Currently Online 
the-pi-guy said:
Tweet 0: In addition to Florida - South Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia, and Alabama, will most likely be hit (much) harder than anticipated. Looking like one of the largest hurricanes ever. Already category 5. BE CAREFUL! GOD BLESS EVERYONE! Instance 1, 2: That morning, Trump also repeated his claim that Alabama would be affected by the storm, telling reporters, “Alabama is going to get a piece of it, it looks like. But it can change its course again and it could go back more toward Florida.” At a FEMA briefing an hour later, Trump said that the storm “may get a little piece of a great place: It’s called Alabama. And Alabama could even be in for at least some very strong winds and something more than that, it could be. This just came up, unfortunately. It’s the size of — the storm that we’re talking about. So, for Alabama, just please be careful also.” Instance 3: In addition to Florida - South Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia, and Alabama, will most likely be hit (much) harder than anticipated. Looking like one of the largest hurricanes ever. Already category 5. BE CAREFUL! GOD BLESS EVERYONE! Trump shows map: President @realDonaldTrump gives an update on Hurricane #Dorian: pic.twitter.com/CmxAXHY5AO Instance 4: This was the originally projected path of the Hurricane in its early stages. As you can see, almost all models predicted it to go through Florida also hitting Georgia and Alabama. I accept the Fake News apologies! pic.twitter.com/0uCT0Qvyo6 Instance 5: In the early days of the hurricane, when it was predicted that Dorian would go through Miami or West Palm Beach, even before it reached the Bahamas, certain models strongly suggested that Alabama & Georgia would be hit as it made its way through Florida & to the Gulf.... Instance 6: Alabama was going to be hit or grazed, and then Hurricane Dorian took a different path (up along the East Coast). The Fake News knows this very well. That’s why they’re the Fake News! Instance 7: Just as I said, Alabama was originally projected to be hit. The Fake News denies it! pic.twitter.com/elJ7ROfm2p https://time.com/5671606/trump-hurricane-dorian-alabama/
You implied that people could look outside to see what the conditions were. As if it were that simple for someone to decide that they need to evacuate.
For a lot of reasons. 1.) You're less likely to listen to a forecast if you think there's a good chance it's wrong. 2.) You're less likely to listen to a forecast if you think the weather is being politicized.
>You typed this, not me. Doesn't even come close to representing my views/opinions. You said the statements against Trump could be politically motivated. Which implies that Liberals are making a bigger deal about Trump sharing a weather report to get at him. Which is ludicrous. |
Tweet 0: Okay, that's one where Trump mentions the hurricane hitting Alabama.
Instance 1, 2: Trump here uses appropriate language unlike his tweet 0: he says
“Alabama is going to get a piece of it, it looks like. But it can change its course again and it could go back more toward Florida.”
“may get a little piece of a great place: It’s called Alabama. And Alabama could even be in for at least some very strong winds and something more than that, it could be. This just came up, unfortunately. It’s the size of — the storm that we’re talking about. So, for Alabama, just please be careful also.”
Instance 3: a repeat of tweet 0 so skipping.
The rest of the instances you provided aren't Trump claiming Alabama is going to be hit.
You implied that people could look outside to see what the conditions were.
>Which they can: I can look outside right now and if it's raining, I will see rain falling from the sky. If I see high wind speeds, the trees will be affected by those strong winds and I can tune into a weather service to see what was up and if I may need to start emergency procedures.
As if it were that simple for someone to decide that they need to evacuate.
>It's certainly not that simple but if conditions outside my window seem extreme, I can tune into the news to look for further info.
1.) You're less likely to listen to a forecast if you think there's a good chance it's wrong.
>True but again, there is always a chance that a weather forecast is wrong. If the weatherman predicts rain for tomorrow, I'm going to take an umbrella JUST IN CASE it does in fact rain. There's a chance it won't rain but I want to be prepared. I'm not going to shout at the weatherman if he's wrong, that risk is unavoidable.
2.) You're less likely to listen to a forecast if you think the weather is being politicized.
This can go both ways: weather forecasts being politicized by pro-Trump and anti-Trump entities taint the forecasts themselves.
