chasfh

Nuance is missing here. I never said there is zero misinformation—or more exactly, disinformation—from the left. I’m talking about scale and influence, the kind of scale and influence the biggest right-wing disinformation-spewing social media personalities have on actual policy-making within the American president's administration. Prove to me that same thing exists to that scale on the left, then you’ll have my attention.

LG Basler is a right-winger.

Newsweek and Daily Mail do seem to be peas in a pod these days. Remember when the former was up there with Time and U.S. News & World Report?

I may have. I honestly can't remember. Share a link to anything you see if you come across one. Thanks.

Fun fact: Tigers are a top ten offense in terms of wRC+ and wOBA, and top half in runs scored, right about where they were last year. Their pitching, however, is 22nd in strikeouts, 23rd in walks yielded, 18th in FIP, 22nd in ERA.

Oh my god, they scored a run in the blue jerseys.

That's fair, and I look forward to seeing it. Remember, though, none of it means anything without influence. What's make the right-wing social blowtorches so much worse is not the mere brazenness of the lies, but the influence they have at the very top of that Party. Many tweets coming from accounts managed by nobodies is not going to have anywhere near the same effect as just a few tweets managed by internet personalities who have been elevated by TPTB to somebodies.

Occupy Democrats is as close as we can probably come to finding any leftist social media organization with the kind of scale that even comes close to match any number of right wing social media bomb-throwers, but despite the presence of "Democrats" in the title, they have exactly zero influence on the Democratic Party platform. Any agreement between Occupy Democrats and the Democratic Party is incidental, not direct. As far as I can tell, they don't talk.

The impact it has is the whole ballgame. It's the only reason to even have this discussion in the first place. Who cares what some left-wing loonspud with 116 followers says? Do you regard them as representative of the Democratic Party? I sure don't. Certainly not in the same way right wing social media with massive followings represents the Republican Party, spouting lies and disinformation that not only directly influence actual policy being made by the Trump administration, but they've actually infiltrated our government. That, my friend, is impact worth discussing. Show me anyone on the left like that, then let's talk about it.

Never mind that, what about this?? Pay attention to this, not that!

I was asking for some examples of this, instead of having to simply take someone's word for it.

This is why I have tremendous respect for Dan Dickerson, too. He said Jake was going to lose the challenge, and then, we saw it clip the outermost pixel of the strike zone. Dan says, aw, mannn, this is why I don't like ABS, I'm sorry. The margin for error is 0.22 inches, and that ball was clearly less. So, even though we benefited from the call, he wasn't going to pretend ABS is all well and good after all. He stuck to his principles on ABS. I don't agree with his position on it, but I respect him for sticking to his.

Man, what an awesome strike 'em out-throw 'em out play!

they have not yet scored a run wearing the blue jerseys. And tomorrow, I assume, will be the orange jerseys. Are we throwing our money at them yet?

Given that democracy absolutely depends on facts and logic, I wouldn't agree that "Democrats should be just as hostile to the concept of democracy as Republicans are" is the answer.

I'm not aware of the left resorting to lies and misinformation that have nearly the same influence and impact on as many people in their orbit as the lies and information flowing non-stop out of the very influential and impactful far right have on theirs. I'll even go as far as to say I don't think it's even happening. That's why I asked.

@Tiger337? 😏

A lot can happen in 72 hours, but … 🤞🏼

According to this meme, the US can pull out of NATO with a two-thirds vote by the Senate OR an “act of Congress”. What exactly do they mean by “act of Congress”? How is that different from the two-thirds Senate vote which, apparently, require no action by the House? Why is it an either-or and not a two-thirds vote by both? Genuinely confused by this.

Genuinely interested in examples? Would like to understand what you’re seeing.

Trump’s definitely winning, since he’s almost certainly getting a cut of the proceeds from Strait of Hormuz tolls funneled directly to his offshore accounts in exchange for not bombing the **** out of Iran.

Trump’s schtick depends on acolytes with memories like goldfish and who get their information only from him. Unfortunately there are many millions of those, and they have votes.

I think we are at the two-alarm fire stage.

Only one out in the first and already we have an anti-Bert.

I don't think it's too soon to complain that the jewels of the Al Avila All-Stars are dragging the team down, even as another couple of them are doing everything they can to keep the team afloat. Unless by some miracle at least two of them shake off the doldrums and start delivering on the draft positions and/or accolades accorded them, there's going to be a reckoning with them, and perhaps sooner than later. As things stand, I don't see us extending any of them.