-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
FAIR: MSNBC’s Anti-Sanders Bias Makes It Forget How to Do Math
- Thread starter brainchild
- Start date
Shillsetera libtrists @ kirbylars @ autodistract
Oh golly this site sure hates uncle Berndog so much it's transparent I have to ping them to answer their crimes.
Sad!
Oh golly this site sure hates uncle Berndog so much it's transparent I have to ping them to answer their crimes.
Sad!
lol good luck. Remember a lot of these people were Hillary shills who still have a bone to pick with Bernier and his supporters for some reason. This site will never be able to have a reasonable thread about Bernie Sanders because the shitposting starts at page 1 every single time.
I find the timing of this thread crazy. My mother called me a little while ago and was asking what I thought about the candidates. At one point, she said how surprised she was to see "Bernie was now in second". I was confused cause I thought he regularly polled in second, but she had been led to believe that it's been Warren for a long while.
I didn't know where she got the impression Bernie has been polling low.
I didn't know where she got the impression Bernie has been polling low.
haven't read the thread...argumen 1 what about rounding?
48-48 for warren, this be 48.4% to 47.5% - a .9 gap
and 49-48 for sanders be 48.6 to 48.4 - a .2 gap
show us the decimals!
(somewhat tongue in cheek, but also it could explain the ranking if it was actually a real ranking in a spreadsheet
48-48 for warren, this be 48.4% to 47.5% - a .9 gap
and 49-48 for sanders be 48.6 to 48.4 - a .2 gap
show us the decimals!
(somewhat tongue in cheek, but also it could explain the ranking if it was actually a real ranking in a spreadsheet
Look who's missing in this California poll graphic. (She got 13%.)
I have seen one other instance where it disadvantaged Buttigieg a few weeks later in the same manner but I can't immediately find a pic of it.
I don't mind having discussions with people who have problems with Sanders. My problem is when these threads get flooded by drive bys who don't respond to questions and people going way off topic to shit on him effectively derailing the thread. It also doesn't help that some people have intentionally insulting attitudes towards Sanders supporters like we're republicans or some shit.
Damn skullmuffins you asked the wrong person lolLook who's missing in this California poll graphic. (She got 13%.)
I have seen one other instance where it disadvantaged Buttigieg a few weeks later in the same manner but I can't immediately find a pic of it.
That's actually kind of interesting. I really want to know what MSNBC's process is for choosing important information for their graphics is.
Threads like this remind me of Andrew Marr's interview with Chomsky, where he (Marr, a BBC journalist) seemed not only incredulous of the claims of Chomsky and Herman's propaganda model but actually seemed to have difficulty in parsing it. Someone operating with a concept of hegemony front and centre would probably look at the examples in the article and consider them to be expected and par for the course (which is not to say that it shouldn't be critiqued). Those operating without such a model, or who reject them, might call it a conspiracy, either earnestly or mockingly (Marr later referred to Chomsky as a "brilliant conspiracist", despite the "conspiracies" Chomsky raising in the interview being basically indisputable [the existence of COINTELPRO was one]).
Around/after the first debates Harris and Warren both got boosted and polled pretty well for a week.
The thing is that the media loves a good narrative. Someone taking second place from Bernie is a story. Bernie remaining second place is not. So people would see headlines like 'Biden in the lead, Harris/Warren tied for third' which obviously leaves someone out.
Look who's missing in this California poll graphic. (She got 13%.)
I have seen one other instance where it disadvantaged Buttigieg a few weeks later in the same manner but I can't immediately find a pic of it.
This answers the question I had walking into this thread: does the piece single out inconsistencies of a single candidate because they only exist for a single candidate, or because the focus was placed upon a single candidate?
I have my answer now.
One reason for this is for people to choose perceived winner's instead. " I agree with Bernie but I don't think he can win"
Agree. As a kid, I thought people voted Dem strictly out of principle. '16 was surprising to me, there is a rabbid subset of team sport mentality. My FB feed was super ugly amongst friends lol.
I think this is evidence towards a more complicated overall bias, but without more examples it still seems like Bernie is being especially targeted.
it must go higher, we have the technology
6 million percentage hatred
That's "Bernard" to them.
Yeah I don't get it either. I take more issue with his more vocal supporters, some in this very thread, but, while he's not perfect, I've never taken much issue with Bernie personally. He's a politician and I honestly do think he wants to make America a better place. Still favoring Warren though.
GAF was one of the top referrers for Hillary's website in 2016. For whatever reason this community just has a lot of supporters of center-left politics (we're probably the only major site on the internet that does). Bernie's 2016 campaign shattered the myth that Obama-era third way politics is the only way we can possibly see ourselves moving forward. Obviously there's going to be resentment for breaking the myth.
In regards of the topic of this thread - considering you have inserted "unpaid interns" as strongly implied evidence of cause but without a pattern (showing similar internship errors for other candidates) it can be factually concluded that you are not a very objective analyst but rather tendentious.
Bernie's absolutely not less progressive than Warren, unless you count being distressingly vague about what she considers Medicare for All to be and whether or not she thinks intervention with Iran is necessary to be progressive ideology.
I do get what you're saying, though. ResetEra and its predecessor were founded first and foremost as video game forums, and it's difficult to consider alternatives to something you already consider to be working, providing you the media you love.
Destain aimed at a large group of people you've generalized is not healthy. Especially whe you rely on their votes.
Ah yes, I was wondering when we would get the "Bernie or Bust" threat...
I also don't understand all the love warren is getting in news/online politics, but these same outlets and people hate sanders when warren is pretty close to Bernie on every single issue. I do get Warren is more right leaning than Sanders but it's honestly still pretty negligible. She use to support a more public option plan for health care for instance, but has since adopted Bernie's plan. Her college plan is another example where I think Bernie just has a better version, but people still seem to hate him and love her. Don't get wrong though, I would gladly vote for Warren over every other candidate except for Bernie.
That perhaps points to the issue not being the message/policy but the messenger?
You assuming I'm making a threat proves my point. Alienating people from your party results in demotivation and resentment. I'm not going to not vote but this hate for Bernie supporters can only hurt the party.
That's pretty ironic since most of the people who hold an anti-Bernie stance since 2016 are the ones who have been saying they'll vote for anyone but Bernie, whereas most Bernie voters won't mind Warren, Harris, or even Biden when it comes to voting against Trump.
My mind goes: This happened 6 times? Well without data on how much they mess up their graphics on other candidates or just in general it's hard to nail this down.
All 6 errors trended him downwards? Okay, this seems like a problem.
They never offered corrections even when it's brought to their attention? Something's not right.
After watching the "skin crawl" clip and seeing no one on the panel challenge such a unprofessional, unsupported statement, I'm starting to believe there is an atmosphere and momentum at MSNBC leaning against Bernie - whether intentional or not.
All 6 errors trended him downwards? Okay, this seems like a problem.
They never offered corrections even when it's brought to their attention? Something's not right.
After watching the "skin crawl" clip and seeing no one on the panel challenge such a unprofessional, unsupported statement, I'm starting to believe there is an atmosphere and momentum at MSNBC leaning against Bernie - whether intentional or not.
This in no way is a Bernie or bust thread.
The projection is strong, unfortunately.
I have a hard time believing someone that loves Warren, but hates sanders can point to a good reason they don't like him over her except that he an old white man, and they hate people that support him because they are too vocal or obnoxious. Which is fine I guess, but I still don't understand the vitriol the dude gets.
I know why mainstream media and corporations like her more than Sanders, she is much less threatening to them than Bernie, who does nothing but pick fights with the establishment. A normal person that's a "progressive" though should be into both of them unless you are really scared of taxes going up and see Bernie as the boogeyman.
It's something I think about a lot. If we assume they're being smart in that choice, it must be because foriegn policy is way more important to those people than they talk about publically. But they could just be dumb, falling for meaningless tribal signifiers that wouldn't reflect in their governing.
I'm not sure what you mean about foreign policy, I actually think this is Warrens biggest issue as a candidate, and that Bernie is much better about this than he was in 2016. Just look at the Yemen bill he got approved then vetoed by Trump for instance, or his stance on Palestine. He's gotten so much better in this field than he used to be.
Ah yes, I was wondering when we would get the "Bernie is the sole reason we lost 2016" threat.
Going from the greater amount of whining I see on gaming side he's not wrong. You don't get a warning for whining about shitposts. You do get warnings for whining about moderation.
I've seen a "I will never vote for this man" response in a different thread but I just can't believe it. There's no way you could hate Sanders so much that you would not vote assuming you're already a guaranteed voter.
You're getting hung up on the wrong thing. It's not about being "progressive". It's about being a leftist.
Every single candidate in there* will proudly proclaim that they're "progressive", but that's just a half measure. Bernie is the only candidate who's actually attacking the issue at the core of all of the country's problems: capitalism. E.g. he's talking about ending private health insurance companies, not acquiescing to them or leaving them out there as an "option".
Warren is a progressive technocrat to the left of the other candidates, sure, but she's a half measure - that's why center-left people feel comfortable backing her and then turn around and attack Bernie. Warren is the candidate that's closest to being a leftist without actually being one, so she's a great pick for people who wanna pretend they're leftists but haven't actually been radicalized yet. They don't want the real deal, which is what Bernie offers and the only thing that actually threatens the people who put us in this mess in the first place.
That's why there's such a huge discrepancy in how some people treat Warren and Bernie, even though, theoretically, they're "close". Truth is: they're not.
* Not Biden :P
I don't like him because his policy isn't half as fleshed out as Warren, his campaign hires give me no hope his cabinet won't be just as full of ass kissing sycophants, and personally I think he comes off like a jerk any time he's caught off guard especially when he catches heat for something he deserves to catch heat for
but will he be blamed when biden loses to trump in 2020? be sure to check the next episodes of this saga
Exactly.
Oh btw I pmed other mods about the drive-bys and the trolling that derailed the thread but I think I caught them right as they logged off. Do you mind taking a look at the thread and possibly issue some warnings to discourage some of these posters from bombing Sanders threads with off-topic bullshit?
I was thinking about liberals, who I assume make up most of the absolute despising of bernie but have no problems with warren.
I don't know many actual socialist left people who strongly hate Bernie compared to warren. I know some put warren slightly ahead of bernie, but haven't heard them so strongly prefering that.
MSNBC is owned by Comcast. They might be "left-leaning" but their bread and butter is always going to be neoliberal and pro-corporate. This is why I distrust TV news. If Bernie is an actual threat they'll shank him as hard as FOX would.
I assume a lot of the hate came from the quick spread of Bernie Bros articles? I feel like a lot of people were suddenly more vocally anti-him within the liberal party after that. Mixed with the fact that Clinton lost and so many people looked anywhere but her to point the finger of blame, seems like a good foundation of "hate". As for things like constant small tweeks in news reporting/graphs, while I get that people can call some things paranoia/conspiracy theories, it's like people forget that the DNC e-mail leaks happened.
I say all this as someone who never really got on the Bernie train. It seems easy to be able to have valid opinions against him, but so much of it comes off as petty drive-bys (generally speaking, not even just here) instead.
I say all this as someone who never really got on the Bernie train. It seems easy to be able to have valid opinions against him, but so much of it comes off as petty drive-bys (generally speaking, not even just here) instead.
Oh for sure, I 100 percent agree, but I don't think the average person that watches politics actually knows that much about the 2. I know the corporations do, MSM included, I just get frustrated because most people don't understand the differences, on a surface level, Warren and Sanders are very similar. Someone like me though who really stands behind what Bernie represent would point to that as being the reason I think he is far and away the best.
I guess this is the nuance between the 2, I don't expect the average voter to know that, or give a detailed response on why the systemic change Bernie represents is a bad thing, unless they are wealthy of course. My use of progressive is mainly pointed at people who say, yeah free college and universal healthcare is good, but I just hate Bernie and love Warren.
Last edited:
Oh come on. Again you don't have to like Corbyn (I am no fan of Labour), but if you live in the UK you have to extremely partisan not to recognise he has had an extremely bumpy ride given to him by the press. The whole 'unelectable' narrative was extremely bizarre.
There are soooo many bigger threats to our democracy than Russia. The outrage should have been entirely focused on disenfranchised black voters and voting machine security. That shit's easily provable and doesn't require a large web of suspects that are impossible to extradite.
no but look, its all about voting in the same people who brought the dnc to their knees, saying bernie is uNeLeCtaBle and then blaming him for corporate dems failures. it all makes sense in some twisted minds
Huh? There is proof on the number of hit pieces he have received than other candidates. MSNBC had a guest that literally said Bernie makes her skin crawl with no facts and made a lot of blanket statements that went unchallenged. Why do you feel this way again?