6 ms·
A quick read of the article confirms that a google subsidiary IS MAKING A WEBSITE. Trump got all the details wrong as usual, but the main idea is true. That ar
by tryptophan 7y ago
A quick read of the article confirms that a google subsidiary IS MAKING A WEBSITE. Trump got all the details wrong as usual, but the main idea is true.
That article just seems like its fishing for "trump bad" material.
- rovr138 7y agoNot a subsidiary of Google, a subsidiary of Alphabet.
- cavisne 7y agoWhy pretend there’s a difference?
- zlsa 7y agoBecause there is?
- allannienhuis 7y agoit's not a difference that matters in this context.
- servusMachina 7y agoSeems like it doesn't matter simply due to your political bias.
- allannienhuis 7y agoYou can invert that statement and it has just as much validity: "Seems like it matters simply due to your political bias"
- servusMachina 7y agoAbsolutely, but only one of those statements is correct in this context.
- outside1234 7y agoNobody in the real world understands Alphabet - they just say Google.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- ajross 7y agoUnder the circumstances, shouldn't we demanding that the executive branch do a bit more than getting the main idea correct? Isn't it newsworthy when the president, in probably the single most important press event of his administration, got "all the details wrong as usual"? Isn't that... "bad"? So why is it "fishing" to report "Trump bad" in this context? This is bad. It's BAD. We have a clearly incompetent administration trying to coordinate the response to the worse disease outbreak in 102 years. And shouldn't the media be able to say that when it's true?