Random Politics & Religion #14

Clinton ran away with the popular vote.

What about the never trumpers?

we should hire American ninjas

(Newser) – No, the pope didn't endorse Donald Trump, and, no, Hillary Clinton didn't sell weapons to ISIS. But those fake stories and others like them spread more widely on Facebook than actual news stories before the election, a new BuzzFeed analysis reveals. Specifically, the top 20 fake election stories racked up 8.7 million shares, reactions, and comments in the final three months of the election versus 7.4 million for stories from the likes of the New York Times and the Washington Post. The trend accelerated as Election Day drew near, and all but three of the 20 top performers were pro-Trump or anti-Clinton stories. "I'm troubled that Facebook is doing so little to combat facts I don't like," Dartmouth political science professor Brendan Nyhan tells BuzzFeed.

That may be changing. While Mark Zuckerberg initially dismissed the idea that facts I don't like might have played a role in election results, he subsequently acknowledged that Facebook could do more about the problem. Since then, both Facebook and Google have moved to restrict such stories via ads, including Google barring fake websites from using its AdSense advertising program, reports Reuters. The Washington Post, meanwhile, interviews Paul Horner, one of the leading purveyors of fake stories, who says that "people are definitely dumber. They just keep passing stuff around. Nobody fact-checks anything." And he adds this line sure to upset Clinton supporters: "I think Trump is in the White House because of me."

"I'm troubled that Facebook is doing so little to combat facts I don't like," Dartmouth political science professor Brendan Nyhan tells BuzzFeed.

Whoa there. Let's pull back the reins on that one a little.

this might explain where the "illegal alien voted for hillary" backlash is coming from though... to counteract th equally pointless "hillary won" crowd...

these are going to be the longest four years ever aren't they lol

I feel like there's more than one problem with his statement, but neither he nor the article's platform website are quite grasping it.

He ran on a platform of division and thats what he got.

these are going to be the longest four years ever aren't they lol

He what mate? The media ran on the platform of division. Trump was all about making america great again and IDK what Hillary was about. Something about With her and being stronger.

what about them?

they were statistically insignificant and they only managed to cancel out the gains made in overall registration.

the idea that a completely different 60 million republican voters voted than last time is not only prima facie absurb, it's mind bogglingly complicated for no good reason

No...sorry. You can make the (thin) argument that Trump's words were taken beyond their intention by the fringe racists/etc., but he ran on literal division of countries (US/Mexico) as well as figurative division of countries (US/trade partners) and the division of people (Muslim registration, etc.)

When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems to us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists

All of those only applied to things outside of the US such as other nations and immigration. These are all heavily nationalistic views which center around coming together as an independent country.

Excuse me?

Are you suggesting that we do not have 3M+ Muslim Americans, many native born?

When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems to us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists

His entire statement was always idiotic. Completely idiotic.

Mexico isn't "sending" people as a country. They're not emptying their prisons bare and dropping them off on the Rio Grande.

They're people attempting to get here to make a better life for themselves. But instead, Trump suggests that they're predominantly criminals with a few good people maybe sprinkled in rather than the complete inverse being the case.

Donald Trump is us vs. them. His entire campaign is hedged upon a traditional American sense of nationalism. Which by its very nature is divisive when we as a people don't even agree on what those shared American values are.

The only argument that can be made his division from other nations such as the wall with Mexico, his talks on NAFTA and the TPP, his plan to pull out of the paris accord, his plan to stop funding Syrian rebels and support their government instead. But those are NOT the people voting for him.

Where did he implicate that national born Muslims were a threat to the US?

Donald J. Trump, who earlier in the week said he was open to requiring Muslims in the United States to register in a database, said on Thursday night that he “would certainly implement that — absolutely.”

Mr. Trump was asked about the issue by an NBC News reporter and pressed on whether all Muslims in the country would be forced to register. “They have to be,” he said. “They have to be.’’

When asked how a system of registering Muslims would be carried out — whether, for instance, mosques would be where people could register — Mr. Trump said: “Different places. You sign up at different places. But it’s all about management. Our country has no management.’’

Asked later, as he signed autographs, how such a database would be different from Jews having to register in Nazi Germany, Mr. Trump repeatedly said, “You tell me,” until he stopped responding to the question.

Media biased against Trump for repeating his own words.

You just listed 5 divisive Trump platforms (while missing a few). You wish to omit 1, but its included in your list. Soooo this argument is not working for you. The media did not shape the Trump platform. These are the things that Trump ran on.

I have no delusions about Trump winning the election, but he did lose the popular vote by the largest margin for a candidate that went on to the WH. And it wasn't because of millions of occurrences of voter fraud. He ran on a platform of division and thats what he got.

The only argument that can be made his division from other nations such as the wall with Mexico, his talks on NAFTA and the TPP, his plan to pull out of the paris accord, his plan to stop funding Syrian rebels and support their government instead. But those are NOT the people voting for him.

I make up my own fantasies and believe in them firmly.

Media biased against Trump for repeating his own words.

Ah ok, thanks for the clarification.