33
Comments (6)
sorted by:
3
Brandidh 3 points ago +3 / -0

This drives me up the wall. Why can they use descriptors like "baseless" which has not been proved either. If it said "with claims of voter fraud" that would actually be neutral and many people would take the inference. Using qualifiers, especially unproven, is not journalism.

3
Krigstein 3 points ago +3 / -0

Wonder why Reuters didn’t look into where all that money donated to BLM thru ActBlue went...

3
Lemongrass5 3 points ago +3 / -0

"Baseless claims of voter fraud." Correct me if I'm wrong but these are the same fucking people that went four years saying the elections were rigged. NOW all of sudden they are 100% safe.

Fuck off.

3
thunderpussy 3 points ago +3 / -0

Social media was NEVER for you to have a voice. As a person who retired from tech, I am ASTOUNDED that people fell for the social media honey pot.

But then again, the social media companies hired an army of psychologists to assist them with manipulating the masses. Every pixel, every action that you could possibly take on their websites was carefully designed to manipulate you, a la Pavlov's dog. It worked beautifully.

It was always about data mining, intelligence gathering and mass control of the populace.

From day one.

2
NoMoreMao 2 points ago +2 / -0

Best way to fix that is delete Twatter and make them irrelevant.

1
eagle123 1 point ago +2 / -1

At least they are advertising that Trump needs funding help.