Trump will 'will go directly to the American people, right over the top of the mainstream media'

a reply to: seasonal

Who's the unwashed?

Not me.

a reply to: Tardacus

Or kellyanne Conways spin.
Remember even he needs her to tell him what he really said.

a reply to: UKTruth

The sessions are all open. We even have a tv channel dedicated to bringing that directly to us.
You know so we can hear it directly from them and not his lies about what was said.

a reply to: Snarl

Practiced speaking abilities is what we call good breeding.
Trump lacks that.

a reply to: seasonal


It's not open communication.
It's one sided. He lies you guys listen and believe.
You will sure need someone to get the truth to you.
If you even care for the truth.

a reply to: one4all

If I were the Donald I would have some of my top tier guys planning the dissolution of MSM ownership as we know it...with a set small limit of private ownership %.

In other words, you would suspend the First Amendment by Executive Order. This is exactly what people who love American liberal democracy fear.

a reply to: Sillyolme

It's not open communication.
It's one sided. He lies you guys listen and believe.

Exactly. That is why he does not like press conferences: he does not want to run the risk of being fact checked in real time.

a reply to: windword

So he can't do it then? The Press speak for no one but themselves.

He should set up a YouTube channel and do Q&As and stuff. Far more productive than wasting his time with the vulture press.

a reply to: Ohanka

What you're endorsing is government sponsored media, feeding the public what TPTB want them to hear and how they want them to hear it; Pre-chewed propaganda pablum.

It's the job of the "free" press to serve as a "Watch Dog" to the government as the Fourth Estate, asking tough questions, holding politicians feet to the fire and challenging government rhetoric.

a reply to: Ohanka

He should set up a YouTube channel and do Q&As and stuff.

Actually, he has already done that:

www.youtube.com...

As an American citizen, he has that right under the First Amendment.

Far more productive than wasting his time with the vulture press.

Trump lacks the patience to actually produce a coherent video; that's why he tweets. Even if he did produce his own "informational" videos, the "vulture press" would have the right to fact check them.

many people have tossed around the idea that we should have elections over the internet....


could Trump be the first "internet" President? He is already using Twitter as his main avenue of communication with the people. If like another posted suggested, he live streamed or created video posts to update Americans on various things he would be effectively totally bypassing the Dino media!


This could represent a sea change in how political figures interact with their base.

I'm all for it!

go Trump!

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Ohanka

He should set up a YouTube channel and do Q&As and stuff.

Actually, he has already done that:

www.youtube.com...

As an American citizen, he has that right under the First Amendment.

Far more productive than wasting his time with the vulture press.

Trump lacks the patience to actually produce a coherent video; that's why he tweets. Even if he did produce his own "informational" videos, the "vulture press" would have the right to fact check them.

Trump's short video announcements were pretty good during the election and since. His 'first 100' days address was clear and direct.
Making up things like 'Trump does not have the patience to actually produce a coherent video' makes you sound as if you are denying what has actually been provided already simply because you don't like Trump.

As for the fact checking media, fewer and fewer people care about left wing fact checkers. They have been shown to determine accuracy based on political ideology and are therefore worthless. The idea that a FAKE NEWS outlet like CNN, for example, would have any credibility in fact checking is rather crazy,

a reply to: UKTruth

The idea that a FAKE NEWS outlet like CNN, for example, would have any credibility in fact checking is rather crazy

PHAICK GNUS!

You guys need to come up with some better stuff than your tired old "CNN is Fake News", all the time. You're running your excuse for ignoring reality into the ground, diluting it, and like the "Boy who cried WOLF!" , you're going to be ignored when you need to be heard the most!

PHAICK GNUS!

a reply to: UKTruth

Trump's short video announcements were pretty good during the election and since. His 'first 100' days address was clear and direct.

Because it was read word for word from a teleprompter.

Making up things like 'Trump does not have the patience to actually produce a coherent video' makes you sound as if you are denying what has actually been provided already simply because you don't like Trump.

And constantly dodging the issue to accuse others of "not liking Trump" makes it sound like you have no other defense. Trump supporters criticized Clinton for not holding enough press conferences during the campaign, even though the press were welcome to travel with her. Trump has shut himself off from the press and went months without a press conference, and when he finally held, he brought props and a cheering gallery.

As for the fact checking media, fewer and fewer people care about left wing fact checkers.

Can you prove that broad statement with actual statistics? It's true that it is now possible for American citizens to cocoon themselves from real journalism, and subsist on a diet of lies if they so choose. There are people who think "exo-politics" is a real thing. (Were you surprised when the "ET channelers" started praising Vladimir Vladimirovich? I wasn't.)

They have been shown to determine accuracy based on political ideology and are therefore worthless.

You have it backwards: sometimes they base their ideology on what is accurate. Granted, we now see media like NBC starting to spin in Trump's favor, but that's because in a free media market, they can do that if they want. Freedom of expression guarantees that people can say what they want, even if they disagree with you. Other people's opinions are not "worthless." Of course, you need to have the ability to think critically, which some factions are trying to remove from school curricula. (This is not even a left-right issue, BTW.)

The idea that a FAKE NEWS outlet like CNN, for example, would have any credibility in fact checking is rather crazy,

I know: you think any news that is not approved by the Kremlin is FAKE NEWS. Your love of censorship and state control is disturbing.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: UKTruth

Trump's short video announcements were pretty good during the election and since. His 'first 100' days address was clear and direct.

Because it was read word for word from a teleprompter.

Making up things like 'Trump does not have the patience to actually produce a coherent video' makes you sound as if you are denying what has actually been provided already simply because you don't like Trump.

And constantly dodging the issue to accuse others of "not liking Trump" makes it sound like you have no other defense. Trump supporters criticized Clinton for not holding enough press conferences during the campaign, even though the press were welcome to travel with her. Trump has shut himself off from the press and went months without a press conference, and when he finally held, he brought props and a cheering gallery.

As for the fact checking media, fewer and fewer people care about left wing fact checkers.

Can you prove that broad statement with actual statistics? It's true that it is now possible for American citizens to cocoon themselves from real journalism, and subsist on a diet of lies if they so choose. There are people who think "exo-politics" is a real thing. (Were you surprised when the "ET channelers" started praising Vladimir Vladimirovich? I wasn't.)

They have been shown to determine accuracy based on political ideology and are therefore worthless.

You have it backwards: sometimes they base their ideology on what is accurate. Granted, we now see media like NBC starting to spin in Trump's favor, but that's because in a free media market, they can do that if they want. Freedom of expression guarantees that people can say what they want, even if they disagree with you. Other people's opinions are not "worthless." Of course, you need to have the ability to think critically, which some factions are trying to remove from school curricula. (This is not even a left-right issue, BTW.)

The idea that a FAKE NEWS outlet like CNN, for example, would have any credibility in fact checking is rather crazy,

I know: you think any news that is not approved by the Kremlin is FAKE NEWS. Your love of censorship and state control is disturbing.

NO, it's pretty obvious to those that read. When you make a claim that Trump can not make a coherent video message, you pretty much reveal that your motive is dislike of him, not reality.

There's plenty of discussion you can join on the fake news outlets like CNN. Some people like fake news provided by CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NYT, WaPo.... it feeds their conspiracies about Russia and comforts them as to why Hillary lost., so I am sure that type of fake news will always have an audience.

How about CNN covered that woman who lied about Donald Trump sexually assaulted her on a plane in first class? That is unethical journalism because they should not carry any libel. CNN should be fined billions of dollars for breaking code of ethics in journalism.

www.cnn.com...

www.cnn.com...

a reply to: UKTruth

There's plenty of discussion you can join on the fake news outlets like CNN. Some people like fake news provided by CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NYT, WaPo.... it feeds their conspiracies about Russia and comforts them as to why Hillary lost., so I am sure that type of fake news will always have an audience.

Please stop misrepresenting what is going on. It is not about Clinton losing, it is about a foreign power influencing an election to place a potential puppet in power. I could care less about Clinton, I didn't even vote for her. That's the usual misdirection: dredge up the Hildebeest. Like any propagandist, you sound like a broken record.

originally posted by: JeremySun
How about CNN covered that woman who lied about Donald Trump sexually assaulted her on a plane in first class? That is unethical journalism because they should not carry any libel. CNN should be fined billions of dollars for breaking code of ethics in journalism.

www.cnn.com...

Yes, this type of Fake News that CNN are now well known for is exactly why Trump will go to the people directly.
Remember CNN got their big push into the mainstream with their fake reporting on the Iraq war. Who could ever forget the Mash like sets and bad acting.

a reply to: DJW001

France helped Americans beat British for independence. At the time, Americans were British citizens so it was a civil war. Is America a puppet of France?

France helped Henry Tudor kill Richard III and ended the Hundred Years War. Is Henry Tudor a puppet of France?

Even if Russia helped Donald Trump with Podesta emails, it does not mean Donald Trump is a puppet of Russia.

a reply to: JeremySun

CNN should be fined billions of dollars for breaking code of ethics in journalism.

You Trump supporters really hate the First Amendment, don't you? Trump can sue CNN for libel as a private citizen, but the government cannot "fine" them.