volkris @volkris@qoto.org
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
@SonofaGeorge well it's more that the list of sensationalized headlines getting clicks while misleading the public is getting longer and longer.
Journalism is dead.
@libramoon except that the biases of the Chief Justice are held in check by the fact that he doesn't get to just do whatever he wants. He is at the mercy of all of the other justices.
And that's the point, these sensational headlines give an impression that run counter to how our government actually operates, and so these journalists need to knock that stuff off because the population ends up misinformed.
@MartyLemert I mean what specifically are you referring to?
@libramoon these sensationalized stories are overlooking that Roberts still didn't have unilateral control over the court.
The other justices still had their ability to object and write their own opinions.
This is all just really misleading sensationalism and it needs to be called out for the journalistic malpractice that it is, misleading readers for the sake of clicks.
@cemedia lack of quid pro quo.
That's the answer.
@Wallyapplebee those conspiracy theories are just not useful.
The Times headline is flat out misleading, considering that Trump didn't get the results he was asking for, but the times is mainly trying to stir the pot among people who don't know how to court actually functions in the US system.
It doesn't matter what the Chief Justice thought because the other justices outvoted him and wrote their own opinions.
The times is just engaging in hello journalism here, and it's not good for society.
@usernamesAreTricky there's a really well-known prototypical logical fallacy that most serial killers drink milk therefore drinking milk must be a sign of a serial killer.
Same thing here.
Just because this rejected white paper does have some overlap with Trump policy doesn't mean Trump supports it despite his rejection.
I mean, we could also say that the Harris campaign supports it because both of them recognize the presidency.
No, sometimes when somebody agrees with you you should take yes for an answer instead of pushing forward with the conspiracy theory.
Do you like what heritage wrote? Think it's a good idea? No? Well Trump and mainstream conservatives say it's not a good idea, so they're on your side here dude. Why promote it?
@eddeeMN that a person is a liar is no justification for setting up a straw man argument.
Still, the fact that key campaigns against this proposal, and that his voters reject the proposal, comes together to say that he would lose support and lose votes should he actually try to implement the thing that he says he doesn't want to implement and that his people don't want him to implement.
It gets into this really nutty conspiracy theory. Yeah, Trump's a liar, but that doesn't give much license to ignore everything else happening in his entire orbit to put words in his mouth and criticize him for the thing that he explicitly rejects.
Just because he's a liar doesn't mean you can ignore everything and make up an alternative story and run with it.
@mhjohnson I think one blaring thing is that the Times headline talks about a winning streak for Trump, and yet Trump LOST in for example not getting the broad broad executive privilege he asked for.
So the headline from the Times itself promotes the false story they've been peddling all these months, and that needs to be called out.
@eddeeMN and Trump has explicitly rejected the plan.
So Trump and other high-profile conservatives have joined with critica of Heritage to say that they are misguided and that this is not the way forward for the country.
It's not a blueprint for a second Trump term because Trump has said that's not anything he's interested in going by.
Congress does not set state election districts.
That's not a federal authority.
That is set on the state level, not by Congress.
@MugsysRapSheet they don't.
That's absolutely not true.
Legally, that is not how voting works. Congress does not pick their voters. For a couple of different reasons. Not the least of which being the legal separation between federal and state powers.
So no, Congress does not pick their voters. It was intentionally designed to prevent that, and legally that is not possible because of those safeguards.
I don't know who told you otherwise, but you need to stop listening to them, they are misleading you, and we have such a huge problem of misinformation in this country, conspiracy theories being spread around.
@TheOldGuy to be clear, the guy is a troll that you can't believe.
Does he hate Taylor Swift? Who knows, but you know what he does love? People talking about him.
And you played right into his game.
We have an old saying on the internet, don't feed the trolls. Just ignore them. If we had just ignored Donald Trump he would have decayed into the oblivion. He would have become irrelevant.
If you don't want to support him, ignore him. But posts like this are exactly what feed into his game.
You're supporting him by giving him attention.
@MugsysRapSheet I'm admitting that the only views Congress represents are those of the people who bother to vote.
You want your views represented? Vote!
Otherwise you're out of the system. That's just how it works.
@EtherNRhum yeah I think journalism has a huge amount of responsibility for the state that we are in right now. Journalism has done such a horrible job not only failing to tell people how things work, but outright lying to people, saying things that are simply false on a daily basis. Education has been completely corrupted.
But the land of the free is free, for what that's worth. The problem is that people, like you said, have been misinformed so they are freely acting based on bad information.
It's important to realize that the core of this problem is not Trump. He's the symptom, not the cause. We desperately need to fix education. Yelling about Trump is not going to make this better and in many ways it makes it worse.
@breedlov but you're missing the next sentence where he said the stories were based on reports from constituents.
It seems that you're calling it a story implying that it's false, but some stories are true.
This tale is coming from witnesses. Is it true? I have no idea! But a lot of people are missing that there are people saying it's true.
Firstly I really don't I don't care one way or another. I don't have a dog in that fight, pun intended, but we should at least be clear that these stories are based on witness accounts.
@mikeash or to put it simply, Trump's whole thing is lying to his supporters about how strong and effective he was, that's what he's running on.
You're free to promote that propaganda if you want, just keep in mind that you are promoting his presidency, promoting his own messages, as you do.
Do what you want though, just be aware of that you are playing his game, promoting his candidacy, reinforcing his messaging.
If you're comfortable with that, have at it. It makes it more likely that he will win, but you do what you're going to do, just keep in mind that you are reinforcing his messaging.
Oh, no, not at all. I'm glad to clarify. I'm not telling you to shut up at all. Speak all you want.
Your position doesn't match with the facts. You can definitely keep promoting that perspective if you want, this is social media, you can say all you want.
What you're saying doesn't match the facts, but you're still absolutely welcome to say what you want.
But there is the consideration that not only is what you're saying easily debunked by the record, but it does help support Trump. If you want to support Trump, go for it. I wouldn't want to do that, but you are perfectly right to play his game if you want to, and help get him reelected.
Just be aware that it's what you're doing.
If you want to help get Trump reelected by promoting factually false narratives, your call.
@mikeash I mean good thing I'm not making that argument then.
What are you talking about? I honestly don't know what that response is going on about.
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
volkris's choices:
