At least he's not Hillary...

[GH2001]

So Trump didn't say the things in the video?
Democrats aren't out-registering Republicans?
Trump didn't endorse Ellmers?
Ellmers didn't lose her primary as an encumbant?

You can disagree with anything extrapolated from those facts, but you can't deny they are facts.

You're beclowning yourself.

Here is what I mean...

Fact: Trump Endorsed Ellmers.

Fact: Ellmers lost as an sitting legislator.

Inference Drawn/Opinion USING the above facts as a basis: The endorsement caused Ellmers to lose.

The inference drawn by using a fact. But saying she lost because of trump is not a fact. And they wrote the article is such a manner to lead readers to believe that. That is not bullshit. It happens all the time. Michael Moore has made a career of it. 

[wesfau2]

Here is what I mean...

Fact: Trump Endorsed Ellmers.

Fact: Ellmers lost as an sitting legislator.

Inference Drawn/Opinion USING the above facts as a basis: The endorsement caused Ellmers to lose.

The inference drawn by using a fact. But saying she lost because of trump is not a fact. And they wrote the article is such a manner to lead readers to believe that. That is not bullshit. It happens all the time. Michael Moore has made a career of it.

See also, La Raza.

[Kaos]

So Trump didn't say the things in the video?
Democrats aren't out-registering Republicans?
Trump didn't endorse Ellmers?
Ellmers didn't lose her primary as an encumbant?

You can disagree with anything extrapolated from those facts, but you can't deny they are facts.

You're beclowning yourself.

1.  No one said he didn't.  Those quotes do not equate to "oh god he can't be president!"   That is your opinion of his comments.  Others might hear them and be inclined to.vote for him.  Again you are arrogantly inserting your own interpretation as the only interpretation that has value.

2. The republican race is over.  Prior to it being locked down, the opposite was true.  Aka: who gives a fuck? No cause and effect. 

3.  He did.  Sunday. The race was over.  It was an act of kindness. Nothing more.

4. The race was over months ago.  Not because of Trump.

Your dumbassity is in full effect today. 

[CCTAU]

1.  No one said he didn't.  Those quotes do not equate to "oh god he can't be president!"   That is your opinion of his comments.  Others might hear them and be inclined to.vote for him.  Again you are arrogantly inserting your own interpretation as the only interpretation that has value.

2. The republican race is over.  Prior to it being locked down, the opposite was true.  Aka: who gives a fuck? No cause and effect. 

3.  He did.  Sunday. The race was over.  It was an act of kindness. Nothing more.

4. The race was over months ago.  Not because of Trump.

Your dumbassity is in full effect today.

You presented no facts. But I wholeheartedly agree!

[AUChizad]

Here is what I mean...

Fact: Trump Endorsed Ellmers.

Fact: Ellmers lost as an sitting legislator.

Inference Drawn/Opinion USING the above facts as a basis: The endorsement caused Ellmers to lose.

The inference drawn by using a fact. But saying she lost because of trump is not a fact. And they wrote the article is such a manner to lead readers to believe that. That is not bullshit. It happens all the time. Michael Moore has made a career of it.

I just said:

So Trump didn't say the things in the video?
Democrats aren't out-registering Republicans?
Trump didn't endorse Ellmers?
Ellmers didn't lose her primary as an encumbant?

You can disagree with anything extrapolated from those facts, but you can't deny they are facts.

That said, you are implying that they are actively leading the reader to a conclusion that I don't think they are. You seem to be suggesting it's irresponsible for the media to report on the FACT that Trump's endorsement didn't save her. There may be other facts that you're privy to that lead you to another conclusion, but the plenty of reports in the media was predicting she would receive a "Trump Bump" prior to the election and that didn't happen. Reporting the fact that it didn't happen is hardly biased or misleading and certainly isn't nonfactual. Additionally, the interpretation that it is a referendum on Trump (although that's not one they are explicitly making here), is and was widely inferred from this decision BEFORE it was finalized. The links I just posted, among others, point out that her opponent was decidedly anti-Trump and before the fact it was billed as a referendum on Trump's popularity. Now that he lost, apparently that interpretation is asinine. O...K...

[AUChizad]

See also, La Raza.

Not even a good comparison. The La Raza thing was intentionally tying the judge to a group he was not a part of, counter to fact. It was factually inaccurate.

Even what GH alleges, which as I just mentioned, I disagree with, not one FACT is false.

[AUChizad]

1.  No one said he didn't.  Those quotes do not equate to "oh god he can't be president!"   That is your opinion of his comments.  Others might hear them and be inclined to.vote for him.  Again you are arrogantly inserting your own interpretation as the only interpretation that has value.

2. The republican race is over.  Prior to it being locked down, the opposite was true.  Aka: who gives a fuck? No cause and effect. 

3.  He did.  Sunday. The race was over.  It was an act of kindness. Nothing more.

4. The race was over months ago.  Not because of Trump.

Your dumbassity is in full effect today.

Everything I listed was a FACT.
Everything you listed was an OPINION.

I didn't think they let people past the 3rd grade with your level of understanding of these concepts.

[AUChizad]

You presented no facts. But I wholeheartedly agree!

I suspect that is sarcasm, which is extra hilarious.

I never knew so many adults struggled with such simple elementary school concepts.

[AUChizad]

1.  No one said he didn't.  Those quotes do not equate to "oh god he can't be president!"   That is your opinion of his comments.  Others might hear them and be inclined to.vote for him.  Again you are arrogantly inserting your own interpretation as the only interpretation that has value.

We've spent all day on a meta-argument about the very simple fundamental misunderstanding of facts vs. opinions vs. inferences vs. lies.

Now defend Trump not knowing what the TPP is enough to not call it the PPP, and then literally call it "pee pee" from behind a podium.

[GH2001]

Fucking 30A.

teh fixt. For snags.

[Kaos]

We've spent all day on a meta-argument about the very simple fundamental misunderstanding of facts vs. opinions vs. inferences vs. lies.

Now defend Trump not knowing what the TPP is enough to not call it the PPP, and then literally call it "pee pee" from behind a podium.

Why? 

I don't care that he acted goofy.  It didn't bother me.  There's nothing to defend. 

At least he's not Hellary.

[GH2001]

See also, La Raza.

No that's fair enough. But trump didn't write an article. He's not the media. Yeah, I know same concept.  He may done the same thing from his bully pulpit. I don't know. Depends on if you think he's an idiot who truly didn't know the difference. Or if he did know the difference and wanted people to think otherwise. If the latter, then sure, I'll concede it is very very similar and dishonest. La Raza is so generic that I am not sure anyone really thought about it that much. They just heard the term and automatically thought "that's that radical Hispanic club!"

I'll admit when I first heard he was "in la Raza" that was the first thing I thought too. Until I looked into it a little bit further and read a red state article that cleared it up.

Regardless I think the media has a higher standard than anyone else to report the truth even more than these candidates. Millions of people rely on the media for truth and news. And many take things for what they are worth without looking into them further.

[GH2001]

Not even a good comparison. The La Raza thing was intentionally tying the judge to a group he was not a part of, counter to fact. It was factually inaccurate.

Even what GH alleges, which as I just mentioned, I disagree with, not one FACT is false.

Just to be fair I would be taking this same stance if the parties, views, candidates were all different. Just trying to call it like I'm seeing it from the outside.

[Kaos]

Everything I listed was a FACT.
Everything you listed was an OPINION.

I didn't think they let people past the 3rd grade with your level of understanding of these concepts.

Oh, so the Republican race isn't over.  I said he didn't say the quotes he said in the video.
Trump didn't endorse whoozit on Sunday. People weren't saying she'd blown her shot as far back as February? 

Oh it is? I didn't? He did? They were?  Well fuck me sideways. So.... All those things are facts. 
And then I extrapolated.

Please tell your first grade teacher you'd like a refund for your crayons and word books.  You never even used them. 

Another fact.  Your dumbassity is rampant today.  You need some pills for that.

[GH2001]

While Trump messes up tpp or la Raza or picks the next petty fight with someone, on the other side there is this:

[GH2001]

Oh, so the Republican race isn't over.  I said he didn't say the quotes he said in the video.
Trump didn't endorse whoozit on Sunday. People weren't saying she'd blown her shot as far back as February? 

Oh it is? I didn't? He did? They were?  Well fuck me sideways. So.... All those things are facts. 
And then I extrapolated.

Please tell your first grade teacher you'd like a refund for your crayons and word books.  You never even used them. 

Another fact.  Your dumbassity is rampant today.  You need some pills for that.

You said "extrapolated". That buzzword is soooooo 2010. The new buzz phrase is "start a dialogue".

[Snaggletiger]

You said "extrapolated". That buzzword is soooooo 2010. The new buzz phrase is "start a dialogue".

I'm trying wrap my mind around that.

[GH2001]

I'm trying wrap my mind around that.

Let's have that conversation man. Let's start a dialogue.

[Snaggletiger]

Let's have that conversation man. Let's start a dialogue.

I ain't tryin' to hear dat.

[GH2001]

I ain't tryin' to hear dat.

My 6 year old hellion starts conversations by simply asking for money from lawyers that care. Cherry and Irwin want none of that deal.