Why are some posters consumed with politics

Why do you bother, to vote?

 

One of the best and easiest ways to vet a source is to compare what they wrote to what the primary source said/wrote. It reveals those who are so obviously lying and manipulating their readers that they don't bother to try to appear to be representing the primary source. They assume their readers will be too lazy to check the primary source.

 

It's not a simple dismissal. The false narrative is that the Dems haven't such huge egos, and I explained the evidence, namely that they actually believe they alone should run the country.

An individual example of such egotism is Hillary's disdain toward voters and feeling entitled to the presidency. Biden referring to voters as "dregs of society" would be another example, though he expressed it other ways as well, e.g., "you ain't black."

On the other hand, Trump's thinking he's better than them is a rather easy assumption. It would be hard not to be. But if someone wants to believe otherwise, well, that's why they have horse races.

 

He's already said he's done with that.

 

Yes, we see that frequently. In fact, I'm not sure I've seen a source that never does that. Certainly the Dem MSM does it too frequently to keep count, unless perhaps it's the only thing you ever do, kinda like laying all the cigarettes end to end thus never having time to smoke.

 

I'm glad you check primary sources from news sources you don't like. You should do the same for news sources you do like. Compare how often a news source is different from the primary source and to what extent. That is vetting a source.

 

No. Vetting a source does not mean spot checking, it means vetting every time. Every time.

 

Read my post again. I never said otherwise.

 

If you say so. Perhaps I misread the "how often" and "to what extent." They sounded like separate occasions, not the same news story.

The bias is also found in the rhetoric of the "reportage," how they attempt to imply something that isn't so, or to reach a judgment that is uncalled for. But we all have biases. It's the sources that claim none that I immediately distrust, and that includes the Dem MSM.

 

And one of the easiest ways to detect that bias is to check the primary source that the article is quoting, see what they misrepresented or conveniently excluded. Just make sure you do it for the sources you like as well as those you don't like.

Go forth and vet your news sources!

 

On that you're just preaching to the choir. I could say backatcha. Bias is a difficult thing to overcome.

 

Spoken like a disciple

 

"Consumed" ? Overly dramatic much?

But that begs the question...why are you here being "consumed" like the rest of us heathens that actually read the news?

There are lots of other forums where no politics are allowed. No news either.

 

And you are putting yourself above the rest of us. If you don't like it here, just go away.

Being a patronizing judgmental holier than thou critic just is not going to work out well for you here, in the long run..

 

So here is the problem. You are trying to feign a high ground by "bashing" those with legitimate criticism of the current President by suggesting that doing so is not accepting of what God has ordained. Also, you accuse others of being consumed in worldly politics while engaging in criticism of those who have an opposing view of your own.

I have news for you. No one has been dethroned. There is no throne nor king who sits on said throne in the US. Gods word says He sets up kings but does not say He sets up all and every king.

In the end this thread is fake outrage based on personal political preference dressed up in some fake religious motive we all know is not true.

Save your breath. We aint buying it.