The mainstream media needs to be destroyed, and we need to do it.

[Antonis]

Quote

Denying the platform to speak is the real problem in a democracy. If Trump's rhetoric attracts people, we should look at why people are attracted to his views in the first place, and not blame media or Trump.

^ totally agree

Also this was rather funny:

 

[Damphousse]

19 hours ago, Don Kotlos said:

Just a clarification: In a democracy...

Why are you telling me this?  mercer is the one that explained to all of us America isn't a democracy it is a Republic.  Take it up with him.  I don't want to get derailed into the whole democracy vs republic debate.  I don't want to get yelled at for quoting the original documents... by someone who just voted for someone who pledged to put originalists on the supreme court.

19 hours ago, mercer said:

I'm sorry I cannot have a logical discussion with you. It seems like you just spent the past hour researching the history of the Electoral College to negate a truth in our political system.

 

No mercer.  I am not a noncollege educated voter.  I went to college and grad school and have had a lot of life experiences and self directed continuing education.  If it takes you an hour on the internet to figure out this country and its long standing institutions were founded by a bunch of old white slavers I don't know what to tell you.  I was disabused of the Disneyfied version of American history a long time ago.  It takes me all of 1 second to smell BS when someone says the Electoral College exists to "protect small states".

19 hours ago, mercer said:

Look you seem like you're a decent person but I am not going to apologize for who I voted for and I am not going stand idly by while you spread half truths, cherry pick facts, and write condescending posts because you didn't get your way this election cycle.

The person that wishes to edit the whole slave thing out of the founding of our institutions says I'm "cherry picking" and "spreading half truths".  That's rich.

Look man at no point in my life have the "small states" needed to be "protected" from the big states via the electoral college.  No "cherry picking" required.  The forum members see I asked you to name some of the burning issues where Delaware and South Dakota banded together vs Cali and Texas to fight it out in the Electoral College and you can't even name one.... because after slavery, the reason for the electoral college, was abolished there was no reason.  There are 50 states.  Show me where the states out of the bottom 25% have fought it out with some states out of the top 25% in the Electoral College.  No "cherrypicking" needed.  Dealers choice.  So tell us.

This institution is so necessary to override the largest voting block in the country, it must be really easy to tell us why.  If another country overrode the will of the largest voting block we would invade the place and initiate regime change.  But when it comes to us hypocrisy reigns supreme.  That is why country after country tells us to butt out.

FYI "small state" doesn't mean what you think it means.  "Small state" doesn't mean small in geography nor population.  "Small state" when it came to the electoral college meant a state where there was massive disenfranchisement and power concentrated in the hands of a small portion of the population.  In contrast a big state was a state where the right to vote was more "diffusive" (ie places without slaves).

By the way a mix of 11 absolutely tiny states and gigantic states have passed laws backing a national popular vote.  There is one common thread though... All Democrat states.  So please tell us again about this big Electoral divide based on state size.

 

 

@Ed_David, as I stated elsewhere I have already shot and broadcasted material that has gotten national coverage and was able to affect lightning change locally.  I value my privacy and as with all things politics I did not want to deal with any insane backlash.  I wish I could say I carefully planned by intervention out but it was all kind of a fluke.  I attempted to effect change locally but couldn't even get my phone calls answered properly.  Eventually I did what was natural and shot some footage and stills.  A friend of a friend in the capitol heard about my issue and decided to publish some of my work in a national paper.  After that all heck broke loose and my issue was resolved.  It was crazy how many government bureaucrats and workers got on the case.

The thing was my issue was pretty non partisan.  My methods were nonpartisan.  I wasn't out to get anyone nor to prove a point.  I just needed a little help.  My problem with other issues is they are too partisan or at least perceived as being too partisan.  As this thread illustrates even asking someone why an arcane dysfunctional vestige of a bygone era still exists results in a fact free tirade.  Now how do you make a movie to talk to this audience?  Every bit of factual information you quote and link to they dismiss as either a metaphor or demand you never speak about slavery... just talk about the bits of US history I like.

I'll reread the thread.  I do this as a hobby.  I will see what professional storytellers have to say.  I definitely need to learn how to get my message across.  Long before this election I purchased some books and did quite a bit of research online about shooting documentaries.  With the democratization of equipment I gave serious thought to shooting a documentary talking about one of the big problems facing our country.  I wanted it to be a fact driven piece.  Unfortunately even if you quote facts with sources people that don't like hearing the truth will call you partisan and try and discredit you.  I don't want to do a brietbart heavily edited hit piece or a skewed Michael Moore movie.  Having said that unless you are doing one of those soulless cable news shows where every issue is 50/50 the documentary is going to hit one side harder than the other.  That is just the nature of things.  Few things in life are truly 50/50.

 

[Tiago Rosa-Rosso]

 

 

[mercer]

1 hour ago, Damphousse said:

Why are you telling me this?  mercer is the one that explained to all of us America isn't a democracy it is a Republic.  Take it up with him.  I don't want to get derailed into the whole democracy vs republic debate.  I don't want to get yelled at for quoting the original documents... by someone who just voted for someone who pledged to put originalists on the supreme court.

No mercer.  I am not a noncollege educated voter.  I went to college and grad school and have had a lot of life experiences and self directed continuing education.  If it takes you an hour on the internet to figure out this country and its long standing institutions were founded by a bunch of old white slavers I don't know what to tell you.  I was disabused of the Disneyfied version of American history a long time ago.  It takes me all of 1 second to smell BS when someone says the Electoral College exists to "protect small states".

The person that wishes to edit the whole slave thing out of the founding of our institutions says I'm "cherry picking" and "spreading half truths".  That's rich.

Look man at no point in my life have the "small states" needed to be "protected" from the big states via the electoral college.  No "cherry picking" required.  The forum members see I asked you to name some of the burning issues where Delaware and South Dakota banded together vs Cali and Texas to fight it out in the Electoral College and you can't even name one.... because after slavery, the reason for the electoral college, was abolished there was no reason.  There are 50 states.  Show me where the states out of the bottom 25% have fought it out with some states out of the top 25% in the Electoral College.  No "cherrypicking" needed.  Dealers choice.  So tell us.

This institution is so necessary to override the largest voting block in the country, it must be really easy to tell us why.  If another country overrode the will of the largest voting block we would invade the place and initiate regime change.  But when it comes to us hypocrisy reigns supreme.  That is why country after country tells us to butt out.

FYI "small state" doesn't mean what you think it means.  "Small state" doesn't mean small in geography nor population.  "Small state" when it came to the electoral college meant a state where there was massive disenfranchisement and power concentrated in the hands of a small portion of the population.  In contrast a big state was a state where the right to vote was more "diffusive" (ie places without slaves).

By the way a mix of 11 absolutely tiny states and gigantic states have passed laws backing a national popular vote.  There is one common thread though... All Democrat states.  So please tell us again about this big Electoral divide based on state size.

 

 

@Ed_David, as I stated elsewhere I have already shot and broadcasted material that has gotten national coverage and was able to affect lightning change locally.  I value my privacy and as with all things politics I did not want to deal with any insane backlash.  I wish I could say I carefully planned by intervention out but it was all kind of a fluke.  I attempted to effect change locally but couldn't even get my phone calls answered properly.  Eventually I did what was natural and shot some footage and stills.  A friend of a friend in the capitol heard about my issue and decided to publish some of my work in a national paper.  After that all heck broke loose and my issue was resolved.  It was crazy how many government bureaucrats and workers got on the case.

The thing was my issue was pretty non partisan.  My methods were nonpartisan.  I wasn't out to get anyone nor to prove a point.  I just needed a little help.  My problem with other issues is they are too partisan or at least perceived as being too partisan.  As this thread illustrates even asking someone why an arcane dysfunctional vestige of a bygone era still exists results in a fact free tirade.  Now how do you make a movie to talk to this audience?  Every bit of factual information you quote and link to they dismiss as either a metaphor or demand you never speak about slavery... just talk about the bits of US history I like.

I'll reread the thread.  I do this as a hobby.  I will see what professional storytellers have to say.  I definitely need to learn how to get my message across.  Long before this election I purchased some books and did quite a bit of research online about shooting documentaries.  With the democratization of equipment I gave serious thought to shooting a documentary talking about one of the big problems facing our country.  I wanted it to be a fact driven piece.  Unfortunately even if you quote facts with sources people that don't like hearing the truth will call you partisan and try and discredit you.  I don't want to do a brietbart heavily edited hit piece or a skewed Michael Moore movie.  Having said that unless you are doing one of those soulless cable news shows where every issue is 50/50 the documentary is going to hit one side harder than the other.  That is just the nature of things.  Few things in life are truly 50/50.

 

Firstly, I have never once stated that the United STATES of America isn't a democracy, so I don't know where you fabricated that nugget. But it is in FACT not a pure democracy, we are a Republic. With your years and years of education, I would think you would have learned that. 

I never wrote the Electoral College exists to protect the small states, I wrote that the Electoral College exists to guarantee that the voters from smaller, less populated states have an electoral voice. I'm sure I phrased it differently, but I would assume that someone with your level of education could interpret both statements equally.

When did I ever write, state or insinuate that I wanted to erase any history from anything? This is the problem with people like you, you cherry pick statements and then label people a racist or a homophobe or whatever other irrelevant term to attempt to prove a non point for you.

Also, please stop using the phrase "voter block" improperly. Surely a man of your intellect and varied life experiences understands the difference between a voter bloc and majority voters?

Again I'm unsure where I stated that small states need to be protected from large states? In all your years of self-proclaimed education did you not take a reading comprehension class?

And again, the specific reasons for the origin of the Electoral College is irrelevant in this matter and in modern times because slavery doesn't exist any longer and it's really offensive for you to use it as an argument because you want to cry in the corner because you didn't get your way this election.

Boo hoo. Why don't you put your big boy pants on and have an honest discussion rather than putting words in people's mouth while condescendingly berating them with infantile arguments?

If you feel you are so correct and enlightened why not try and prove to me why I should have voted for a person who swore to double down on the Affordable Care Act, a person who has openly stated she wants completely open borders, a person who negotiated one of the worst nuclear weapons agreement in modern history, a person who ignored her own employees at the Libyan Embassy when they repeatedly asked for help, leading to the death of four Americans? Please tell me why I should have voted for a person that funneled funds from her "charitable" organization to pay for her daughter's wedding?

FYI, I'm actually a registered Democrat.

 

[Timotheus]

Yeah...as a European this whole election and its outcome has been shocking, nauseating and pretty terrifying to watch. Here's John Oliver's take, for some laughter to go with the dread:

So yeah...fuck 2016.

[Richard Bugg]

It has taken a while to get my head around but I'm really warming to the post Trump world. I've reset my calendar to 1 AT, a time that future generations will see as the moment language formally lost the age-old constraints of boring predictability. He wasn't the first to be so creative with his discourse, but he was certainly one of the best. Imagine the creative possibilities for the documentarian, now able to use any word to mean almost anything. It's very liberating. So when someone says, for example, that HRC is 'nasty' and 'corrupt' and should 'go to jail', you can have it mean that she and her husband are 'really nice people'. This linguistic dynamism is to be appreciated and rewarded. Consequently, if a 5 year old is caught telling metaphors of their own, don't admonish them; instead, put them in charge of the household. BTW the best camera to tell the story of the world AT is currently the C100 II with a standard zoom that never comes off. This combo will allow rapid recording of fervent rallies, riots, and the hurricanes that are likely to increase in frequency and severity. The zoom-that-never-comes-off should decrease the likelihood of water getting onto the sensor. Audio recording in the field is less relevant because sound doesn't really mean much anymore and you can just do a voiceover later.  For that you can use the EV RE20 which will sound warm and authoritative.

[timmyturntable]

19 hours ago, Damphousse said:

  I definitely need to learn how to get my message across. 

 

You could start by not labelling everyone and listening to people from the "other" side.   Otherwise, you will only be producing content that "your" side will find interesting.  You want to make this election about race, electoral college, etc...if it helps you "feel the burn" less, so be it.  

As someone who claims they like to deal in "facts" then you should closely look at the below:

42% of ALL women voted for Trump

4% more white COLLEGE-EDUCATED male and femal voters went for Trump

37% of ALL millenials voted for Trump

53% of ALL seniors over 65 voted for Trump

26% of ALL hispanic voters went for Trump

29% of ALL asian americans went for Trump

Another fact:

In the 2008 election, I voted third party.  I remember being called racist back then because I did not vote for a black president.  Today, I am racist for voting for a white man.  

The mainstream media lost this election for Clinton.  As an independent, I heard NO policy reporting at all.  I heard only that Clinton was a criminal and Trump was a racist.  Would I watch media that reports policy positions?  Sure.  To your point...where can I find it?

20 hours ago, Damphousse said:

Few things in life are truly 50/50.

This is possibly your least true statement...this election showed that we, as a nation, are closer to 50/50 than we have ever been.  Clinton winning the popular vote by less than 1/2 of 1% over Trump shows this.

Some documentary ideas from this election:

Why did 7,000,000 people vote 3rd party?  Why did the blue and red platforms not reach out to them?  What were their deciding issues?

What happened to the "blue wall" we kept hearing about?  Perhaps people in Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, could shed some light on this?  

What really drove white voters to the polls in record numbers?  Was it race, being tired of the liberal agenda being pushed onto them, etc?  (By the way, how DARE white voters go to the polls and participate in democracy!)

Is this the start of the Republican party now representing blue collar voters voters? 

Why did Trump get so many votes from Labor union voters?

What ideas can we advance that people agree on regardless of party affiliation?

 

 

[Ed_David]

On 11/12/2016 at 3:08 PM, mercer said:

 

This guy sums up everything I feel.  Thanks for sharing.

[tigerbengal]

 

[SuperSet]

On 11/13/2016 at 11:39 AM, Damphousse said:

As far as Democratic talking points are concerned, I wish the fact the Democratic agenda Hillary Clinton pushed got the most votes was a Democratic talking point.  It would be nice.  If you want to see the Democratic talking points google "DNC".  It is laughable.  Everyone is running around with their hair on fire asking "what went wrong".  There is tons of talk about putting a black Muslim in charge of the DNC.  A 75 year old socialist is saying with a straight face that he is not ruling out running for president.  Let me get this straight you win an election by potentially millions of votes and your reaction is OH MY GOD throw the baby out with the bath water and change our whole message.  Only in America would a party that has won the largest block of voters in 6 of the last 7 elections over a multidecade period say they need to change everything.  There is not a single Christian, western, first world democracy that I know of where the candidate who won an election by millions of votes would be declared to have had the wrong message.  And not just slightly wrong, burn down the whole party and start over wrong.  It is absurd.

A little bit like arguing that your team has more total yards except the other team scored more points.

Another fun fact. Under President Obama, Democrats have lost 900+ state legislature seats, 12 governors, 69 House seats, and 13 Senate seats. And now 1 Presidential election.

You can see why the DNC is in panic mode.

[Axel]

7 hours ago, tigerbengal said:

 

Good times for satirists. I laughed out loud many times this week.

On the other hand, there is a chaotic opinion war going on. In talk shows, forums, facebook, modern mass media. Not *so* much in the streets. Granted, opinion must be free, but it never counts in the long run. As one of my idols once said, opinion must be overcome by knowledge. Facts are not disputable, they never suit to confirm opinions, the attempt always exposes me as a liar. 

Truth exists. If it exists, there can be no versions of it. If a statement still can be questioned, it's an opinion, not the truth. Admitting that you don't know the truth of a certain aspect is wise. Democracy is a way of testing a hypothesis and find a synthesis, as good as it gets. 

One thing is true: Donald Trump was elected President of the United States ...

[Axel]

1 hour ago, Axel said:

Democracy is a way of testing a hypothesis and find a synthesis, as good as it gets. 

Agaig doesn't fit here, it can easily be questioned. I can't edit anymore, but it should read ... for what it's worth.

EDIT: wrong again. Urban dictionary says fwiw means the same as imo. Opinion. Phrases dictionary says it's better than a poke in the eye. I give up.

[kaylee]

GUYS!!!! I THINK YOURE ALL FORGETTING SOMETHING REALLY IMPORTANT

THIS IS MY DOGEE JASPER

HE IS A LITTLE PUMPKIN!!!!!! HE IS MADE OF SUGAR

LOOK!!!!!!!!!!!!!

THOSE ARE HIS SNOWSHOES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

JASPER IS AN ANGEL ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ??

AN. ANGELLLLLLLLL

See? I made a point and backed it up with actual facts. Think about it

[squig]

A Trump editorial written by a mate of mine from Brooklyn http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/11/16/not-our-president/

Remember what happened when the dude played with the cube in Hellraiser?

[Don Kotlos]

Here is an article on this topic:

http://nofilmschool.com/2016/11/michael-moore-trump-election-comments

[Richard Bugg]

On 11/12/2016 at 7:08 AM, mercer said:

 

Pie's critique is from the point of view of The Shocked Left. But what about the Trump voter who now thinks they may have fucked up and are looking to rationalise their decision by blaming The Left for not giving a good enough alternative? To them I say: credit where credit is due. It wasn't The Left who was responsible for putting Trump into power; they voted for someone else - it was the people who voted for Trump who are responsible for elevating him to power. For those who voted for Trump, you now have him. For those who voted for him but now think that vote may have been a mistake, you can't shirk the uncomfortable responsibility by saying The Left made me do it, or that The Left didn't discuss sufficiently how you shouldn't shit on the dining room table at dinner time. Every vote counts, and you now have what you voted for.

But with the benefit of new information and a fresh perspective you are always free to change your mind at any time and help fix up the damage. That is a perfectly acceptable and reasonable thing to do. It is a necessary thing to do, not least for your own sanity.

[mercer]

15 minutes ago, Richard Bugg said:

Pie's critique is from the point of view of The Shocked Left. But what about the Trump voter who now thinks they may have fucked up and are looking to rationalise their decision by blaming The Left for not giving a good enough alternative? To them I say: credit where credit is due. It wasn't The Left who was responsible for putting Trump into power; they voted for someone else - it was the people who voted for Trump who are responsible for elevating him to power. For those who voted for Trump, you now have him. For those who voted for him but now think that vote may have been a mistake, you can't shirk the uncomfortable responsibility by saying The Left made me do it, or that The Left didn't discuss sufficiently how you shouldn't shit on the dining room table at dinner time. Every vote counts, and you now have what you voted for.

But with the benefit of new information and a fresh perspective you are always free to change your mind at any time and help fix up the damage. That is a perfectly acceptable and reasonable thing to do. It is a necessary thing to do, not least for your own sanity.

Other than spreading half-truths, I don't blame the Left for my vote. I blame them for assuming the worst of me rather than discussing my choice. I blame them for ignorantly labeling me this or that without knowing how I feel about specific policies.

I, personally, am fine with my vote. I will wait to see how he governs before I reevaluate my decision as I'm sure a lot of the other Trump voters will do. I am not above admitting I am wrong if I am.

[tigerbengal]

great video by Sangye

 

 

[squig]

2 hours ago, Richard Bugg said:

Pie's critique is from the point of view of The Shocked Left. But what about the Trump voter who now thinks they may have fucked up and are looking to rationalise their decision by blaming The Left for not giving a good enough alternative? To them I say: credit where credit is due. It wasn't The Left who was responsible for putting Trump into power; they voted for someone else - it was the people who voted for Trump who are responsible for elevating him to power. For those who voted for Trump, you now have him. For those who voted for him but now think that vote may have been a mistake, you can't shirk the uncomfortable responsibility by saying The Left made me do it, or that The Left didn't discuss sufficiently how you shouldn't shit on the dining room table at dinner time. Every vote counts, and you now have what you voted for.

But with the benefit of new information and a fresh perspective you are always free to change your mind at any time and help fix up the damage. That is a perfectly acceptable and reasonable thing to do. It is a necessary thing to do, not least for your own sanity.

The DNC are not "the left". The DNC are neo-liberals. The left for the most part backed Bernie. The DNC screwed Bernie like they screwed Henry Wallace because he actually stood for the people. Trump's only in it for Trump, just like he has been his whole life. America got punk'd.

[Richard Bugg]

6 minutes ago, squig said:

Trump's only in it for Trump, just like he has been his whole life. America got punk'd.

The following piece about the writing of "The Art of the Deal" reinforces your point quite well:

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/07/25/donald-trumps-ghostwriter-tells-all

This whole things seems a bit like the Ebrahim Saadawi fiasco on steroids.