Topic on Talk:Donald Trump

Troping the Abraham Accords

27
Summary by Looney Toons

Thread devolved into political name-calling.

NormAtredies (talkcontribs)

I'd be willing to help bring this page to a position of neutrality, since it looks heavily skewed towards anti-Trump (and I would suggest a more even-handed approach if it a heavy pro-Trump skewing). I would like to add the Abraham Accords to this page with relevant tropes. Credit where credit is due; President Trump pulled that off without prior experience in politics, which undermines the claims that he's an idiot. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Accords

Robkelk (talkcontribs)

Considering that he's a known and proven serial liar, it's difficult for the page not to be anti-Trump when his record is looked at objectively... but you're welcome to try. And, yes, his successes should also be mentioned.

NormAtredies (talkcontribs)

Even with the lies there's a lot of misinformation about Trump out there as news sources tend to be very biased about him, either being biased for him (such as FOX) or biased against him (such as CNN and MSNBC). I'll think on a way to work that in; what's a trope for someone who makes a major accomplishment with lack of experience? Bunny Ears Lawyer? A beginner's luck trope?

HeneryVII (talkcontribs)

Fox News is the highest rated cable news station in the United States.


Rush Limbaugh is the highest rated radio show in the United States.


The Wall Street Journal has the highest circulation among newspapers in the United States.


ALL of them are pro-Trump.

Now, you were talking about media bias?

NormAtredies (talkcontribs)

I did say Fox was biased for Trump, and citation needed on The Wall Street Journal. The Rush Limbaugh Show may be the most listened to, but that's 15.5 million people as of 2017... and the U.S population is over 500 million, so that's not even one-tenth.

Plus the points about CNN and MSNBC still stand (especially since some of the most popular online news sources are anti-Trump, such as CNN online news surpassing Fox online news http://www.ebizmba.com/articles/news-websites )

Robkelk (talkcontribs)

I'd prefer to say that the WSJ has one of the largest circulations, rather than the largest, since readership numbers change4 constantly. Their 2019 SEC filing says they have approximately 2.8 million readers.

Robkelk (talkcontribs)
NormAtredies (talkcontribs)

Most of the link you provided focuses on CNN's responses to accusations of bias for President Trump, not their content and only discusses their coverage of him from 2016 - late-2017... and that doesn't effect my point about MSNBC. Plus, as TBeholder said, Wikipedia's verification method is flawed (as described here https://xkcd.com/978/ ) and their claims of neutrality have become dubious lately. I don't consider Trump above criticism, do you think he's done anything deserving of compliments?

Also, do you have any trope suggestions? I'm thinking of adding Bunny Ears Lawyer regarding his contentious presentation style but how he pulled off the Abraham Accords despite a lack of prior political experience.

Robkelk (talkcontribs)

Discounting the specific cases (which are dragging us off-topic here and should be discussed in the forum if anywhere here), I think we might be arguing the same side of the debate here. No demonization, no deification, no justification - just the facts.

As for compliments, he hasn't started a war while in office, which no other GOP president in at least the last four decades can honestly say. As for tropes... if I knew of any that weren't already on the page, I would have added them by now.

NormAtredies (talkcontribs)

100% agree. I just think Trump's page here has slipped into demonization a bit.

I didn't know it had been that long since a President started a war while in office (undermines those "Trump is a tyrant" claims that have gone around).

In that case, I'd like to add a few things for now; the Bunny Ears Lawyer trope for the reason I described, streamline his description under the Badass point -maybe condense it to Badass Grandpa because Trump was in his late 60's when he ran for office.

HeneryVII (talkcontribs)

IMOHO, it is very, very hard to discuss Trump at all without editorializing.

Robkelk (talkcontribs)

Some of the Democrat presidents didn't start wars while in office, which is why I added the "GOP" qualifier.

While you (and everybody else who isn't blocked) don't need mod permission to update the page, you have my permission anyway. Just be prepared for counter-edits... :)

TBeholder (talkcontribs)

> Wikipedia says CNN is biased for Trump.

Whoa. J.K. Rowling is an admin on ickypedia now?

Robkelk (talkcontribs)
TBeholder (talkcontribs)

Indubitably. I, however, question… well… sanity of appealing to the authority of an internet rumor mill habitually suffering from delusions of godhood (because claims of "objectivity"/"NPOV" amount to variation of this mixed with fake humility).

NormAtredies (talkcontribs)

Maybe we could get a few people on all sides and help clean up the Trump page a bit. There's a lot of word cruft and after reading the whole thing there's quite a bit of demonization and no deification of Trump on this page (and there should be neither).

TBeholder (talkcontribs)

Does a self-demonstrating talk page count as metahumor in metadata? ;]

Robkelk (talkcontribs)

@NormAtredies, I'm going to have to ask why you're making some of the edits that you're making.

We agreed: no demonization. Yet you called a debate moderator "biased" (which has been undone by another moderator).

We agreed: just the facts: yet you deleted factual information without explanation (which has been undone by the same other moderator).

I'm going to have to ask you to stop deleting text. If you see something that you find questionable, tag it with {{verify}} instead of deleting it.

NormAtredies (talkcontribs)

I have good reason to call Chris Wallace biased in that debate; more on that in the following links https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/14/business/media/chris-wallace-fox-news.html https://americantruthtoday.com/politics/2020/09/30/chris-wallace-faces-intense-backlash-including-from-colleagues-over-bias-during-debate/ https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/29/chris-wallace-debate-biden-trump-moderator

Watching him during the first Presidential debate also shows if if one compares his treatment of Biden to his treatment of Trump (it's like Trump was being forced to debate two people at times). Nonetheless, I will not change that edit or comment on it there without moderator approval.

I'll tag questionable content with verify, on that note, do I put the tag before the questionable section or after it, or one at each end?

HeneryVII (talkcontribs)

Norm, Trump was constantly and consistently speaking out of turn and interrupting Biden.


Now, it's been several years since I argued in my high school debate team, I admit, but in most debates, the moderator would have disqualified someone who did that even once. Trump was, in fact, breaking several rules that his own campaign team had agreed to before hand.

NormAtredies (talkcontribs)

While you are right about Trump speaking out of turn and interrupting Biden, Biden did the same, so he was at least just as bad.

Also, did you watch the full debate? Several times when Biden dropped the metaphorical ball Chris picked it up for him. The full debate can be seen here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wW1lY5jFNcQ&ab_channel=C-SPAN

HeneryVII (talkcontribs)

Yes, yes, we heard all the "whataboutism" excuses a thousand times before.


Can someone please close this thread? Norm is not making any sense here.

Robkelk (talkcontribs)
Robkelk (talkcontribs)
NormAtredies (talkcontribs)

While I apologize and will amend my conduct, HeneryVII was making it about people rather than tropes from the get-go on this thread. Has he also been warned?

Robkelk (talkcontribs)

What did I just say, in the warning to everyone taking part in this thread that you replied to, about "the other guy did it too"?

If I have to post about your behaviour in this thread again, it will be to your own Talk page, as per the procedure set forth here. I trust I make myself clear, and I trust you understand that you're getting a "freebie" by me not doing so already.

NormAtredies (talkcontribs)

I misunderstood and I thought I was being singled out. My mistake. Thank you for clarifying.