Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
18 user(s) are online (9 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 1
Guests: 17

jerseymom, more...




Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users




(1) 2 »


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#43
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2013/3/29 21:43
Last Login :
4/5 18:29
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1906
Offline
Quote:

bill wrote:
Quote:

Pebble wrote:
[quote]
I had read that same study and had heard it before. Most recently there have been studies equating broadband internet speed with more radical political views.


Do you have a link? That sounds like such a weird topic to study.

Quote:

The study linked is flawed given the sample size and demographic.


Can you please elaborate on this?


Here's a link for the study on the impacts of broadband as it relates to political extremism.

As for the study... it encompassed only about 300 people. It also worked off of biased articles. That is perfectly fine. But it did not take into account the idea that a story could be of interest and not be biased. For instance, an article that discusses labor negotiations could be of interest because the field discussed could be one where the student (only students were surveyed) was majoring in that field.

Essentially, I'd like to see more data on the subject, not that I don't believe people will listen to commentators that lean in the direction they lean already, but I don't see where people will read only news articles that supply information that will add to their own world view.

Posted on: 2016/10/21 19:28
Dos A Cero
Top


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#42
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2008/9/10 17:55
Last Login :
2016/10/21 19:48
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1207
Offline
Yes, I went. Talde was packed....wall to wall.

Posted on: 2016/10/20 15:27
Top


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#41
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2006/11/13 18:42
Last Login :
2018/3/5 19:18
From 280 Grove Street
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4123
Offline
who really gives a rat's ass about Chelsea ?

Nepotism at it's worse and we complain when JC officials do the same, but remain quiet if it's the Clintons !

Resized Image

Posted on: 2016/10/18 23:14
My humor is for the silent blue collar majority - If my posts offend, slander or you deem inappropriate and seek deletion, contact the webmaster for jurisdiction.
Top


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#40
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2005/12/18 2:57
Last Login :
2017/9/14 20:15
From Crystal Point
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 711
Offline
Quote:

Pebble wrote:
[quote]
I had read that same study and had heard it before. Most recently there have been studies equating broadband internet speed with more radical political views.


Do you have a link? That sounds like such a weird topic to study.

Quote:

The study linked is flawed given the sample size and demographic.


Can you please elaborate on this?

Posted on: 2016/10/18 18:45
Top


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#39
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2013/3/29 21:43
Last Login :
4/5 18:29
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1906
Offline
Quote:

bill wrote:
Quote:

Pebble wrote:
The article you linked is also an opinion piece. It equates articles proclaiming gay nuptials as being some level of bias. I don't agree with that.


The reason the author thought that the Times was biased was because they only had positive articles of gay marriage. Whereas, other newspapers had critical articles as well,

"The San Francisco Chronicle runs an uninflected article about Congressional testimony from a Stanford scholar making the case that gay marriage in the Netherlands has had a deleterious effect on heterosexual marriage. The Boston Globe explores the potential impact of same-sex marriage on tax revenues, and the paucity of reliable research on child-rearing in gay families. But in The Times, I have learned next to nothing about these issues, nor about partner abuse in the gay community, about any social difficulties that might be encountered by children of gay couples or about divorce rates (or causes, or consequences) among the 7,000 couples legally joined in Vermont since civil union was established there four years ago."


Quote:
If you believe that people only read what reinforces their belief then you are basing your statements on an opinion.


I didn't even know about this phenomenon till I read about an actual scientific study on it.

http://www.livescience.com/3640-people-choose-news-fits-views.html

I had read that same study and had heard it before. Most recently there have been studies equating broadband internet speed with more radical political views.

The study linked is flawed given the sample size and demographic.

In regards to gay marriage... The story you quoted was from 2004. Unfortunately, our national discourse on the subject was not nearly up to the standards we have now (ie. it is legal and not harmful). There are no studies that actually show what your Stanford scholar actually suggests. We have not seen it here in America. I stand by my statement that simply pronouncing gay nuptials is not a level of bias.

Posted on: 2016/10/18 18:28
Dos A Cero
Top


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#38
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2005/12/18 2:57
Last Login :
2017/9/14 20:15
From Crystal Point
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 711
Offline
Quote:

Pebble wrote:
The article you linked is also an opinion piece. It equates articles proclaiming gay nuptials as being some level of bias. I don't agree with that.


The reason the author thought that the Times was biased was because they only had positive articles of gay marriage. Whereas, other newspapers had critical articles as well,

"The San Francisco Chronicle runs an uninflected article about Congressional testimony from a Stanford scholar making the case that gay marriage in the Netherlands has had a deleterious effect on heterosexual marriage. The Boston Globe explores the potential impact of same-sex marriage on tax revenues, and the paucity of reliable research on child-rearing in gay families. But in The Times, I have learned next to nothing about these issues, nor about partner abuse in the gay community, about any social difficulties that might be encountered by children of gay couples or about divorce rates (or causes, or consequences) among the 7,000 couples legally joined in Vermont since civil union was established there four years ago."


Quote:
If you believe that people only read what reinforces their belief then you are basing your statements on an opinion.


I didn't even know about this phenomenon till I read about an actual scientific study on it.

http://www.livescience.com/3640-people-choose-news-fits-views.html

Posted on: 2016/10/18 17:21
Top


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#37
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2013/3/29 21:43
Last Login :
4/5 18:29
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1906
Offline
Quote:

bill wrote:
Quote:

Pebble wrote:
I find it interesting that your quotes are based on an opinion piece that has quite a level of sarcasm which you seem to ascribe to as some form of fact.


I guess I skimmed it and missed her sarcasm. Can you please show me where the author is conveying it?

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/24/pub ... -times-public-editor.html

Quote:
As for those that read it... I don't see where that matters. Just because an audience is liberal doesn't mean the articles are.


Actually it might, if you believe readers read what fit their viewpoints then it makes sense. If the readership is liberal, that implies they are reading articles that coincide with their own views.

Also she mentioned the reader comments, not I.


My apologies. I thought you were referencing this:
Quote:

bill wrote:
Quote:

Pebble wrote:
So, basically, we have 10 links in the NY Times and the only ones with any bias or negativity against him are opinion pieces.


Hence the perceived liberal bias, those opinion pieces are the second headlines people see on the nytimes website.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/25/opi ... -a-liberal-newspaper.html

Which I only skimmed the early paragraph after noting it as a satirical take from a couple of years ago.

The article you linked is also an opinion piece. It equates articles proclaiming gay nuptials as being some level of bias. I don't agree with that.

If you believe that people only read what reinforces their belief then you are basing your statements on an opinion. When you have a straight news story, there is no bias. What you supplied was an article that admits, in 2004, that their opinion section is heavily weighted in one direction. This has nothing to do with their ability to write on a variety of subjects.

Posted on: 2016/10/18 17:10
Dos A Cero
Top


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#36
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2005/12/18 2:57
Last Login :
2017/9/14 20:15
From Crystal Point
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 711
Offline
Quote:

Pebble wrote:
I find it interesting that your quotes are based on an opinion piece that has quite a level of sarcasm which you seem to ascribe to as some form of fact.


I guess I skimmed it and missed her sarcasm. Can you please show me where the author is conveying it?

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/24/pub ... -times-public-editor.html

Quote:
As for those that read it... I don't see where that matters. Just because an audience is liberal doesn't mean the articles are.


Actually it might, if you believe readers read what fit their viewpoints then it makes sense. If the readership is liberal, that implies they are reading articles that coincide with their own views.

Also she mentioned the reader comments, not I.

Posted on: 2016/10/18 16:53
Top


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#35
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2013/3/29 21:43
Last Login :
4/5 18:29
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1906
Offline
Quote:

135jc wrote:
Quote:

Pebble wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:

What the hell does spending money to support a candidate have to do with paying taxes...?


As Ive stated previously. This was a perfect opportunity to support your candidate. No one here lifted a finger.

Again... what the hell does supporting a candidate have to do with paying taxes?!


It shows that when given the chance to give voluntarily no one does. But they will vote in a Candidate or for a tax that will ensure we all pay more never attempting to control costs.


No. It doesn't. By all accounts, the event was well attended.

As for the other item... Someone can believe in paying taxes for services while also believing that one specific candidate is not someone they want to financially support. Why you think those two are forcefully linked is beyond my comprehension.

Posted on: 2016/10/18 16:51
Dos A Cero
Top


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#34
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2013/3/29 21:43
Last Login :
4/5 18:29
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1906
Offline
Quote:

bill wrote:
Quote:

Pebble wrote:
They were some of the last links in my search. As for the front page... they are clearly marked "opinion".


Right, and most Americans probably don't even read that part. But what is interesting is that the NY Times has the opinion pages so pronounced.

Other leading newspapers have their opinion headlines way lower (USA Today, LA Times, Chicago Tribune).

Even from another NY times public editor, "The home page is a good place to start. Anchoring its top right corner is the Opinion section, which promotes the columns and editorials of its mostly liberal writers. “Readers know the difference between opinion and news,” you’ll often hear. I’m not so sure all do, especially when the website makes neighbors of the two and social platforms make them nearly impossible to tease apart.
Maybe we’re well past worrying about that. So turn to the drumbeat of Hillary Clinton campaign ads on the website. Even for me, who fully knows an ad from a news story, seeing Clinton’s smiling face when I’ve come to read the news can be rather jarring.
How about all the reader comments attached to political articles? On most days, conservatives occupy just a few back-row seats in this giant liberal echo chamber, not because Republicans are screened out by editors but because they don’t show up in the first place."

As people these days read the news that fit their views, this chart shows where the NY times stands
Resized Image



I find it interesting that your quotes are based on an opinion piece that has quite a level of sarcasm which you seem to ascribe to as some form of fact.

Yes, there are some liberal opinion pieces prominently displayed. When David Brooks comes out with a piece, it'll be there as well, but he can't even bring himself to write something nice about Trump. This doesn't make the paper bias, it means that they aren't even attempting a false comparison.

As for those that read it... I don't see where that matters. Just because an audience is liberal doesn't mean the articles are.

In addition, you are talking about reader comments. Does that really matter? How is that a judge of anything other than those willing to comment on a story. Outside of Yvonne below every article on NJ.com, I'm not sure I know anyone else that does it. Does this mean that only lunatics read NJ.com or that those writing for NJ.com are lunatics...?

The reality is, this election isn't a fight between equal sides. A simple four years ago by this point in time, Mitt Romney had over 100 endorsements from daily newspapers. In this election Trump has two. Newspapers that have existed for over 100 years and have never endorsed a Democrat are endorsing one this year. Does that mean everyone is bias or does that mean that those with functioning brain cells are able to make a comparison and somewhat unanimously recognize how much Trump really is like dog crap?

Posted on: 2016/10/18 16:49
Dos A Cero
Top


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#33
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2005/12/18 2:57
Last Login :
2017/9/14 20:15
From Crystal Point
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 711
Offline
Quote:

Pebble wrote:
They were some of the last links in my search. As for the front page... they are clearly marked "opinion".


Right, and most Americans probably don't even read that part. But what is interesting is that the NY Times has the opinion pages so pronounced.

Other leading newspapers have their opinion headlines way lower (USA Today, LA Times, Chicago Tribune).

Even from another NY times public editor, "The home page is a good place to start. Anchoring its top right corner is the Opinion section, which promotes the columns and editorials of its mostly liberal writers. “Readers know the difference between opinion and news,” you’ll often hear. I’m not so sure all do, especially when the website makes neighbors of the two and social platforms make them nearly impossible to tease apart.
Maybe we’re well past worrying about that. So turn to the drumbeat of Hillary Clinton campaign ads on the website. Even for me, who fully knows an ad from a news story, seeing Clinton’s smiling face when I’ve come to read the news can be rather jarring.
How about all the reader comments attached to political articles? On most days, conservatives occupy just a few back-row seats in this giant liberal echo chamber, not because Republicans are screened out by editors but because they don’t show up in the first place."

As people these days read the news that fit their views, this chart shows where the NY times stands
Resized Image



Posted on: 2016/10/18 16:32
Top


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#32
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2009/7/17 3:05
Last Login :
7/16 18:01
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 851
Offline
Quote:

Pebble wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:

What the hell does spending money to support a candidate have to do with paying taxes...?


As Ive stated previously. This was a perfect opportunity to support your candidate. No one here lifted a finger.

Again... what the hell does supporting a candidate have to do with paying taxes?!


It shows that when given the chance to give voluntarily no one does. But they will vote in a Candidate or for a tax that will ensure we all pay more never attempting to control costs.


Posted on: 2016/10/18 16:19
Top


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#31
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2013/3/29 21:43
Last Login :
4/5 18:29
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1906
Offline
Quote:

135jc wrote:

What the hell does spending money to support a candidate have to do with paying taxes...?


As Ive stated previously. This was a perfect opportunity to support your candidate. No one here lifted a finger.

Again... what the hell does supporting a candidate have to do with paying taxes?!

Posted on: 2016/10/18 16:13
Dos A Cero
Top


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#30
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2009/7/17 3:05
Last Login :
7/16 18:01
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 851
Offline

What the hell does spending money to support a candidate have to do with paying taxes...?


As Ive stated previously. This was a perfect opportunity to support your candidate. No one here lifted a finger.

Posted on: 2016/10/18 16:11
Top


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#29
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2013/3/29 21:43
Last Login :
4/5 18:29
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1906
Offline
Quote:

bill wrote:
Quote:

Pebble wrote:
So, basically, we have 10 links in the NY Times and the only ones with any bias or negativity against him are opinion pieces.


Hence the perceived liberal bias, those opinion pieces are the second headlines people see on the nytimes website.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/25/opi ... -a-liberal-newspaper.html

They were some of the last links in my search. As for the front page... they are clearly marked "opinion".

Lastly, I think it is important to recognize that bias isn't a matter of having even coverage. One negative Clinton article should be met with one negative Trump article. There is plenty on Hillary to attack that is recent. However, Trump isn't remotely close to being a legitimate choice for president.

When people write an article on dog crap, there is going to be a hard fight to write something nice. At its best, there is compost material. The rest of the articles are likely to talk about people not cleaning it up from the street, how it smells awful, etc. Trump is dog crap. There really is very little that someone can be positive about with him.

Posted on: 2016/10/18 16:10
Dos A Cero
Top


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#28
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2005/12/18 2:57
Last Login :
2017/9/14 20:15
From Crystal Point
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 711
Offline
Quote:

Pebble wrote:
So, basically, we have 10 links in the NY Times and the only ones with any bias or negativity against him are opinion pieces.


Hence the perceived liberal bias, those opinion pieces are the second headlines people see on the nytimes website.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/25/opi ... -a-liberal-newspaper.html

Posted on: 2016/10/18 15:49
Top


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#27
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2013/3/29 21:43
Last Login :
4/5 18:29
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1906
Offline
Quote:

135jc wrote:
This is the problem I have with progerssives. They tell us that we need to pay more taxes. However when the time comes to voluntarily contribute to the campaign of the woman you have been feverishly defending no one shows.

What the hell does spending money to support a candidate have to do with paying taxes...?


Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Pebble, the NYTimes publishes maybe 10 stories a day, online and in print, slamming Trump-…

I went on NYTimes.com this morning and searched over the Past 24 Hours for “Donald Tump.” There were exactly 10 stories listed. Here they are:
Trump Foundation Tells New York It Has Stopped Soliciting After State Order - http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/18/us/ ... ng-after-state-order.html If this article was “biased” then the inverted pyramid would have contained information about the controversy surrounding the foundation in the lead and not at the end.

The New Protesters Defying Donald Trump: His Customers - http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/18/us/ ... trump-brand-reaction.html This is more of a general interest piece about people deciding to not invest in Trump businesses. I think it could be considered a bit much to state that there are so many people cancelling their golf plans, but the NY Times readership takes stories (small sample and projects it wider) like this all the time on a wide range of topics.

Who will be presiden? - http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/20 ... ntial-polls-forecast.html This is a blog post that details the probabilities of each candidate based on polls. It isn’t biased to present the facts and evidence there-in.

I Hardly Expected My Letter to Donald Trump to Go Viral - http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/18/ins ... ld-trump-to-go-viral.html This is a follow-up piece about the lawyer that replied to Trump’s threat to sue the NY Times. Basically, a profile piece on a person that is now somewhat famous. I guess this is a “hit piece” on Trump if you really want to stretch things out. The reality is that this isn’t serious.

The Big Companies That Avoid Taxes - http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/18/opi ... ies-that-avoid-taxes.html This article is not about Donald Trump. The article is about companies and their ability to avoid taxes. Trump is mentioned in only that he bragged about being smart for not paying taxes. However, that is where it ends. Additionally, this is a column and not an article. As such, it is an opinion piece and not a news article.

What Our Sons Are Learning From Donald Trump - http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/18/ups ... ng-from-donald-trump.html This falls in the society category as it is a discussion on masculinity and the types of jobs that exist. Hardly a “hit job” on Trump. Nothing in the article about Trump isn’t fact. In fact, it doesn’t mention the word “assault” or “harass.” The worst it says about trump is that he was “objectifying women,” which is not something with two functioning brain cells can deny.

Pledging The Trump Fraternity - http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/18/opi ... the-trump-fraternity.html An opinion piece that is not kind to him.

Gender Issues in Sharp Focus At The Times - http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/13/ins ... p-focus-at-the-times.html A discussion about how the NY Times is adding a correspondent to cover women’s issues and part of the reason for this is due to the presidential race.

Why Trump Doubled Down on the Central Park Five - http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/18/opi ... he-central-park-five.html Another opinion piece that isn’t too kind to Trump.

So, basically, we have 10 links in the NY Times and the only ones with any bias or negativity against him are opinion pieces.

Quote:

Monroe wrote:
which shouldn't surprise anyone, given that its largest shareholder is Mexican billionaire (one of the richest men in the world) Carlos Slim, who hates Trump and is furious that Trump would secure our borders.

Here’s the article on the purchase: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/20/business/media/20times.html?_r=0

Mr. Slim is not the largest shareholder. In total he owns 17%. Considering he’s one of the wealthiest on the planet, this isn’t a surprise.

Buying into the idea that someone who has such a minor stake in the company is somehow controlling it seems rather ludicrous.

Posted on: 2016/10/18 15:32
Dos A Cero
Top


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#26
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2007/7/9 19:50
Last Login :
Today 22:50
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2087
Offline
Quote:

manu wrote:
Quote:

Voyeur wrote:
Quote:

manu wrote:
Quote:

EasyGibson wrote:
I live next door to Talde. It happened. They had cops posted up every 20 feet or so.

None of you heard about it because none of you pathetic peons are worth even a fraction of what they were looking to get in donations. You'd be taking up space that could be potentially occupied by another Goldman higher up.

Somehow, my invitation was also lost in the mail.


Ticket price for the event started at $45. I don't think you have to be a Goldman higher up to afford it...


The "tickets start at $45" canard - while technically true - remains a canard. A half dozen tickets were probably offered at that price - I don't know the exact number. But I do know that the next tier jumped up to $500 apiece. That's longstanding practice at Hillary fundraisers: token entry beginning at $45, then an abrupt jump to $500.

That tells you everything you need to know about how committed the campaign is to having us peons stop by.

Apologies for the interruption - I'll let you folks get back to telling each other how misguided and deluded you are for your political beliefs.



I don't know the number of tickets at $45 but the next tier was not $500, but $250.




Here are the tiers, directly from the invite (and the $45's were "sold out" but don't know when):

Host - $2,500
Includes Host reception with Chelsea

Co-Host - $1,000
Includes Co-Host reception with Chelsea

Supporter - $250

for45 - $45
SOLD
OUT!

Posted on: 2016/10/18 3:34
Top


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#25
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2009/4/24 18:36
Last Login :
2017/6/16 17:37
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 221
Offline
Quote:

Voyeur wrote:
Quote:

manu wrote:
Quote:

EasyGibson wrote:
I live next door to Talde. It happened. They had cops posted up every 20 feet or so.

None of you heard about it because none of you pathetic peons are worth even a fraction of what they were looking to get in donations. You'd be taking up space that could be potentially occupied by another Goldman higher up.

Somehow, my invitation was also lost in the mail.


Ticket price for the event started at $45. I don't think you have to be a Goldman higher up to afford it...


The "tickets start at $45" canard - while technically true - remains a canard. A half dozen tickets were probably offered at that price - I don't know the exact number. But I do know that the next tier jumped up to $500 apiece. That's longstanding practice at Hillary fundraisers: token entry beginning at $45, then an abrupt jump to $500.

That tells you everything you need to know about how committed the campaign is to having us peons stop by.

Apologies for the interruption - I'll let you folks get back to telling each other how misguided and deluded you are for your political beliefs.



I don't know the number of tickets at $45 but the next tier was not $500, but $250.



Posted on: 2016/10/18 2:54
Top


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#24
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2014/9/19 1:29
Last Login :
Yesterday 17:57
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 191
Offline
Quote:

manu wrote:
Quote:

EasyGibson wrote:
I live next door to Talde. It happened. They had cops posted up every 20 feet or so.

None of you heard about it because none of you pathetic peons are worth even a fraction of what they were looking to get in donations. You'd be taking up space that could be potentially occupied by another Goldman higher up.

Somehow, my invitation was also lost in the mail.


Ticket price for the event started at $45. I don't think you have to be a Goldman higher up to afford it...


The "tickets start at $45" canard - while technically true - remains a canard. A half dozen tickets were probably offered at that price - I don't know the exact number. But I do know that the next tier jumped up to $500 apiece. That's longstanding practice at Hillary fundraisers: token entry beginning at $45, then an abrupt jump to $500.

That tells you everything you need to know about how committed the campaign is to having us peons stop by.

Apologies for the interruption - I'll let you folks get back to telling each other how misguided and deluded you are for your political beliefs.


Posted on: 2016/10/18 2:32
Top


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#23
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2009/4/24 18:36
Last Login :
2017/6/16 17:37
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 221
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

manu wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Pebble, the NYTimes publishes maybe 10 stories a day, online and in print, slamming Trump-which shouldn't surprise anyone, given that its largest shareholder is Mexican billionaire (one of the richest men in the world) Carlos Slim, who hates Trump and is furious that Trump would secure our borders.


I can see you received the memo from the Trump campaign. Good job using it word for word. Lol...



I grew up reading the NYTimes at breakfast, and an old friends dad was the publisher for a short time-so, no, I've followed the Times for quite a while-including the financial position that Carlos Slim has had waaaay before Trump was a candidate.


Sure. Haha!

Posted on: 2016/10/17 23:59
Top


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#22
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2013/5/15 14:11
Last Login :
8/21 15:12
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4411
Offline
Quote:

manu wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Pebble, the NYTimes publishes maybe 10 stories a day, online and in print, slamming Trump-which shouldn't surprise anyone, given that its largest shareholder is Mexican billionaire (one of the richest men in the world) Carlos Slim, who hates Trump and is furious that Trump would secure our borders.


I can see you received the memo from the Trump campaign. Good job using it word for word. Lol...


I grew up reading the NYTimes at breakfast, and an old friends dad was the publisher for a short time-so, no, I've followed the Times for quite a while-including the financial position that Carlos Slim has had waaaay before Trump was a candidate.

Posted on: 2016/10/17 23:26
Top


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#21
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2009/4/24 18:36
Last Login :
2017/6/16 17:37
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 221
Offline
Quote:

EasyGibson wrote:
I live next door to Talde. It happened. They had cops posted up every 20 feet or so.

None of you heard about it because none of you pathetic peons are worth even a fraction of what they were looking to get in donations. You'd be taking up space that could be potentially occupied by another Goldman higher up.

Somehow, my invitation was also lost in the mail.


Ticket price for the event started at $45. I don't think you have to be a Goldman higher up to afford it...

Posted on: 2016/10/17 23:19
Top


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#20
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2009/4/24 18:36
Last Login :
2017/6/16 17:37
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 221
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Pebble, the NYTimes publishes maybe 10 stories a day, online and in print, slamming Trump-which shouldn't surprise anyone, given that its largest shareholder is Mexican billionaire (one of the richest men in the world) Carlos Slim, who hates Trump and is furious that Trump would secure our borders.


I can see you received the memo from the Trump campaign. Good job using it word for word. Lol...

Posted on: 2016/10/17 23:15
Top


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#19
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2015/3/8 23:14
Last Login :
2017/8/17 3:49
From Erie
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 313
Offline
I live next door to Talde. It happened. They had cops posted up every 20 feet or so.

None of you heard about it because none of you pathetic peons are worth even a fraction of what they were looking to get in donations. You'd be taking up space that could be potentially occupied by another Goldman higher up.

Somehow, my invitation was also lost in the mail.

Posted on: 2016/10/17 23:15
Top


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#18
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2013/5/15 14:11
Last Login :
8/21 15:12
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4411
Offline
Pebble, the NYTimes publishes maybe 10 stories a day, online and in print, slamming Trump-which shouldn't surprise anyone, given that its largest shareholder is Mexican billionaire (one of the richest men in the world) Carlos Slim, who hates Trump and is furious that Trump would secure our borders.

Posted on: 2016/10/17 23:09
Top


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#17
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2009/7/17 3:05
Last Login :
7/16 18:01
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 851
Offline
This is the problem I have with progerssives. They tell us that we need to pay more taxes. However when the time comes to voluntarily contribute to the campaign of the woman you have been feverishly defending no one shows.

Posted on: 2016/10/17 22:11
Top


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#16
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2005/8/6 23:41
Last Login :
Today 1:24
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 545
Offline
Back to the topic - did this event even exist? Seems like nobody wants to talk about it publicly or post pictures.


Posted on: 2016/10/17 20:25
Top


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#15
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2007/3/19 18:28
Last Login :
Today 12:21
From hamilton park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 272
Offline
Quote:

Pebble wrote:
[quote]
The NY Times isn't remotely bias. Their news is about as straight as it gets. Remember, the NY Times was integral in getting the Iraq War started. They do have conservative columnists as well as liberal ones. The Daily News is definitely more "liberal" but these aren't polar opposites.

The fact is, there are far more television news channels that lean to the right (CNBC, Fox Business, Fox News, One America, Bloomberg, NewsMaxTV, The Blaze) than there are left leaning (MSNBC and…?). CNN just kind of sucks as a news agency, but they are hardly biased. BBC News exists but also quite even. Headline News plays it straight.

The concept that there exists some form of “liberal media bias” is based on fiction. It belies all facts that exist. You literally have five “news” channels dedicated completely to push one political position 24 hours. Add in TrumpTV that’ll come out when his race ends…


did you type that hogwash with a straight face? I'm rolling on the floor laughing and my co-workers want to know why

Posted on: 2016/10/17 19:49
utterly deplorable
Top


Re: Hillary Clinton Fundraiser in JC with Chelsea Clinton - Anyone Go?
#14
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined :
2013/3/29 21:43
Last Login :
4/5 18:29
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1906
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Well, the Post has to put some balance in, given that the Daily News is 100% in the tank for the left (with the exception of a dig at comrade DeBlasio), and the NYTimes which no longer is journalistic.

But 'Headless dancer in Topless Bar' will live forever in tabloid headline legend!


The NY Times isn't remotely bias. Their news is about as straight as it gets. Remember, the NY Times was integral in getting the Iraq War started. They do have conservative columnists as well as liberal ones. The Daily News is definitely more "liberal" but these aren't polar opposites.

The fact is, there are far more television news channels that lean to the right (CNBC, Fox Business, Fox News, One America, Bloomberg, NewsMaxTV, The Blaze) than there are left leaning (MSNBC and…?). CNN just kind of sucks as a news agency, but they are hardly biased. BBC News exists but also quite even. Headline News plays it straight.

The concept that there exists some form of “liberal media bias” is based on fiction. It belies all facts that exist. You literally have five “news” channels dedicated completely to push one political position 24 hours. Add in TrumpTV that’ll come out when his race ends…

Posted on: 2016/10/17 19:32
Dos A Cero
Top




(1) 2 »




[Advanced Search]





Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!



LicenseInformation | AboutUs | PrivacyPolicy | Faq | Contact


JERSEY CITY LIST - News & Reviews - Jersey City, NJ - Copyright 2004 - 2017