The US Politics |OT|

[Machiavellian]

Runa216 said:

Machiavellian said:

Actually is very easy.  For every ounce of information that says one thing, there is something else that has a counter.  Having friends that are very big Trump supporters and still are, I have seen and heard their reasoning.  I have gone to the web sites where they get their information and I have listened to the people they trust.  The thing about information is that its abundant and you can always find information that support your bias.  This just isn't isolated to just Trump supporters but people in general.  So the thing is, if you believe a certain way, if you think a certain way, you will definitely find someone who also believe and think the same thing or who is willing to use your bias for their own gain.  A lot of times you do not even know you are being marketed to when you read some story but you are.  Most news is heavily bias, where opinions are filed in with bits and pieces of information that may be true or twisted to support said person opinion.

Case in point would be someone like Ted Cruz.  Being a lawyer with the chops he has, he very much understands how the law works.  Think about the things he has said in favor of supporting the claims made by the President on Fraud and how he words his speech.  He has probably paid attention to every case but since he knows his words are designed to reach people who will not question what he says because he speaks to their bias, he leads them on with that false sense that he believe in their cause knowing its a joke.  Most politicians work like this and pretty much how marketing works.

The issue is never about how much information out there that people can use, its what they consider as information while tossing anything out that does not conform to their bias.

Except that's not true at all. This nonsense ideal that both sides should be equally represented is a farce, one meant to not ruffle feathers rather than come to the truth of reality. Take the Climate Change discussion and debate...which in the eyes of the scientific community is NOT a debate at all. Yet, when people are debating it, the sides are presented as equal when in reality it's like 49:1 in favour of 'climate change is real and influenced by us'. But if a site or show allows 98% of the time to go to one side, they come across as biased even though...you know...that's what the consensus agrees upon by a rather wide margin. 

This is false equivalency. Not reality. 

Not sure why you came to the conclusion from my post that both sides should be equally represented.  Instead I am saying that if you are trying to reach the other side and all you do is say facts are on your side then that probably not going to cut it.  Anyone can find their own facts or find information that counter what you believe is facts.  Case in point would be COVID.  We have multiple doctors that have viewpoints all over the place concerning the virus, how to combat it and what works and what does not.  At the moment one person fact may be disproven or updated depending on new data that comes in.

Using Climate Change their are still many scientist who do not go along with the majority.  Just because its a majority doesn't mean they are all correct and their may be points being withheld that counters to their opinion whether educated or not.  Even data can be viewed in different ways if not represented by actual occurrences.  Here is a link on the Pros and Cons on the subject but the main thing to understand is that anyone can find data that supports their viewpoint.  

https://climatechange.procon.org/