5 ms·

Worth a read for explanation as to why: https://rb.gy/81ygny https://rb.gy/81ygny

PaulDavisThe1st 6y ago
this is a link to the wikipedia page on "Trump Derangement Syndrome", and contains little, if any, "explanation as to why". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_derangement_syndrome https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_derangement_syndrome
- kyle_martin1 6y ago
  Reading too much negative anything is bad for the psyche. It just so happens that the MSM is full-on TDS and they can't seem to let go. Trump is the blackhole for MSM, everything is somehow connected to "Orange Man Bad". Moreover, the Washington Post reported that 90% of Trump's coverage is negative [1]. Do you know anyone that is 90% terrible? I doubt it. Taking a step back from one's political views, which is hard for a lot of people, it becomes obvious that there's little honest and unbiased reporting going on within MSM. Sure it's fine to read information with a particular viewpoint (be it conservative or liberal), as long as the reader is made aware that the "facts" are framed from a particular viewpoint. Otherwise it's just brainwashing and intellectually dishonest. I think any rational person can get behind this sort of "zero-trust framework". [1] https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jan/15/a-broadcast-tradition-90-of-trump-coverage-remains/ https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jan/15/a-broadcast...
  - RonaldRaygun 6y ago
    Very strange that an unusually terrible politician would have an unusual number of negative articles written about him, isn't it? Clearly this is bias in action. Many people don't realize that everyone has exactly the same moral standing, and that any indication to the contrary is not to be trusted. Thank goodness we have the catchphrases "Orange Man Bad" and "Trump Derangement Syndrome" to safely allow us to ignore any and all criticism of the president. This certainly helps assuage any cognitive dissonance, which as we all know is a leftist plot. Do make sure to read this extremely informative article from the eminently neutral Washington Times (here misidentified as the Washington Post, in what was surely an honest mistake) and while doing so keep in mind, that all politicians have a god-given right to exactly 50% positive coverage. This is as true for Trump as it is for Maduro, who as you know we laud precisely as much as we denigrate. Just remember, anyone telling you that Donald Trump is going to reject any non-landslide loss and claim tens of millions of fraudulent votes without a shred of evidence, merely because he's told us this with his mouth, is clearly suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome, their brain fried by a surfeit of orangeness.
    - guscost 6y ago
      You have part of a point. But then you also go into this fantasy where most criticism of Trump is the sober assessment of dispassionate intellectuals with no conflicts of interest, rather than plain old opposition PR funded by the people whose power he threatens. You’re not seeing the whole picture by a long shot.
      - RonaldRaygun 6y ago
        > But then you also go into this fantasy where most criticism of Trump is the sober assessment of dispassionate intellectuals with no conflicts of interest I used sarcasm to make a point, yes. Here, you have claimed I've said something completely outside of the content of my post. I base my criticism of Donald Trump solely on his actions and his words. They are indelible, and a clear-eyed person needs nothing beyond them to understand who his is and what he represents.
- wwwwwwwww 6y ago
  And they placed a photo of Trump shaking hands with Putin at the top of the article. I wonder why.
  - Rebelgecko 6y ago
    If you read the caption, it's because that the event being photographed led to Trump's first mention of the phrase

this is a link to the wikipedia page on "Trump Derangement Syndrome", and contains little, if any, "explanation as to why". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_derangement_syndrome https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_derangement_syndrome

kyle_martin1 6y ago
Reading too much negative anything is bad for the psyche. It just so happens that the MSM is full-on TDS and they can't seem to let go. Trump is the blackhole for MSM, everything is somehow connected to "Orange Man Bad". Moreover, the Washington Post reported that 90% of Trump's coverage is negative [1]. Do you know anyone that is 90% terrible? I doubt it. Taking a step back from one's political views, which is hard for a lot of people, it becomes obvious that there's little honest and unbiased reporting going on within MSM. Sure it's fine to read information with a particular viewpoint (be it conservative or liberal), as long as the reader is made aware that the "facts" are framed from a particular viewpoint. Otherwise it's just brainwashing and intellectually dishonest. I think any rational person can get behind this sort of "zero-trust framework". [1] https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jan/15/a-broadcast-tradition-90-of-trump-coverage-remains/ https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jan/15/a-broadcast...
- RonaldRaygun 6y ago
  Very strange that an unusually terrible politician would have an unusual number of negative articles written about him, isn't it? Clearly this is bias in action. Many people don't realize that everyone has exactly the same moral standing, and that any indication to the contrary is not to be trusted. Thank goodness we have the catchphrases "Orange Man Bad" and "Trump Derangement Syndrome" to safely allow us to ignore any and all criticism of the president. This certainly helps assuage any cognitive dissonance, which as we all know is a leftist plot. Do make sure to read this extremely informative article from the eminently neutral Washington Times (here misidentified as the Washington Post, in what was surely an honest mistake) and while doing so keep in mind, that all politicians have a god-given right to exactly 50% positive coverage. This is as true for Trump as it is for Maduro, who as you know we laud precisely as much as we denigrate. Just remember, anyone telling you that Donald Trump is going to reject any non-landslide loss and claim tens of millions of fraudulent votes without a shred of evidence, merely because he's told us this with his mouth, is clearly suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome, their brain fried by a surfeit of orangeness.
  - guscost 6y ago
    You have part of a point. But then you also go into this fantasy where most criticism of Trump is the sober assessment of dispassionate intellectuals with no conflicts of interest, rather than plain old opposition PR funded by the people whose power he threatens. You’re not seeing the whole picture by a long shot.
    - RonaldRaygun 6y ago
      > But then you also go into this fantasy where most criticism of Trump is the sober assessment of dispassionate intellectuals with no conflicts of interest I used sarcasm to make a point, yes. Here, you have claimed I've said something completely outside of the content of my post. I base my criticism of Donald Trump solely on his actions and his words. They are indelible, and a clear-eyed person needs nothing beyond them to understand who his is and what he represents.
wwwwwwwww 6y ago
And they placed a photo of Trump shaking hands with Putin at the top of the article. I wonder why.
- Rebelgecko 6y ago
  If you read the caption, it's because that the event being photographed led to Trump's first mention of the phrase