TRUMP 2024

497,411 Views | 6292 Replies | Last: 3 min ago by Werewolf
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Distractions, distraction, distractions......and all the while ............Q

PS: and maybe the AG is being coerced ;-)

EDIT: or should it be signed Q & Anons

packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

smitt86 said:

caryking said:


I do agree we will have a **** show; however, nothing says that this **** show will be violent if Harris wins. If Trump wins Halperin might be underestimating the mess we will see. Liberals are far worse and divisive that conservatives. History shows that to be true...
I'm not picking a side in this battle, but let's be honest here, every Trump-supporter I know was IRATE after the last election and January 6th happened(regardless if you believe the government instigated it, folks were there any angry).

I expect far left folks to do/say dumb things if Trump wins, and I expect far right folks to do/say dumb things if Harris wins. It's how this always works.

I think it'll be violent either way, at least in small pockets. And the reason the divide is getting larger year after year has nothing to do with who the President was or any actual policies, it's all social media driven.

Folks find echo-chambers, are looking for a sense of purpose, and attach their purpose to their "tribe"/team, and then they feel like they're succeeding and "making a difference" if they are super active in their new community. So then it just causes them to hear more of what they want to hear and they start to really drink their team's kool-aid and become less pro-"their team" and more anti-"the other team". It's why you have folks thinking Trump will be a dictator and must be stopped all all costs, and you have folks thinking that Democratic politicians were meeting in a pizza joint where they drank children's blood to stay young/powerful, haha.

It's why everyone on one side thinks every mainstream media network is just a puppet for liberal politicians/companies, and everyone on the other side thinks 99% of the stuff on X is crazy talk and fake news. Between AI, bots, and folks intentionally spreading false information to get clicks, social media just going to keep driving a wedge and make the gap between the 2 political parties get larger and larger.

Unless we put an end to social media(won't happen) or completely turn away from the two-party system(highly unlikely), this is just going to continue to get worse.

I'd give this post 10 stars if I could.

Could not possibly agree more.

Social media is a scourge on humanity. The algorithms and echo chambers are impossibly effective at quashing actual public discourse and cultivating extremism.


Extremism is what you supported during Covid. You no longer have a monopoly to control the narrative so now you're triggered by it.

If you eliminate social media, eliminate your "news" networks. Your "news" networks have made many, like you, mentally ill and have cultivated left wing extremism. Your people are trying to assassinate the presidential candidate over and over, and your "news" networks have the gall to talk about right wing extremism.

caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

smitt86 said:

caryking said:


I do agree we will have a **** show; however, nothing says that this **** show will be violent if Harris wins. If Trump wins Halperin might be underestimating the mess we will see. Liberals are far worse and divisive that conservatives. History shows that to be true...
I'm not picking a side in this battle, but let's be honest here, every Trump-supporter I know was IRATE after the last election and January 6th happened(regardless if you believe the government instigated it, folks were there any angry).

I expect far left folks to do/say dumb things if Trump wins, and I expect far right folks to do/say dumb things if Harris wins. It's how this always works.

I think it'll be violent either way, at least in small pockets. And the reason the divide is getting larger year after year has nothing to do with who the President was or any actual policies, it's all social media driven.

Folks find echo-chambers, are looking for a sense of purpose, and attach their purpose to their "tribe"/team, and then they feel like they're succeeding and "making a difference" if they are super active in their new community. So then it just causes them to hear more of what they want to hear and they start to really drink their team's kool-aid and become less pro-"their team" and more anti-"the other team". It's why you have folks thinking Trump will be a dictator and must be stopped all all costs, and you have folks thinking that Democratic politicians were meeting in a pizza joint where they drank children's blood to stay young/powerful, haha.

It's why everyone on one side thinks every mainstream media network is just a puppet for liberal politicians/companies, and everyone on the other side thinks 99% of the stuff on X is crazy talk and fake news. Between AI, bots, and folks intentionally spreading false information to get clicks, social media just going to keep driving a wedge and make the gap between the 2 political parties get larger and larger.

Unless we put an end to social media(won't happen) or completely turn away from the two-party system(highly unlikely), this is just going to continue to get worse.

I'd give this post 10 stars if I could.

Could not possibly agree more.

Social media is a scourge on humanity. The algorithms and echo chambers are impossibly effective at quashing actual public discourse and cultivating extremism.
Social media is absolutely no different than The View…
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Disagree Cary, Social Media provides an opportunity for truth. The nitwits on that show are nothing but morons spouting off an agenda/narrative. Come on man!

Same thing with the MSM, their garbage is presented to the people as REAL TRUTH. At least on social media its up to each person to parse through all the material and make their best judgement........closer to potluck but not a much of damn lies and half-truths.

Take FoxNews........now that is a slick operation.....professional like the rest of the MSM....but FoxNews gives you enough........and just enough to gain your confidence.....but they lead you away from the difficult truths that suit their puppet-masters. Take Brett Baier calling the AZ for Biden......and most of the R's here took it in like the gospel.........it shall be so.
Gulfstream4
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Civilized said:

Looks like Trump's attempted fantasy-land stumping yesterday at the Economic Club of Chicago went over like a lead balloon.





Rollingstone? What's next….National Lampoon? Maybe Mad Magazine?

Come on man…
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Tcrump gave the uppity smarta$$ as chance........and.....well he gave the twerp a chance to start with. KABOOM
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'll make a little prediction here today. When it's revealed what all has transpired and how close we came to losing this country, Trump's face should have prominence equal to that of Washington, Jefferson and Lincoln. That is how perilously close we will have come to losing this nation and its Constitution for good.



Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"Our newest ad just dropped". Lol!

Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
smitt86
How long do you want to ignore this user?
caryking said:

Civilized said:

smitt86 said:

caryking said:


I do agree we will have a **** show; however, nothing says that this **** show will be violent if Harris wins. If Trump wins Halperin might be underestimating the mess we will see. Liberals are far worse and divisive that conservatives. History shows that to be true...
I'm not picking a side in this battle, but let's be honest here, every Trump-supporter I know was IRATE after the last election and January 6th happened(regardless if you believe the government instigated it, folks were there any angry).

I expect far left folks to do/say dumb things if Trump wins, and I expect far right folks to do/say dumb things if Harris wins. It's how this always works.

I think it'll be violent either way, at least in small pockets. And the reason the divide is getting larger year after year has nothing to do with who the President was or any actual policies, it's all social media driven.

Folks find echo-chambers, are looking for a sense of purpose, and attach their purpose to their "tribe"/team, and then they feel like they're succeeding and "making a difference" if they are super active in their new community. So then it just causes them to hear more of what they want to hear and they start to really drink their team's kool-aid and become less pro-"their team" and more anti-"the other team". It's why you have folks thinking Trump will be a dictator and must be stopped all all costs, and you have folks thinking that Democratic politicians were meeting in a pizza joint where they drank children's blood to stay young/powerful, haha.

It's why everyone on one side thinks every mainstream media network is just a puppet for liberal politicians/companies, and everyone on the other side thinks 99% of the stuff on X is crazy talk and fake news. Between AI, bots, and folks intentionally spreading false information to get clicks, social media just going to keep driving a wedge and make the gap between the 2 political parties get larger and larger.

Unless we put an end to social media(won't happen) or completely turn away from the two-party system(highly unlikely), this is just going to continue to get worse.

I'd give this post 10 stars if I could.

Could not possibly agree more.

Social media is a scourge on humanity. The algorithms and echo chambers are impossibly effective at quashing actual public discourse and cultivating extremism.
Social media is absolutely no different than The View…
Is it not? I think it's actually quite different, and I couldn't care less for that program.

If I sign up for cable/streaming/etc, I get a ton of channels to choose from. Many of those channels are programs that I hate or don't care to watch, but the companies don't suggest it to me and my family/friends can't just put it in my face encouraging me to watch it. The "algorithm", which at this point that word is starting to lose it's meaning with all the usage of it, is crafted to generate engagement. If I'm Brian and I like NC State and hunting, you'd think my feed would be a ton of NC State stuff (positive and negative) and hunting stuff. Instead, the social media platforms(at least ones like FB and X) realized that it's much easier to get folks to "engage", when they're mad about something. So it would be like tuning into watch NC State play on the CW, and the entire game they're just talking about everything Brian hates(UNC, gun rights, PETA, etc). So Brian could just turn the channel, right? How do you turn the channel on social media? You can keep scrolling, but it's just going to be more of the same. It creates the echo chamber, it would be like someone ONLY watching The View, so you think everything they say are facts, and most folks with a brain know that's not really how any media outlet works.

Also, when those folks get in their chairs and talk to the camera on The View... we know their names. They might not be doing all of the writing for the show, but it's their mouths it's coming out of and they're the ones folks hold responsible for the words. We know what they're saying and exactly who is saying it, there is some accountability there. On social media, most folks are anonymous trolls that are just inciting folks to anger and reposting false things(even some they've created) just to generate clicks/traffic. If social media would move to associating their name/face with their account, I think you'd have a LOT less folks feeling emboldened to post hateful/trollish things just to generate engagement. Freedom of Speech doesn't entitle folks to anonymity, so you should be free to say what you want on social media, but you should also have to stand on what you say and be held accountable for it.
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Fyi, X has a "Following" tab. You can set your own lineup.
smitt86
How long do you want to ignore this user?
packgrad said:

Fyi, X has a "Following" tab. You can set your own lineup.
I know, but because you posted that, I thought it would be interesting to go see the first 10 posts to see if there is anything political(I don't follow any specifically political folks).

The SECOND thing in my "Following" feed, is a post from X itself with an advertisement from "Univision Noticias" advertising a Donald Trump "town hall response" video... in a language I don't know and X wouldn't assume I speak Spanish from anything I've ever posted or follow.

So I keep scrolling, past 3 NFL-related posts, to the 7th post on my "Following" feed, where I can "set my own lineup." The 7th post is another X ad from "Right for America". This post says "American's last, immigration first - that's Kamala's immigration policy" with a clip showing criminals/felons and a scared lady at her home waiting to be attacked.

In first 7 posts, I have 5 NFL posts from sources I follow, and 2 political ads. I can't "set my own lineup" when X is forcing things onto my feed that I have no interest in reading/clicking on. Is there an "opt-out of political posts" option? I'd love to enable that one.
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Ha. It's election season. Tv has commercials too.... edit to add. Drop phone and accidentally posted. I don't know if they have that function for political ads. I know that I've been able to click on other things and say I did not want to see stuff like that. I don't know about the political ads though.
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FWIW, I did the same and went to my following tab. Scrolled through at least a couple dozen posts and didn't have any political ads. I did have ads from netsuite, veleryn, and temu though.

I follow most msm companies, many politicians, many political commentators, to go along with my NC State sports, athletes, coaches, and other sports related follows.

It's interesting how the algorithm targeted you for those ads. I don't get it. Maybe it's because I already follow many media and political people.
I sympathize with your point if that's the kind of crap you get.
smitt86
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yeah, it may be because I don't follow any MSM or any political folks, so maybe they see that I'm a target to try and sway one way or the other.

It's actually not as bad as just the blanket text messages and calls I've gotten the last month. I'm unaffiliated so I can vote how I want based on candidates and actual talking points and not party affiliations, but because I don't pick a team, I get at least 3-4 text messages a day about invitations to rallies, polling, and voting for various candidates. It's exhausting in general, and don't really see a way out of it other than arbitrarily joining a "team".
FlossyDFlynt
How long do you want to ignore this user?
smitt86 said:

Yeah, it may be because I don't follow any MSM or any political folks, so maybe they see that I'm a target to try and sway one way or the other.

It's actually not as bad as just the blanket text messages and calls I've gotten the last month. I'm unaffiliated so I can vote how I want based on candidates and actual talking points and not party affiliations, but because I don't pick a team, I get at least 3-4 text messages a day about invitations to rallies, polling, and voting for various candidates. It's exhausting in general, and don't really see a way out of it other than arbitrarily joining a "team".
Same. Android spam filter does catch most of them though. I also screen any call that isnt saved in my phone, and most of the time they just hang up.

Now, if I could stop all the flyers that hit my mailbox, Id be golden
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
smitt86 said:

caryking said:

Civilized said:

smitt86 said:

caryking said:


I do agree we will have a **** show; however, nothing says that this **** show will be violent if Harris wins. If Trump wins Halperin might be underestimating the mess we will see. Liberals are far worse and divisive that conservatives. History shows that to be true...
I'm not picking a side in this battle, but let's be honest here, every Trump-supporter I know was IRATE after the last election and January 6th happened(regardless if you believe the government instigated it, folks were there any angry).

I expect far left folks to do/say dumb things if Trump wins, and I expect far right folks to do/say dumb things if Harris wins. It's how this always works.

I think it'll be violent either way, at least in small pockets. And the reason the divide is getting larger year after year has nothing to do with who the President was or any actual policies, it's all social media driven.

Folks find echo-chambers, are looking for a sense of purpose, and attach their purpose to their "tribe"/team, and then they feel like they're succeeding and "making a difference" if they are super active in their new community. So then it just causes them to hear more of what they want to hear and they start to really drink their team's kool-aid and become less pro-"their team" and more anti-"the other team". It's why you have folks thinking Trump will be a dictator and must be stopped all all costs, and you have folks thinking that Democratic politicians were meeting in a pizza joint where they drank children's blood to stay young/powerful, haha.

It's why everyone on one side thinks every mainstream media network is just a puppet for liberal politicians/companies, and everyone on the other side thinks 99% of the stuff on X is crazy talk and fake news. Between AI, bots, and folks intentionally spreading false information to get clicks, social media just going to keep driving a wedge and make the gap between the 2 political parties get larger and larger.

Unless we put an end to social media(won't happen) or completely turn away from the two-party system(highly unlikely), this is just going to continue to get worse.

I'd give this post 10 stars if I could.

Could not possibly agree more.

Social media is a scourge on humanity. The algorithms and echo chambers are impossibly effective at quashing actual public discourse and cultivating extremism.
Social media is absolutely no different than The View…
Is it not? I think it's actually quite different, and I couldn't care less for that program.

If I sign up for cable/streaming/etc, I get a ton of channels to choose from. Many of those channels are programs that I hate or don't care to watch, but the companies don't suggest it to me and my family/friends can't just put it in my face encouraging me to watch it. The "algorithm", which at this point that word is starting to lose it's meaning with all the usage of it, is crafted to generate engagement. If I'm Brian and I like NC State and hunting, you'd think my feed would be a ton of NC State stuff (positive and negative) and hunting stuff. Instead, the social media platforms(at least ones like FB and X) realized that it's much easier to get folks to "engage", when they're mad about something. So it would be like tuning into watch NC State play on the CW, and the entire game they're just talking about everything Brian hates(UNC, gun rights, PETA, etc). So Brian could just turn the channel, right? How do you turn the channel on social media? You can keep scrolling, but it's just going to be more of the same. It creates the echo chamber, it would be like someone ONLY watching The View, so you think everything they say are facts, and most folks with a brain know that's not really how any media outlet works.

Also, when those folks get in their chairs and talk to the camera on The View... we know their names. They might not be doing all of the writing for the show, but it's their mouths it's coming out of and they're the ones folks hold responsible for the words. We know what they're saying and exactly who is saying it, there is some accountability there. On social media, most folks are anonymous trolls that are just inciting folks to anger and reposting false things(even some they've created) just to generate clicks/traffic. If social media would move to associating their name/face with their account, I think you'd have a LOT less folks feeling emboldened to post hateful/trollish things just to generate engagement. Freedom of Speech doesn't entitle folks to anonymity, so you should be free to say what you want on social media, but you should also have to stand on what you say and be held accountable for it.
You know... you could just not be on Social Media, right? You make a choice to be on Social Media no differently that you make a choice to sign up for cable/streaming. At the end of the day, you can control your time spent in most everything you do.

Now, you can certainly complain about Social media algorithms if you like, or... turn it off! It's really that simple, isn't it?
smitt86
How long do you want to ignore this user?
caryking said:

smitt86 said:

caryking said:

Civilized said:

smitt86 said:

caryking said:


I do agree we will have a **** show; however, nothing says that this **** show will be violent if Harris wins. If Trump wins Halperin might be underestimating the mess we will see. Liberals are far worse and divisive that conservatives. History shows that to be true...
I'm not picking a side in this battle, but let's be honest here, every Trump-supporter I know was IRATE after the last election and January 6th happened(regardless if you believe the government instigated it, folks were there any angry).

I expect far left folks to do/say dumb things if Trump wins, and I expect far right folks to do/say dumb things if Harris wins. It's how this always works.

I think it'll be violent either way, at least in small pockets. And the reason the divide is getting larger year after year has nothing to do with who the President was or any actual policies, it's all social media driven.

Folks find echo-chambers, are looking for a sense of purpose, and attach their purpose to their "tribe"/team, and then they feel like they're succeeding and "making a difference" if they are super active in their new community. So then it just causes them to hear more of what they want to hear and they start to really drink their team's kool-aid and become less pro-"their team" and more anti-"the other team". It's why you have folks thinking Trump will be a dictator and must be stopped all all costs, and you have folks thinking that Democratic politicians were meeting in a pizza joint where they drank children's blood to stay young/powerful, haha.

It's why everyone on one side thinks every mainstream media network is just a puppet for liberal politicians/companies, and everyone on the other side thinks 99% of the stuff on X is crazy talk and fake news. Between AI, bots, and folks intentionally spreading false information to get clicks, social media just going to keep driving a wedge and make the gap between the 2 political parties get larger and larger.

Unless we put an end to social media(won't happen) or completely turn away from the two-party system(highly unlikely), this is just going to continue to get worse.

I'd give this post 10 stars if I could.

Could not possibly agree more.

Social media is a scourge on humanity. The algorithms and echo chambers are impossibly effective at quashing actual public discourse and cultivating extremism.
Social media is absolutely no different than The View…
Is it not? I think it's actually quite different, and I couldn't care less for that program.

If I sign up for cable/streaming/etc, I get a ton of channels to choose from. Many of those channels are programs that I hate or don't care to watch, but the companies don't suggest it to me and my family/friends can't just put it in my face encouraging me to watch it. The "algorithm", which at this point that word is starting to lose it's meaning with all the usage of it, is crafted to generate engagement. If I'm Brian and I like NC State and hunting, you'd think my feed would be a ton of NC State stuff (positive and negative) and hunting stuff. Instead, the social media platforms(at least ones like FB and X) realized that it's much easier to get folks to "engage", when they're mad about something. So it would be like tuning into watch NC State play on the CW, and the entire game they're just talking about everything Brian hates(UNC, gun rights, PETA, etc). So Brian could just turn the channel, right? How do you turn the channel on social media? You can keep scrolling, but it's just going to be more of the same. It creates the echo chamber, it would be like someone ONLY watching The View, so you think everything they say are facts, and most folks with a brain know that's not really how any media outlet works.

Also, when those folks get in their chairs and talk to the camera on The View... we know their names. They might not be doing all of the writing for the show, but it's their mouths it's coming out of and they're the ones folks hold responsible for the words. We know what they're saying and exactly who is saying it, there is some accountability there. On social media, most folks are anonymous trolls that are just inciting folks to anger and reposting false things(even some they've created) just to generate clicks/traffic. If social media would move to associating their name/face with their account, I think you'd have a LOT less folks feeling emboldened to post hateful/trollish things just to generate engagement. Freedom of Speech doesn't entitle folks to anonymity, so you should be free to say what you want on social media, but you should also have to stand on what you say and be held accountable for it.
You know... you could just not be on Social Media, right? You make a choice to be on Social Media no differently that you make a choice to sign up for cable/streaming. At the end of the day, you can control your time spent in most everything you do.

Now, you can certainly complain about Social media algorithms if you like, or... turn it off! It's really that simple, isn't it?
I was comparing it to a television program and laid out why I don't think the 2 are comparable.

I understand I'm electing to be on social media(at least X), but I also understand a lot of the stuff on there is nonsense, AI-generated, trolls, and/or "fake news" or "malinformation".

The original point was that, social media is what is driving the gap between the left and the right, not necessarily who the President has been or any policies they've implemented. I don't want to prevent anyone from posting whatever they want, but I do think it's reasonable to force folks to attack social media accounts to real IDs and own what they post. Folks are emboldened by being able to remain anonymous, but I doubt folks would believe something if they knew it was posted by a bot or foreign actor just posting things to rile folks up, and doubt folks would be willing to be so argumentative/malicious if they actually had to be held accountable for their words. Telling people to "just not use it" is a bit silly. It has a ton of usefulness, but that doesn't mean it isn't also a nefarious place that could be improved.

We already have the "you must show an ID to vote" debate going on, might as well just move that same energy over to social media where you have to have an account tied to your personal information. Could cut out so much hate/BS on the internet.
TheStorm
How long do you want to ignore this user?
smitt86 said:

Yeah, it may be because I don't follow any MSM or any political folks, so maybe they see that I'm a target to try and sway one way or the other.

It's actually not as bad as just the blanket text messages and calls I've gotten the last month. I'm unaffiliated so I can vote how I want based on candidates and actual talking points and not party affiliations, but because I don't pick a team, I get at least 3-4 text messages a day about invitations to rallies, polling, and voting for various candidates. It's exhausting in general, and don't really see a way out of it other than arbitrarily joining a "team".
Joining a "team" has nothing to do with it. I'm registered Republican, and I get text messages from both sides, requests to participate in polls, etc. I actually get 2-1 volume in favor of Harris, so there's that. I just block the number and delete the text. 3 days later I get that same exact contact from a different phone number.
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
smitt86 said:

caryking said:

smitt86 said:

caryking said:

Civilized said:

smitt86 said:

caryking said:


I do agree we will have a **** show; however, nothing says that this **** show will be violent if Harris wins. If Trump wins Halperin might be underestimating the mess we will see. Liberals are far worse and divisive that conservatives. History shows that to be true...
I'm not picking a side in this battle, but let's be honest here, every Trump-supporter I know was IRATE after the last election and January 6th happened(regardless if you believe the government instigated it, folks were there any angry).

I expect far left folks to do/say dumb things if Trump wins, and I expect far right folks to do/say dumb things if Harris wins. It's how this always works.

I think it'll be violent either way, at least in small pockets. And the reason the divide is getting larger year after year has nothing to do with who the President was or any actual policies, it's all social media driven.

Folks find echo-chambers, are looking for a sense of purpose, and attach their purpose to their "tribe"/team, and then they feel like they're succeeding and "making a difference" if they are super active in their new community. So then it just causes them to hear more of what they want to hear and they start to really drink their team's kool-aid and become less pro-"their team" and more anti-"the other team". It's why you have folks thinking Trump will be a dictator and must be stopped all all costs, and you have folks thinking that Democratic politicians were meeting in a pizza joint where they drank children's blood to stay young/powerful, haha.

It's why everyone on one side thinks every mainstream media network is just a puppet for liberal politicians/companies, and everyone on the other side thinks 99% of the stuff on X is crazy talk and fake news. Between AI, bots, and folks intentionally spreading false information to get clicks, social media just going to keep driving a wedge and make the gap between the 2 political parties get larger and larger.

Unless we put an end to social media(won't happen) or completely turn away from the two-party system(highly unlikely), this is just going to continue to get worse.

I'd give this post 10 stars if I could.

Could not possibly agree more.

Social media is a scourge on humanity. The algorithms and echo chambers are impossibly effective at quashing actual public discourse and cultivating extremism.
Social media is absolutely no different than The View…
Is it not? I think it's actually quite different, and I couldn't care less for that program.

If I sign up for cable/streaming/etc, I get a ton of channels to choose from. Many of those channels are programs that I hate or don't care to watch, but the companies don't suggest it to me and my family/friends can't just put it in my face encouraging me to watch it. The "algorithm", which at this point that word is starting to lose it's meaning with all the usage of it, is crafted to generate engagement. If I'm Brian and I like NC State and hunting, you'd think my feed would be a ton of NC State stuff (positive and negative) and hunting stuff. Instead, the social media platforms(at least ones like FB and X) realized that it's much easier to get folks to "engage", when they're mad about something. So it would be like tuning into watch NC State play on the CW, and the entire game they're just talking about everything Brian hates(UNC, gun rights, PETA, etc). So Brian could just turn the channel, right? How do you turn the channel on social media? You can keep scrolling, but it's just going to be more of the same. It creates the echo chamber, it would be like someone ONLY watching The View, so you think everything they say are facts, and most folks with a brain know that's not really how any media outlet works.

Also, when those folks get in their chairs and talk to the camera on The View... we know their names. They might not be doing all of the writing for the show, but it's their mouths it's coming out of and they're the ones folks hold responsible for the words. We know what they're saying and exactly who is saying it, there is some accountability there. On social media, most folks are anonymous trolls that are just inciting folks to anger and reposting false things(even some they've created) just to generate clicks/traffic. If social media would move to associating their name/face with their account, I think you'd have a LOT less folks feeling emboldened to post hateful/trollish things just to generate engagement. Freedom of Speech doesn't entitle folks to anonymity, so you should be free to say what you want on social media, but you should also have to stand on what you say and be held accountable for it.
You know... you could just not be on Social Media, right? You make a choice to be on Social Media no differently that you make a choice to sign up for cable/streaming. At the end of the day, you can control your time spent in most everything you do.

Now, you can certainly complain about Social media algorithms if you like, or... turn it off! It's really that simple, isn't it?
I was comparing it to a television program and laid out why I don't think the 2 are comparable.

I understand I'm electing to be on social media(at least X), but I also understand a lot of the stuff on there is nonsense, AI-generated, trolls, and/or "fake news" or "malinformation".

The original point was that, social media is what is driving the gap between the left and the right, not necessarily who the President has been or any policies they've implemented. I don't want to prevent anyone from posting whatever they want, but I do think it's reasonable to force folks to attack social media accounts to real IDs and own what they post. Folks are emboldened by being able to remain anonymous, but I doubt folks would believe something if they knew it was posted by a bot or foreign actor just posting things to rile folks up, and doubt folks would be willing to be so argumentative/malicious if they actually had to be held accountable for their words. Telling people to "just not use it" is a bit silly. It has a ton of usefulness, but that doesn't mean it isn't also a nefarious place that could be improved.

We already have the "you must show an ID to vote" debate going on, might as well just move that same energy over to social media where you have to have an account tied to your personal information. Could cut out so much hate/BS on the internet.


Social media doesn't drive anything, per se…. People drive things. People act the way they do, for what reason. The origin of this was when Civ called out Social Media and I said it "'s no different than the view.

You took this, I think into control of Social Media, and compared against a TV subscription. At the end of the day, it really is what it is.

At one time, we had the big three networks competing for people's views. Well, that's been a long time ago. The world has changed, probably not for the good.

Now Twitter (X) wasn't so awful prior to Elon buying it. It's amazing how one person can change the perspective of everything, isn't it?
jkpackfan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TheStorm said:

smitt86 said:

Yeah, it may be because I don't follow any MSM or any political folks, so maybe they see that I'm a target to try and sway one way or the other.

It's actually not as bad as just the blanket text messages and calls I've gotten the last month. I'm unaffiliated so I can vote how I want based on candidates and actual talking points and not party affiliations, but because I don't pick a team, I get at least 3-4 text messages a day about invitations to rallies, polling, and voting for various candidates. It's exhausting in general, and don't really see a way out of it other than arbitrarily joining a "team".
Joining a "team" has nothing to do with it. I'm registered Republican, and I get text messages from both sides, requests to participate in polls, etc. I actually get 2-1 volume in favor of Harris, so there's that. I just block the number and delete the text. 3 days later I get that same exact contact from a different phone number.
I've been bombarded by Harris texts lately.
CoachCase
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Dems have the money and they are spending it in every way possible to promote their candidates. Sure hope all their investors are greatly disappointed on the morning of November 6!
GuerrillaPack
How long do you want to ignore this user?
https://instagr.am/p/DBPAyikxr4A
"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CoachCase said:

Dems have the money and they are spending it in every way possible to promote their candidates. Sure hope all their investors are greatly disappointed on the morning of November 6!
That's probably not going to happen…. It will happen when they get done counting all the extra ballots..
GuerrillaPack
How long do you want to ignore this user?
https://instagr.am/p/DBP3dWxN9zr
"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
Werewolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GuerrillaPack said:

https://instagr.am/p/DBP3dWxN9zr
First Page Refresh
Page 180 of 180
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.