn't be the first time election polls were wrong. That's been a thing since at least "Dewey Defeats Truman." You could have picked any number of incidents to illustrate media bias or the media getting something wrong, but you fixated on something directly out of the Trump playbook. >That sort of thing shakes even the most steadfast authoritarian. Who's an authoritarian? Do I hear a dog-whistle?
  - ScottFree 7y ago
    > You made it partisan here: No, I didn't, nor did I implicate anything near what you're suggesting. I'll thank you to stop putting words in my mouth. > Do I hear a dog-whistle? Thank you for reminding me why I stopped posting here.