Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/vox/

"These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward liberal causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage liberal causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy."

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/vox/

"These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward liberal causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage liberal causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy." -And yet it gives Vox high accuracy of news reporting. What's your point? My Alt-right msm denier...

Oh yeah, derailment and denial...

Back to Science being peer reviewed.

Sounds like Artificial is personally offended...

Well hey, Steve is very quick to point out bias in other media outlets, but has no problem with posting news from sites with far-left bias.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Sounds like Artificial is personally offended... It does, but most of our far rightists here fit some or all criteria stated.

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
Well hey, Steve is very quick to point out bias in other media outlets, but has no problem with posting news from sites with far-left bias. Big difference between a talking head and the findings study from psychologists which is undergoing peer review. But you know that my Alt-right friend.

Originally posted by Steve Zodiac
Big difference between a talking head and the findings study from psychologists which is undergoing peer review. But you know that my Alt-right friend.
I think you should just admit that you posted news from a far-left website, even though you consistently denounce those who post news from right-biased media. Everything on vox.com is very suspect, including this article.

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
I think you should just admit that you posted news from a far-left website, even though you consistently denounce those who post news from right-biased media. Everything on vox.com is very suspect, including this article. Haha, it has high trust for news on your own fact checking site.

Originally posted by Steve Zodiac
Haha, it has high trust for news on your own fact checking site.
It's your fact-checking site, as a matter of fact. Just because it has high accuracy rating doesn't erase the fact that it also has a far-left bias.

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
It's your fact-checking site, as a matter of fact. Just because it has high accuracy rating doesn't erase the fact that it also has a far-left bias. Ahh but in this case, any bias and rhetoric is somewhat negated due to it only reporting the findings of a scientific study, look it has quotes and everything.

But you know, it's hard to see what you are if a nazi is what you are.

I got under your skin so much you saved a site from me? Haha cuck!

Originally posted by Steve Zodiac
Ahh but in this case, any bias and rhetoric is somewhat negated due to it only reporting the findings of a scientific study, look it has quotes and everything.

But you know, it's hard to see what you are if a nazi is what you are.

I got under your skin so much you saved a site from me? Haha cuck!
Yes, it has pretty pictures and quotes that lead back to other vox.com articles when you click them.

"lol cuck me good trollololol". In seriousness, I saved the site because I found it genuinely useful.

As for the survey itself, provided it turns out it's worth anything once it's been reviewed, I'm not particularly surprised about its findings on the alt-right. They aren't exactly the most open-minded or tolerant bunch.

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
I think you should just admit that you posted news from a far-left website, even though you consistently denounce those who post news from right-biased media. Everything on vox.com is very suspect, including this article.

Remember: this is the same place that gives Breitbart and CNN the same factual reporting rating lol. The Blaze and Zero Hedge also have the same reporting rating.

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
As for the survey itself, provided it turns out it's worth anything once it's been reviewed, I'm not particularly surprised about its findings on the alt-right. They aren't exactly the most open-minded or tolerant bunch.

Indeed and I laugh at the "hundreds" of people surveyed. There are over 300 million people in America.

Another problem is "alt right" as a term. What does it even mean now? It was coined by a nazi, right? Richard Spencer, I think. So he meant people like him, but that is no longer what is now meant by the term. People here have called me "alt right". Despite not supporting nazis, despite not being a white nationalist.

I feel like this survey is just confirming common sense. Of course those who are truly alt right are going to agree with ideas like favoring whites over others. The ones who deserve the title are rarely hesitant to share their abhorrent views about race and perceived superiority. Part of that is because if anyone complains about it...in their minds it feeds into the narrative of their victimization.

Which the whole being obsessed with identity politics and perceived victimization is something the alt right and alt left have in common.

Hard to take a survey seriously that has "Republicans who refused to vote for Trump" and "Government employees" as a choice on how evolved people are.

So they're being racist against other white guys?

Jews and Muslims scored pretty danged high compared to "Government employees" (Lot of white guys in the post office, IRS, ect..)

That survey from a hard left wing rag

Originally posted by cdtm
Hard to take a survey seriously that has "Republicans who refused to vote for Trump" and "Government employees" as a choice on how evolved people are.

So they're being racist against other white guys?

Jews and Muslims scored pretty danged high compared to "Government employees" (Lot of white guys in the post office, IRS, ect..)

Yeah, but on the other hand if you're a leftist this helps your narrative so that is reason alone to take it seriously.

Originally posted by Surtur
Remember: this is the same place that gives Breitbart and CNN the same factual reporting rating lol. The Blaze and Zero Hedge also have the same reporting rating.
Well, it does have a higher 'Factual Reporting' rating than Breitbart, CNN, The Blaze, etc. But as far as bias goes, Vox is as left-biased as Breitbart is right-biased, so yeah...

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
Well, it does have a higher 'Factual Reporting' rating than Breitbart, CNN, The Blaze, etc. But as far as bias goes, Vox is as left-biased as Breitbart is right-biased, so yeah... Yeah it reports the facts, in this case, a study undergoing peer review, but of course, most Scientists are liberal so... and why are most Scientists liberal? Because they are educated and intelligent.

http://nypost.com/2016/06/09/science-says-liberal-beliefs-are-linked-to-pyschotic-traits/

https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/study-leftists-mentally-ill/

http://www.wnd.com/2008/11/56494/


Seems the left has it's share of people calling them crazy too. All this means is that both extremes have problems. Duh. That's not news. lol

Yeah, but look at those people? Peer reviewed studies? Of course not. Youtube talking heads? Of course. Funny thing about the New York post one is it even states the conclusions were erroneous based on the data. Haha, not so cool!

One was a longtime psychiatrist.

The point is both extremes are littered with people that have a few screws loose. There's nothing shocking about that. It's common knowledge. It would be disingenuous to say that it is only one side though.

Originally posted by socool8520
One was a longtime psychiatrist.

The point is both extremes are littered with people that have a few screws loose. There's nothing shocking about that. It's common knowledge. It would be disingenuous to say that it is only one side though.

Haha, not really the point of the first study... Mental illness and ignorance. Funny thing is the first study you cite when peer reviewed was found to be erroneous in conclusion. No so cool!

Originally posted by Steve Zodiac
Haha, not really the point of the first study... Mental illness and ignorance. Funny thing is the first study you cite when peer reviewed was found to be erroneous in conclusion. No so cool!

yes it was erroneous in saying that it was the right that was nuts lol. Psychologists back tracking? What? That never happens.

Oh..so the super intelligent nutjobs are preferrable? Good to know. lol I see what you did with my name there. Lol

Originally posted by socool8520
yes it was erroneous in saying that it was the right that was nuts lol. Psychologists back tracking? What? That never happens.

Oh..so the super intelligent nutjobs are preferrable? Good to know. lol I see what you did with my name there. Lol It was erroneous the left were nuts... Not so cool! You are by the way comparing Apples and Oranges. But the Alt right do that amirite?

Yeah, I just scanned the bottom, that study has nothing to do with extremism. Where are you getting that from and no not all extremists are nuts. An extreme dislike of paedophillia is not mad anymore than an extreme dislike of racists is.

No you're the psychotic.

Originally posted by Steve Zodiac
Yeah, I just scanned the bottom, that study has nothing to do with extremism. Where are you getting that from and no not all extremists are nuts. An extreme dislike of paedophillia is not mad anymore than an extreme dislike of racists is.

http://www.healthguidance.org/entry/16426/1/The-Psychology-of-Extremism.html

This pretty much says all extremists are kind of nuts. lol regardless of what "side" you are on.


An extreme dislike of paedophillia is not mad anymore than an extreme dislike of racists is.


Sure, you can pick any example of anything we all agree is bad to help your case, but if you are willing to attack another group without provacation in support of your beliefs, you have got issues.

Originally posted by socool8520
http://www.healthguidance.org/entry/16426/1/The-Psychology-of-Extremism.html

This pretty much says all extremists are kind of nuts. lol regardless of what "side" you are on.


An extreme dislike of paedophillia is not mad anymore than an extreme dislike of racists is.


Sure, you can pick any example of anything we all agree is bad to help your case, but if you are willing to attack another group without provacation in support of your beliefs, you have got issues. Ridiculous, some beliefs and opinions are inherently provocative in themselves like racism and paedophilia.

If you say so Steve

We can also pretend these are the only views alot of the left wing extremists hold. lol

Originally posted by socool8520
If you say so Steve

We can also pretend these are the only views alot of the left wing extremists hold. lol A lot? Context? How old are you?

Originally posted by Steve Zodiac
Yeah it reports the facts, in this case, a study undergoing peer review, but of course, most Scientists are liberal so... and why are most Scientists liberal? Because they are educated and intelligent.
Oh lordy, are you really trying to pass off a left-wing bias as somehow inherently scientific or intellectual? Remember, the intelligentsia of the early 20th century were quite partial towards communism.

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
Oh lordy, are you really trying to pass off a left-wing bias as somehow inherently scientific or intellectual? Remember, the intelligentsia of the early 20th century were quite partial towards communism. If left wing bias is good enough for Einstein and Stephen Hawking.

Originally posted by Steve Zodiac
A lot? Context? How old are you?

Attacking typos? And you ask how old I am? I like you. You're funny.


Extreme opposition to government, freedom of speech that doesn't match their own views, etc. with the use of force. Stuff like that.

Originally posted by socool8520
Attacking typos? And you ask how old I am? I like you. You're funny.


Extreme opposition to government, freedom of speech that doesn't match their own views, etc. with the use of force. Stuff like that.

Government?

Originally posted by Steve Zodiac
If left wing bias is good enough for Einstein and Stephen Hawking.

Wait, they are getting Einstein and Hawking to review the paper? That's amazing, but neither one of them is or was a psychologist. Poor peer review imo. Well ones's dead so at least they won't get a rebuttal. lol

Originally posted by Steve Zodiac
Government?

Nah. Lefties don't believe in government so they can spell it with a little g.

Originally posted by socool8520
Nah. Lefties don't believe in government so they can spell it with a little g.

I don't know what gave you this idea they don't believe in it. It's not like they are ignoring the antics of a group that hates nazis but burns the flag of the country that helped defeat them, admits they are communists, gets upset when called patriots, and says they hate the constitution...all the while committing acts of violence of varying degrees.

https://orig10.deviantart.net/89aa/f/2016/257/7/f/impossibru_thrones_by_wwredgrave-dahmtwp.jpg

Reminds me of when Voldemorts face was on the back of some dudes head. Crazy times.

Originally posted by Surtur
Reminds me of when Voldemorts face was on the back of some dudes head. Crazy times.

Lol, I'll grant you that one, thats a funny reply

Originally posted by Surtur
I don't know what gave you this idea they don't believe in it. It's not like they are ignoring the antics of a group that hates nazis but burns the flag of the country that helped defeat them, admits they are communists, gets upset when called patriots, and says they hate the constitution...all the while committing acts of violence of varying degrees.

My bad, they don't believe in a democratic view of government.

Noam Chomsky dared to call out Antifa...with predictable results lol. Said they were a "gift to the right" which is true. Some of my favorite responses were "Noam Chomsky is a gift to the right".

Hmmm... I've sort of developed a theory for Antifa's bullshittery - They are afraid. They are afraid of being attacked first by any number of opponents, from right wing extremists like the Neo Nazi/White Supremacists. Unfortunately fear often manifests itself into violent action at the drop of a hat, and any perceived slight or even aggressive wording will pull the trigger on violent response.

This is not apologist bullshit either, because I disagree on having such a delicate hairtrigger temper. Having a trigger that sensitive means you'll pop like a violent explosion if someone farts in your general direction... from behind a barricade.... on the other side of a busy street....

Yes, there is legit reason to be cautious of unexpected attacks at rallys and protests or even just public gatherings and festivals. But allowing that fear to dictate emotion fuelled violent outbreaks means that the REAL terrorists of the world always win. Because now they have their enemies civilian populations maiming and killing themselves in fear.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
Hmmm... I've sort of developed a theory for Antifa's bullshittery - They are afraid. They are afraid of being attacked first by any number of opponents, from right wing extremists like the Neo Nazi/White Supremacists. Unfortunately fear often manifests itself into violent action at the drop of a hat, and any perceived slight or even aggressive wording will pull the trigger on violent response.

This is not apologist bullshit either, because I disagree on having such a delicate hairtrigger temper. Having a trigger that sensitive means you;ll pop like a violent explosion if someone farts in your general direction... from behind a barricade.... on the other side of a busy street....

Yes, there is legit reason to be cautious of unexpected attacks at rallys and protests or even just public gatherings and festivals. But allowing that fear to dictate emotion fuelled violent outbreaks means that the REAL terrorists of the world always win. Because now they have their enemies civilian populations maiming and killing themselves in fear.

Fear can do crazy things to people I will give you that. But I have another theory. You know how it is said that Trump winning emboldened the KKK and the nazis and all that? I wonder if this hasn't also emboldened Antifa, and these are people who want to tear the country down. They hate the government, they hate the constitution, and they have seen an opportunity to spread this message under the guise of fighting "fascism".

It is also spreading, they are getting bolder, interrupting more things, and IMO inspiring others just like the KKK or nazis can. Some dude came up and pepper sprayed some people at a civil war re-enactment, they were the confederates of course. It's not murder or close to it, but it's just a sign of how this is escalating. Btw the man who did it was a former principal who was also armed with a legal conceal and carry weapon., but failed to mention that to the cops.

Originally posted by Surtur
Fear can do crazy things to people I will give you that. But I have another theory. You know how it is said that Trump winning emboldened the KKK and the nazis and all that? I wonder if this hasn't also emboldened Antifa, and these are people who want to tear the country down. They hate the government, they hate the constitution, and they have seen an opportunity to spread this message under the guise of fighting "fascism".

I don't think it emboldened them. IIRC, the vast majority of ANTIFA is made up of college students and older teenagers. Big enough to cause a lot of damage an do adult things like have copious amounts of premarital sex, smoke weed, and drink a gutload of alchohol, but young, naive and stupid enough to get incredibly irrationally emotional over the smallest things that make even Joffrey Baratheon seem sane.

Outside of this rank and file cannonfodder, you then come to the few adults, who may actually be left wing estremist whackjob f@cknuts, who fuel that fire of fear and implore dangerously stupid acts be carried out to send fear back at those they hate.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
I don't think it emboldened them. IIRC, the vast majority of ANTIFA is made up of college students and older teenagers. Big enough to cause a lot of damage an do adult things like have copious amounts of premarital sex, smoke weed, and drink a gutload of alchohol, but young, naive and stupid enough to get incredibly irrationally emotional over the smallest things that make even Joffrey Baratheon seem sane.

Outside of this rank and file cannonfodder, you then come to the few adults, who may actually be left wing estremist whackjob f@cknuts, who fuel that fire of fear and implore dangerously stupid acts be carried out to send fear back at those they hate.

If it didn't embolden them I do not know how you explain the increased amount of violence? This group existed before Trump.

I find it potentially dangerous to chalk all this up to irrational teens. It is growing larger than that now.

Originally posted by Surtur
If it didn't embolden them I do not know how you explain the increased amount of violence? This group existed before Trump.

I find it potentially dangerous to chalk all this up to irrational teens. It is growing larger than that now.

I addressed that in the 2nd paragraph. It's certain firebrand nutters that fuel the flames. Trump's election didn't technically embolden, but perhaps it was the straw that broke the back, considering that they don't believe he was elected legitimately, not does he represent the views of those who elected him.

It's not going to matter to the firebrands, or the brainwashed kids they control wether that is true or not, it's an excuse.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
I addressed that in the 2nd paragraph. It's certain firebrand nutters that fuel the flames. Trump's election didn't technically embolden, but perhaps it was the straw that broke the back, considering that they don't believe he was elected legitimately, not does he represent the views of those who elected him.

It's not going to matter to the firebrands, or the brainwashed kids they control wether that is true or not, it's an excuse.

Then I have to ask, would you agree with those who claim the KKK and nazis were emboldened? The "straw that broke the back" thing applies to that too I would say.

Originally posted by Surtur
Then I have to ask, would you agree with those who claim the KKK and nazis were emboldened? The "straw that broke the back" thing applies to that too I would say.

No. It's a false comparative - apples to oranges. And not by a small margin either. That is like comparing a child practicing with a wooden sword training to murder people to the evil of the Black Demonic Necromancer Knight of 50 million Evils. It's not even remotely comparable.

The Facist movement, especially the Nazis, have had a demonstrable history of atrocity. They were hanging African Americans simply for being black as far back as the American Civil War. It's even prevelant here in Australia, as close and as recently as the 80s, many while folk in the Northern territory had considered running over Aboriginals in their cars as some kind of sick, demented sport. And lets not even talk about the shitstain on history that was the first and second world wars. That needs no explanation as to how bad Facism was demonstrated to be. Comparing that kind of history of truly horrible things to the actions of a rebellious grassroots youth movement is... kinda f@cked up, wouldn't you say?

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
No. It's a false comparative - apples to oranges. And not by a small margin either. That is like comparing a child practicing with a wooden sword training to murder people to the evil of the Black Demonic Necromancer Knight of 50 million Evils. It's not even remotely comparable.

The Facist movement, especially the Nazis, have had a demonstrable history of atrocity. They were hanging African Americans simply for being black as far back as the American Civil War. It's even prevelant here in Australia, as close and as recently as the 80s, many while folk in the Northern territory had considered running over Aboriginals in their cars as some kind of sick, demented sport. And lets not even talk about the shitstain on history that was the first and second world wars. That needs no explanation as to how bad Facism was demonstrated to be. Comparing that kind of history of truly horrible things to the actions of a rebellious grassroots youth movement is... kinda f@cked up, wouldn't you say?

I thought we were talking about the now. You are absolutley correct that the Nazis and Racist far right have been terrible, monstrous people. No one can seriously argue against that point. Hell, the current far right movement doesn't even compare to the atrocities their counterparts committed in the past. I think that speaks to the progress we have made. It's clearly not enough, but progress has been made. Right now though, people are not being hung from trees with regularity (although it shouldn't be done at all).

In the present, judging both groups by what they are currently doing, they aren't far apart in their violent natures imo. It is true that the Neo Nazis have killed people, but imo, the Antifa group will do this eventually. Their stabbing and brick throwing could easily have killed someone.

Their idealogies are different, but their methods are starting to look very similar. When push comes to shove, I would ultimately side with the left's view of anti-racism, but I don't think you help the cause with violence and intimidation. There was a time when that was almost solely for the right extremists.

Originally posted by socool8520
I thought we were talking about the now. You are absolutley correct that the Nazis and Racist far right have been terrible, monstrous people. No one can seriously argue against that point. Hell, the current far right movement doesn't even compare to the atrocities their counterparts committed in the past. I think that speaks to the progress we have made. It's clearly not enough, but progress has been made. Right now though, people are not being hung from trees with regularity (although it shouldn't be done at all).

In the present, judging both groups by what they are currently doing, they aren't far apart in their violent natures imo. It is true that the Neo Nazis have killed people, but imo, the Antifa group will do this eventually. Their stabbing and brick throwing could easily have killed someone.

Their idealogies are different, but their methods are starting to look very similar. When push comes to shove, I would ultimately side with the left's view of anti-racism, but I don't think you help the cause with violence and intimidation. There was a time when that was almost solely for the right extremists.

I don't think you are looking at this with the right context. I'm not saying that the Facists are guilty directly of the same sins as the Nazis or any other old Facist crimes, BUT, they are guilty of knowingly and deliberately following the same ideology that sparked those crimes of the past.

That one fact completely quashes any moral supremacy they may have had over Antifa, who for all intents and purposes are a rebel youth movement. They have.... good intentions, but the methods are at best that of adeolescence - violent and stupid. And at worst, trying to fight a much bigger fire, with fire.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
I don't think you are looking at this with the right context. I'm not saying that the Facists are guilty directly of the same sins as the Nazis or any other old Facist crimes, BUT, they are guilty of knowingly and deliberately following the same ideology that sparked those crimes of the past.

That one fact completely quashes any moral supremacy they may have had over Antifa, who for all intents and purposes are a rebel youth movement. They have.... good intentions, but the methods are at best that of adeolescence - violent and stupid. And at worst, trying to fight a much bigger fire, with fire.


Oh absolutely, I agree. It's just that that shouldn't take the heat off of another group acting a lot like them with their voilent behavior. I would never argue that the Nazi group's behavior and ideology isn't deplorable. That's just crazy.

You know what they say about the road to Hell and good intentions. lol I don't think they have a moral supremacy over Antifa, far from it, but just because one side is really bad does not give you the right to mimic their violence regardless of age. If they were attacking any other group, there would be no question at to how terrible Antifa is acting, so if we look past that, we can look at their actions objectively. When you do that, they are a bunch of thugs attacking people.

Let's not forget that this group has attacked Trump rallies which aren't inherently Nazi.