By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Donald Trump: How Do You Feel about Him Now? (Poll)

 

Last November,

I supported him and I still do - Americas 91 15.77%
 
I supported him and I now don't - Americas 16 2.77%
 
I supported him and I still do - Europe 37 6.41%
 
I supported him and I now don't - Europe 7 1.21%
 
I supported him and I still do - Asia 6 1.04%
 
I supported him and I now don't - Asia 1 0.17%
 
I supported him and I still do - RoW 15 2.60%
 
I supported him and I now don't - RoW 2 0.35%
 
I didn't support him and still don't. 373 64.64%
 
I didn't support him and now do. 29 5.03%
 
Total:577
Jon-Erich said:
SuaveSocialist said:

Biased in favor of accuracy.  When presented with the  product of an unbroken chain of bad decisions, quite often the only objective review is a scathing one.  Maybe if Dear Leader would govern competently he'd get better press.

I'm sorry but no. I'm not a big Trump fan either, but the mainstream news media is absolute garbage. Even when he does something good, they'll do a negative spin on it. Look at this recent summit. They're talking how Trump is making a deal with a man who starves his own people and imprisons them and tortures them. Yet a few months ago at the Olympics, the media wouldn't shut up about how hot Kim Jong Un's sister was. Where was the brutal dictator talk then? They didn't mention it because Trump and Kim weren't on good terms then. That's just one example. There are many, many more. The truth is the candidate that the media wanted didn't win and they're never going to give Trump a break while he is president. The only time they'll give him a break is 10 years from now when he's out of office and no longer a political threat. He'll join the boys club with Bush and Clinton and will be handled differently. That is what happened with Bush 43. He was by all accounts one of the worst presidents in modern history. The media wasn't too kind to him, even though the media was still very pro-war. If you look at the media's coverage of Bush 43 now, they'll talk about him in a nostalgic way, as if having two major wars and a near-economic collapse was somehow considered the good old days.

This isn't just my opinion. For President Jimmy Carter said the same thing. We're talking about a man who is very old, who has seen many presidents come and go throughout his life and who received quite a bit of negative news coverage when he was president say that no president during his lifetime has ever received as much negative news as Trump has. Jimmy Carter doesn't even agree with Trump on many issues and has no real reason to defend him, so that is saying something.

I have to agree with Jon-Erich here.

Check this video if you don't believe that the MSM has an agenda...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTvAQfzMkww



Around the Network
Jon-Erich said:
SuaveSocialist said:

Biased in favor of accuracy.  When presented with the  product of an unbroken chain of bad decisions, quite often the only objective review is a scathing one.  Maybe if Dear Leader would govern competently he'd get better press.

I'm sorry but no.

 

 Look at this recent summit. They're talking how Trump is making a deal with a man who starves his own people and imprisons them and tortures them. 

They made the EXACT same comments when Obama said he was willing to engage NK with peace talks.

 

I'm sorry, but your example does not refute the accuracy of what the media had to say.  Nor does it adequately defend the myth that Kim-Jong Drumpf is being treated unfairly in the media.

 

The fact is, his regime is a dumpster fire and his every action performed with noteworthy incompetence.  Naturally, that's how the media will report it.  If anything, they are going easy on him.



irstupid said:

Nate Silver, the left-leaning data analyst, had a striking observation on Twitter: "90% of the punditocracy's commentary on the Singapore summit seems to be constructed with the goal of convincing people that Trump shouldn't get any credit for it—rather than rationally analyzing the merits and demerits of the 'deal.'"

And an article a few months ago stating that 90% of Trump coverage is negative.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/mar/6/trump-coverage-still-90-negative-says-new-study/

Such unbiased news we have. It's not a wonder majority of people in all of the topics dealing with Trump are spouting things about how he is doing shit or whatever he did, did not help the situation. Funny seeing people sit and blame Trump for all things North Korea and how he is going to be solely responsible for anything that happens. Then good stuff starts happening and people start going, oh Trump had nothing to do with it and it was 100% china and south korea's doing. Ect.

Hell everytime I read about something, I need to make sure I use a source that is not FoxNews cause otherwise people will not believe it. It's at those times you realize how much the other media outlets are biased. It could be a straight up article stating something as matter of fact as the sun rose today, yet can only find say 1 in 10 of the other outlets managed to report on it.

So tell me, Name calling NK with high school BS was what got NK to the table to negotiate. NK has wanted a US president to come to the table for over 20 years.  The reason things never got anywhere was because other US presidents was not going to make NK legitimate by coming to the table with nothing beforehand.  Trump came to the table and elevated NK without any preconditions.  Then he signed a agreement that basically gave NK everything they wanted in returned promised nothing.  Now anyone who knows Trump understand a signed agreement means nothing.  He has broken those throughout his business career so I highly doubt anything would change now.  What he did do is give NK what they really wanted.  He gave them face, legitimized their Nuclear program in getting the US president to the table and then got away without any real conditions on getting rid of their Nuclear program, their Nukes or even their Chemical weapons.

People do not believe Fox News is because they are never critical of Trump.  Its one thing to support what he is doing but when you support everything he does and even lie to your audience to make whatever he does appear with no faults then how can you believe such a source.  When you ignore coverage that is negative but only what to show positive coverage or you twist negative to positive leaving out important information, why would anyone trust that source.

I give Trump credit for trying but the same Fox news had a totally different opinion when Obama said he would meet with NK.  Actually it was so bias and opposite of how they talked about Trump that you would never trust them as a source again.  Here is a video link for you to see how Bias Fox News was when Obama stated he would meet with NK and how their tone totally changed when Trump stated the same.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1964232273608253&id=908009612563863



I'd ask some of you how you feel about him currently given his family separation border policy but....I'm getting to the point of why bother.



Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

SpokenTruth said:
I'd ask some of you how you feel about him currently given his family separation border policy but....I'm getting to the point of why bother.

Trump is doing a great job at diverting attention away from his problem by saying things about Germany on Twitter.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Shipments

Around the Network
RolStoppable said:
SpokenTruth said:
I'd ask some of you how you feel about him currently given his family separation border policy but....I'm getting to the point of why bother.

Trump is doing a great job at diverting attention away from his problem by saying things about Germany on Twitter.

Indeed and who should care about those immigrants human rights anyway , well the UN did but USA just announced they quit the UN.   

You can't make it up, calling UN an organ that mocks human rights in the middle of the family separation border crisis.






SuaveSocialist said:
Jon-Erich said:

I'm sorry but no.

 

 Look at this recent summit. They're talking how Trump is making a deal with a man who starves his own people and imprisons them and tortures them. 

They made the EXACT same comments when Obama said he was willing to engage NK with peace talks.

 

I'm sorry, but your example does not refute the accuracy of what the media had to say.  Nor does it adequately defend the myth that Kim-Jong Drumpf is being treated unfairly in the media.

 

The fact is, his regime is a dumpster fire and his every action performed with noteworthy incompetence.  Naturally, that's how the media will report it.  If anything, they are going easy on him.

Wow, way to go ignoring most of my post. My point was that when Trump and Kim Jong Un weren't on good terms, the media tried to make Kim Jong Un and North Korea look good while making Trump look bad. Now that they're on good terms, they tried to make Trump look bad by making North Korea look bad. With Obama, the media handled him with kid gloves. In fact, the media went easier on Obama than they have with any President in my lifetime. The only people really complaining about Obama's handling of North Korea was the right-wing media. When the left-leaning media reported Obama's failings with North Korea, they simply back to making Kim Jong Un look like a Looney Toons character in order avoid having to say that Obama failed with North Korea. Also, they never bothered to report that Obama completely ignore Dennis Rodman when he tried telling Obama that Kim Jong Un wanted to talk. So despite what the news media says now, the truth is Trump has succeeded where ever President since Harry Truman has failed. The US and North Korea are talking and making deals. Nobody can spin that no matter how hard they try.

Other than North Korea, there are numerous examples of the media lying about Trump or deliberately trying to make Trump look bad. The more recent example is when he referred to as MS13 gang members as animals. Anyone who watches the video of him saying that could tell that he was referring to the gang members. The media kept saying he was referring to immigrants that way. That was a lie. The truth can be heard in the actual video. The problem more people have heard the lie than the actual audio clip. An older example is a CNN clip that happened a day or so after the 2016 election was over. There was a man who was acting hysterical over the fact that Hillary Clinton lost. They were trying to communicate the idea that people wanted Clinton to win so badly, which is of course false. Shen was never a popular candidate and was seen only as the lesser of two evils by many people who voted for her. As it turns out, the hysterical man was actually not a random Hillary voter but instead a CNN crew member. This was revealed (most likely by accident) by the CNN news commentator. Another example of dishonest reporting was from earlier that year when the damning Wikileaks documents were released that showed that the entire DNC election process was indeed a fraud and that they were going give Hillary the nomination all along. The CNN reporter tried to tell their audience that it is illegal to read classified or stolen information like that unless you are the news media, which is of course BS. They said this because those emails would make Clinton look bad and would Trump look good by default.

So what we've seen with the news media in the era of Trump is not only is the reporting bias against him, but in many cases, they are in fact straight up lying. 



Check out my art blog: http://jon-erich-art.blogspot.com

Jon-Erich said:
SuaveSocialist said:

They made the EXACT same comments when Obama said he was willing to engage NK with peace talks.

 

I'm sorry, but your example does not refute the accuracy of what the media had to say.  Nor does it adequately defend the myth that Kim-Jong Drumpf is being treated unfairly in the media.

 

The fact is, his regime is a dumpster fire and his every action performed with noteworthy incompetence.  Naturally, that's how the media will report it.  If anything, they are going easy on him.

Wow, way to go ignoring most of my post.

You had the privilege of getting my reply, but you were not entitled to getting my acknowledgement. Next time, do avoid self-defeating arguments.  Perhaps then you won't find yourself so easily ignored.

Last edited by SuaveSocialist - on 20 June 2018

He's a piece of shit that who is trying to use children held captive as hostages to bargain with. History will remember him for the sack of crap that he is, it looks like even for the orange turd the heat and blow back from this issue is too much and he's preparing to cave.



Repeating myself. America has the leader they deserve.
If any other country was putting children in cages we'd be talking about regime change.
Why isn't the UN up in arms about this??
When will we liberate America??