pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Feature Shoot PhotographersforBiden Project  (Read 5483 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« on: May 08, 2020, 12:31 »
+2
I'm not familiar with the company. How do you feel about companies taking this firm of a position in politics? Reading further into this shows it's not really about supporting Biden but removing Trump. Would you continue to support them if they firmly were against your preferred candidate? What if it was one of the top three micros wanting to get rid of Biden?

I have a feeling this will quickly go off the rails into hate but I wanted to see if we could have some debate on companies openly trying to influence elections. 

https://www.featureshoot.com/2020/04/introducing-photographersforbiden-a-new-project-by-feature-shoot/
« Last Edit: May 08, 2020, 21:00 by PaulieWalnuts »


« Reply #1 on: May 08, 2020, 15:00 »
+4
lol, what's the "rule" about the three things you should never discuss? politics, religion, & something else?

keeping it strictly analytical (without taking sides), based on your question:

a) it does appear to be specifically designed to get biden elected. there was a news article recently (which I can't seem to find at the moment, frustrating - but 3-4 days ago) - but if I recall the gist of it - it was a higher up in the army that supported biden that said they were specifically going to use a disinformation campaign against trump (the same type of algorithms they used against other hostile nations), and pay social influencers big $$$ to put their support behind biden.

b) educated guess - I would say probably most people would not (knowingly) support a company/person/etc that had a different value system from their own. meaning, if someone liked trump, I don't believe they would knowingly support a biden campaign, and vice versa, if someone liked biden, don't think they would knowingly support a trump campaign.

c) it does seem to be more about 'how can we manipulate someone into voting for _______', as opposed to 'how can we find the person that will govern the best, put the interests of the people at the forefront, and govern the best to ensure everyone can have a "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"'...
« Last Edit: May 08, 2020, 15:06 by SuperPhoto »

« Reply #2 on: May 08, 2020, 15:10 »
+8

 there was a news article recently (which I can't seem to find at the moment, frustrating - but 3-4 days ago) - but if I recall the gist of it - it was a higher up in the army that supported biden that said they were specifically going to use a disinformation campaign against trump (the same type of algorithms they used against other hostile nations), and pay social influencers big $$$ to put their support behind biden.

LOL, indeed.

IMHO, what you wrote above sounds exactly like the kind of vague, untraceable, made-up "news articles" anonymously planted in the darkest corners of the web with the express intent of smearing and slandering a candidate the poster does not support.

You know, the kind of slimy, unproven and unprovable rumors that shouldn't even be there to find in the first place, much less eagerly read, and for sure not gleefully passed on to others. 

So, thanks for the tip, but I prefer the news I find on reputable news outlets.

georgep7

« Reply #3 on: May 08, 2020, 15:11 »
+2
Politics, religion and sports.

They actually require $15 fee for image submissions.
Plus two beloved words "exciting news"
Hah!

https://featureshoot.submittable.com/submit/153935/feature-shoot-submissions

« Reply #4 on: May 08, 2020, 17:26 »
0

 there was a news article recently (which I can't seem to find at the moment, frustrating - but 3-4 days ago) - but if I recall the gist of it - it was a higher up in the army that supported biden that said they were specifically going to use a disinformation campaign against trump (the same type of algorithms they used against other hostile nations), and pay social influencers big $$$ to put their support behind biden.

LOL, indeed.

IMHO, what you wrote above sounds exactly like the kind of vague, untraceable, made-up "news articles" anonymously planted in the darkest corners of the web with the express intent of smearing and slandering a candidate the poster does not support.

You know, the kind of slimy, unproven and unprovable rumors that shouldn't even be there to find in the first place, much less eagerly read, and for sure not gleefully passed on to others. 

So, thanks for the tip, but I prefer the news I find on reputable news outlets.

<sigh> okay then... I spent a few minutes finding the article, just for you...

here is your article, do you consider the washington post, in your humble opinion, to be worthy of a read?

washingtonpost.com/politics/technology-once-used-to-combat-isis-propaganda-is-enlisted-by-democratic-group-to-counter-trumps-coronavirus-messaging/2020/05/01/6bed5f70-8a5b-11ea-ac8a-fe9b8088e101_story.html
« Last Edit: May 08, 2020, 17:32 by SuperPhoto »

Shelma1

« Reply #5 on: May 08, 2020, 17:52 »
+6

 there was a news article recently (which I can't seem to find at the moment, frustrating - but 3-4 days ago) - but if I recall the gist of it - it was a higher up in the army that supported biden that said they were specifically going to use a disinformation campaign against trump (the same type of algorithms they used against other hostile nations), and pay social influencers big $$$ to put their support behind biden.

LOL, indeed.

IMHO, what you wrote above sounds exactly like the kind of vague, untraceable, made-up "news articles" anonymously planted in the darkest corners of the web with the express intent of smearing and slandering a candidate the poster does not support.

You know, the kind of slimy, unproven and unprovable rumors that shouldn't even be there to find in the first place, much less eagerly read, and for sure not gleefully passed on to others. 

So, thanks for the tip, but I prefer the news I find on reputable news outlets.

<sigh> okay then... I spent a few minutes finding the article, just for you...

here is your article, do you consider the washington post, in your humble opinion, to be worthy of a read?

washingtonpost.com/politics/technology-once-used-to-combat-isis-propaganda-is-enlisted-by-democratic-group-to-counter-trumps-coronavirus-messaging/2020/05/01/6bed5f70-8a5b-11ea-ac8a-fe9b8088e101_story.html

The campaign, from what I read in this article, is meant to counter disinformation coming from Trump, not to spread disinformation about him....basically the polar opposite of what you claimed.

« Reply #6 on: May 08, 2020, 18:06 »
+3

 there was a news article recently (which I can't seem to find at the moment, frustrating - but 3-4 days ago) - but if I recall the gist of it - it was a higher up in the army that supported biden that said they were specifically going to use a disinformation campaign against trump (the same type of algorithms they used against other hostile nations), and pay social influencers big $$$ to put their support behind biden.

LOL, indeed.

IMHO, what you wrote above sounds exactly like the kind of vague, untraceable, made-up "news articles" anonymously planted in the darkest corners of the web with the express intent of smearing and slandering a candidate the poster does not support.

You know, the kind of slimy, unproven and unprovable rumors that shouldn't even be there to find in the first place, much less eagerly read, and for sure not gleefully passed on to others. 

So, thanks for the tip, but I prefer the news I find on reputable news outlets.

<sigh> okay then... I spent a few minutes finding the article, just for you...

here is your article, do you consider the washington post, in your humble opinion, to be worthy of a read?

washingtonpost.com/politics/technology-once-used-to-combat-isis-propaganda-is-enlisted-by-democratic-group-to-counter-trumps-coronavirus-messaging/2020/05/01/6bed5f70-8a5b-11ea-ac8a-fe9b8088e101_story.html


Yes, actually I do! ;D I'm a WaPo subscriber, read it online every day, and trust it.

What I don't trust is someone (not speaking of anyone in particular, of course) who posts stuff like "there was a news article recently (which I can't seem to find at the moment, frustrating - but 3-4 days ago) - but if I recall the gist of it - "

How trustworthy would you consider that if somebody else happened to write it here?  8)
« Last Edit: May 08, 2020, 20:14 by marthamarks »

« Reply #7 on: May 08, 2020, 18:08 »
0

 there was a news article recently (which I can't seem to find at the moment, frustrating - but 3-4 days ago) - but if I recall the gist of it - it was a higher up in the army that supported biden that said they were specifically going to use a disinformation campaign against trump (the same type of algorithms they used against other hostile nations), and pay social influencers big $$$ to put their support behind biden.

LOL, indeed.

IMHO, what you wrote above sounds exactly like the kind of vague, untraceable, made-up "news articles" anonymously planted in the darkest corners of the web with the express intent of smearing and slandering a candidate the poster does not support.

You know, the kind of slimy, unproven and unprovable rumors that shouldn't even be there to find in the first place, much less eagerly read, and for sure not gleefully passed on to others. 

So, thanks for the tip, but I prefer the news I find on reputable news outlets.

<sigh> okay then... I spent a few minutes finding the article, just for you...

here is your article, do you consider the washington post, in your humble opinion, to be worthy of a read?

washingtonpost.com/politics/technology-once-used-to-combat-isis-propaganda-is-enlisted-by-democratic-group-to-counter-trumps-coronavirus-messaging/2020/05/01/6bed5f70-8a5b-11ea-ac8a-fe9b8088e101_story.html


Yes, actually I do! ;D I'm a WaPo subscriber, read it online every day, and trust it.

What I don't trust is someone (not speaking of anyone in particular, of course) who posts stuff like "there was a news article recently (which I can't seem to find at the moment, frustrating - but 3-4 days ago)" .

How trustworthy would you consider that if somebody else happened to write it here?  8)

well, I would do a quick search to see if I could find it first... but - mm - yeah - i suppose if someone else 'just' wrote that - perhaps I may have replied the same way as you :)
« Last Edit: May 08, 2020, 18:11 by SuperPhoto »

« Reply #8 on: May 08, 2020, 18:10 »
0

 there was a news article recently (which I can't seem to find at the moment, frustrating - but 3-4 days ago) - but if I recall the gist of it - it was a higher up in the army that supported biden that said they were specifically going to use a disinformation campaign against trump (the same type of algorithms they used against other hostile nations), and pay social influencers big $$$ to put their support behind biden.

LOL, indeed.

IMHO, what you wrote above sounds exactly like the kind of vague, untraceable, made-up "news articles" anonymously planted in the darkest corners of the web with the express intent of smearing and slandering a candidate the poster does not support.

You know, the kind of slimy, unproven and unprovable rumors that shouldn't even be there to find in the first place, much less eagerly read, and for sure not gleefully passed on to others. 

So, thanks for the tip, but I prefer the news I find on reputable news outlets.

<sigh> okay then... I spent a few minutes finding the article, just for you...

here is your article, do you consider the washington post, in your humble opinion, to be worthy of a read?

washingtonpost.com/politics/technology-once-used-to-combat-isis-propaganda-is-enlisted-by-democratic-group-to-counter-trumps-coronavirus-messaging/2020/05/01/6bed5f70-8a5b-11ea-ac8a-fe9b8088e101_story.html

The campaign, from what I read in this article, is meant to counter disinformation coming from Trump, not to spread disinformation about him....basically the polar opposite of what you claimed.

not quite - in conjunction with a few other articles I read (I suppose I can find those too if you wish) - basically, the dems under the guise of 'countering' trump are also trying to 'manipulate' (not give voters a chance to make up their own mind) into making a vote...

« Reply #9 on: May 08, 2020, 18:11 »
+2

 there was a news article recently (which I can't seem to find at the moment, frustrating - but 3-4 days ago) - but if I recall the gist of it - it was a higher up in the army that supported biden that said they were specifically going to use a disinformation campaign against trump (the same type of algorithms they used against other hostile nations), and pay social influencers big $$$ to put their support behind biden.

LOL, indeed.

IMHO, what you wrote above sounds exactly like the kind of vague, untraceable, made-up "news articles" anonymously planted in the darkest corners of the web with the express intent of smearing and slandering a candidate the poster does not support.

You know, the kind of slimy, unproven and unprovable rumors that shouldn't even be there to find in the first place, much less eagerly read, and for sure not gleefully passed on to others. 

So, thanks for the tip, but I prefer the news I find on reputable news outlets.

<sigh> okay then... I spent a few minutes finding the article, just for you...

here is your article, do you consider the washington post, in your humble opinion, to be worthy of a read?

washingtonpost.com/politics/technology-once-used-to-combat-isis-propaganda-is-enlisted-by-democratic-group-to-counter-trumps-coronavirus-messaging/2020/05/01/6bed5f70-8a5b-11ea-ac8a-fe9b8088e101_story.html

The campaign, from what I read in this article, is meant to counter disinformation coming from Trump, not to spread disinformation about him....basically the polar opposite of what you claimed.

I read it that way too now that I have the actual article to read, not somebody's sly, smirking interpretation of it.  :o

« Reply #10 on: May 08, 2020, 18:12 »
0

The campaign, from what I read in this article, is meant to counter disinformation coming from Trump, not to spread disinformation about him....basically the polar opposite of what you claimed.

I read it that way too now that I have the actual article to read, not somebody's sly, smirking interpretation of it.  :o
[/quote]

it's in conjunction with a few other articles... if you like, I can see if I can find those too? (see above post where I replied to the previous poster)...

but basically - from the other articles I read too (see if I can find those as well) - it appears the dems under the guise of removing disinformation, then want to use exactly the same things they are accusing trump of doing to push the dem agenda... so its like the pot calling the kettle black...
« Last Edit: May 08, 2020, 18:18 by SuperPhoto »

« Reply #11 on: May 08, 2020, 18:20 »
+2
not quite - in conjunction with a few other articles I read (I suppose I can find those too if you wish) - basically, the dems under the guise of 'countering' trump are also trying to 'manipulate' (not give voters a chance to make up their own mind) into making a vote...

Uh oh.

Dare one point out that you've suddenly abandoned your previous neutral-sounding "just the facts, ma'am" demeanor and wandered into showing us your own personal political persuasion?

Could that be why you originally decided to post your "I read this somewhere" story?


« Reply #12 on: May 08, 2020, 18:21 »
+1

it's in conjunction with a few other articles... if you like, I can see if I can find those too? (see above post where I replied to the previous poster)...


I'm not asking you to do anything. If you want to dig out the facts for yourself, that's good and I highly recommend it.   :D

But researching just so you can say "I told you so!!!" to somebody else not so good.
« Last Edit: May 08, 2020, 18:36 by marthamarks »

Shelma1

« Reply #13 on: May 08, 2020, 18:26 »
+4

The campaign, from what I read in this article, is meant to counter disinformation coming from Trump, not to spread disinformation about him....basically the polar opposite of what you claimed.

I read it that way too now that I have the actual article to read, not somebody's sly, smirking interpretation of it.  :o

it's in conjunction with a few other articles... if you like, I can see if I can find those too? (see above post where I replied to the previous poster)...

but basically - from the other articles I read too (see if I can find those as well) - it appears the dems under the guise of removing disinformation, then want to use exactly the same things they are accusing trump of doing to push the dem agenda... so its like the pot calling the kettle black...
[/quote]

Your little story fell apart rather quickly.

« Reply #14 on: May 08, 2020, 18:39 »
+4
Your little story fell apart rather quickly.

Yeah. Funny how often that happens, isn't it?  :-*

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #15 on: May 09, 2020, 13:29 »
+1
lol, what's the "rule" about the three things you should never discuss? politics, religion, & something else?

Politics, Religion, and

1) How to make a perfect martini
2) How to start a fire
3) Best way to catch fish (or clean fish...)
4) What is Art vs what is just a popular fad.
5) a long, long, list of more  that are equally as subjective, but personal choices.

Some people think they know best and have to aggressively force their "expert" authority to have the right and best opinion as the only opinion.

Who successfully got rid of Bernie because he was too progressive? Yeah, the Democrats themselves. Lets see who's trying to dump Biden? The Me Too powers from the political left. Who's going to be the democratic candidate then? Is that the plan?

Trump should not be re-elected for many reasons, but outstanding, the number one reason, is his many public and open statements, that in his own words, that have shown he is mentally incompetent.

So my only question is, like the last election, what are the choices? Is it going to be the lesser of which two evils again?  :)

One good, acceptable candidate, no matter which party affiliation, would win by a landslide. So far we are being offered none of the above.

Shelma1

« Reply #16 on: May 09, 2020, 16:25 »
+5
You really cant decide between someone whos clearly mentally incompetent and any even passably competent Democrat? Really?

« Reply #17 on: May 09, 2020, 16:32 »
+3
You really cant decide between someone whos clearly mentally incompetent and any even passably competent Democrat? Really?

I had that same thought, Shelma, but decided not to say it out of respect for Uncle Pete.

But yeah. Really, Pete???

« Reply #18 on: May 10, 2020, 10:09 »
+5
Back to the OP, this looks like a blog in support of Biden - it doesn't appear to be a company or a photo agency.  I don't really see the issue.  Submit there if you want to support Biden and feel the need to write about it, otherwise don't.

As to supporting or avoiding companies with particular ideologies, I've been doing that since 1977, when I first realized that companies would use their wealth to promote policies I don't agree with.  I have a list of companies and brands I will not buy from because of their political orientation.  I'm sure the companies don't care what I do but if enough of us do the same it might make a difference and at least I feel like I'm doing my own (very small) part.  I definitely would not contribute to or support a photo agency that actively promotes what I consider to be the "wrong" political view.

« Reply #19 on: May 13, 2020, 17:27 »
+4
Theres a company that sells spices that took a stand against T after the election. They knew it was risky but without shareholders they were free to express their views and I personally agreed with their stance and support them.

Free speech has been under attack from the current administration so I value companies willing to speak out. I might come up with some photos to submit for this challenge.

Biden wasnt my first, second or even my third choice, but I plan to do what I can to actively help him get elected. Ive been voting for 44 years now (every year, local, school board, all of it not just every 4 years). It has never felt so important. As I hear of more people dying, some I know, most I dont, in a country in chaos with no overall plan, people going hungry, the rule of law turned on its head, Id be ashamed not to speak up. I love my country and I want it back

« Reply #20 on: May 14, 2020, 08:35 »
+3
Theres a company that sells spices that took a stand against T after the election. They knew it was risky but without shareholders they were free to express their views and I personally agreed with their stance and support them.

Free speech has been under attack from the current administration so I value companies willing to speak out. I might come up with some photos to submit for this challenge.

Biden wasnt my first, second or even my third choice, but I plan to do what I can to actively help him get elected. Ive been voting for 44 years now (every year, local, school board, all of it not just every 4 years). It has never felt so important. As I hear of more people dying, some I know, most I dont, in a country in chaos with no overall plan, people going hungry, the rule of law turned on its head, Id be ashamed not to speak up. I love my country and I want it back

I've been buying spices from that company for decades, especially since they put in a store about an hour away.  Apparently I wasn't paying attention because I wasn't really aware of their political views, although I am not surprised.  They were expecting to take up to a 30% loss but instead their business increased.  Not surprised by that either - people of a particular political persuasion in general probably don't buy too many exotic spices, so they gained more customers than they lost.

You and I have been voting for the same amount of time - I was just old enough to vote in the 1976 presidential election.  Since then I have voted in every election available in four states - yesterday I mailed back my ballot for my state's primary election next month.  My preferred candidates rarely get elected - especially where I now live - but if you don't vote then you can't complain about the outcome either.  I hope you get your country back.

« Reply #21 on: May 14, 2020, 12:14 »
+2
Absolutely agree. Thanks for replying.

My first election was for president in 1976 too - I voted by absentee ballot in my first 4 elections since I was away in college in different states (3 years in Massachusetts, one in California - I've always been a New Yorker) - When I used a voting machine at age 22 in 1980 for the first time, I had to ask them how it worked!

Hope we get our country back - for everyone's sake. This division isn't good for anyone, no matter their politics.

I remember watching Nixon resign with some of my friends (around age 16) and one said that's why she never planned to vote, in case she made a mistake. I urged her to reconsider - telling her it is a privilege that people have fought and died for, not something we should abandon. Even if you make a mistake (like voting for Anderson in protest - a mistake I made years later and which I rue to this day), it's important to vote and to make your voice heard, and to learn from your mistakes and do better next time, never give up or the other side wins by default. Democracy is a privilege and we should never become complacent. Being informed and choosing the best candidate on the slate, even if he or she is not the one we would like in the best of all possible worlds, is a duty we owe to ourselves and our fellow citizens.

« Reply #22 on: May 14, 2020, 23:46 »
+1

You and I have been voting for the same amount of time - I was just old enough to vote in the 1976 presidential election.  Since then I have voted in every election available in four states - yesterday I mailed back my ballot for my state's primary election next month. 

Good for you both!

And BTW, I've got you beat in the voting department by 8 years and probably more in actual years.

That's because my first year eligible to vote was 1968 and we still had to be 21 then. By the time you two came along, if I'm not mistaken, Congress had lowered the voting age to 18.

So, by using a complicated, super-sophisticated mathematical formula, I conclude that I'm likely leading you by 8 + 3 or 11 actual years.  ;D 

« Reply #23 on: September 16, 2020, 14:04 »
0
thanks, this is very useful information! I can't wait to be able to use it in practice.

One never knows what one will learn when one reads one's way through an old thread here.

Glad you found our lighthearted self-amusement worth trudging through all the way to the (obviously worthless-to-you) end! :D

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #24 on: September 16, 2020, 14:36 »
+3
I'm not familiar with the company. How do you feel about companies taking this firm of a position in politics? Reading further into this shows it's not really about supporting Biden but removing Trump. Would you continue to support them if they firmly were against your preferred candidate? What if it was one of the top three micros wanting to get rid of Biden?

I have a feeling this will quickly go off the rails into hate but I wanted to see if we could have some debate on companies openly trying to influence elections. 

https://www.featureshoot.com/2020/04/introducing-photographersforbiden-a-new-project-by-feature-shoot/

Likewise, Scientific American has come out for Biden, which is really a position against Trump's anti-science stance.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/16/prestigious-us-science-journal-breaks-with-tradition-to-back-biden

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #25 on: September 18, 2020, 13:21 »
0
I'm not familiar with the company. How do you feel about companies taking this firm of a position in politics? Reading further into this shows it's not really about supporting Biden but removing Trump. Would you continue to support them if they firmly were against your preferred candidate? What if it was one of the top three micros wanting to get rid of Biden?

I have a feeling this will quickly go off the rails into hate but I wanted to see if we could have some debate on companies openly trying to influence elections. 

https://www.featureshoot.com/2020/04/introducing-photographersforbiden-a-new-project-by-feature-shoot/

Likewise, Scientific American has come out for Biden, which is really a position against Trump's anti-science stance.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/16/prestigious-us-science-journal-breaks-with-tradition-to-back-biden

Trump has an Anti-Science stance or the liberals are selling and telling us that he has an Anti-Science stance?  ??? Is Biden really suffering from dementia, or are the Republicans just promoting that myth?

Yeah who would have expected that academics who live in the mostly liberal hives of "we know better than everyone else" would support Biden? PBS that the taxpayers pay for, is far left. Talk about Anti-Science, because the shows have a political agenda that ignores anything that doesn't agree with them

Before anyone thinks I'm in favor of Trump, no way. The truth is, I don't like either of them, and we don't have a choice. Same as the last election, when I didn't like either of the candidates.

Here's the way it's looking right now. "This year, Trump will not be able to vilify Biden. The swing voters do not dislike Biden the way they still disliked Hillary Clinton. And, so, Trump is taking a different approach, casting doubt on Biden by focusing on questions of his mental acuity and verbal mistakes. And he will likely get far by alleging Biden's lifetime in politics has not having yielded a single, career-defining achievement." paraphrased and quoted from Rich Thau

Choices: angry, loudmouth (sometimes uninformed) tweeter or someone who has the force and personality of a brown paper bag. Biden is viewed by many as nothing but a mouthpiece for special interests and activist groups. Defunding the police? That will send voters to Trump. Rioters attacking Federal buildings and retail shops? That's going to get more people to vote for Trump. Kind of a backfire for the protesters, isn't it?

Here I am someone who hates the hate in politics and abhors the division that has taken place in the country. We used to fight together, to make the country better. Someone won, they were Our President. Now all I see is people split and fighting each other, mostly for their own gain and self interests. That's not united. Polarization is the worst enemy for our country the way I see things.

If nothing terrible alters the way things are going and mostly progressing towards November. The election will be very, very close. No one is leading or going to overwhelm the other. The side that gets out the vote will win, regardless of policy or promises. We are that equally divided.

Tenebroso

« Reply #26 on: September 18, 2020, 14:39 »
0
It's normal for you to stay away from Trum, it's very logical.

In my opinion, the cyborg, bots, fake news, foreign armies no longer know what strategy to follow to continue manipulating a society that distances itself from information and also confuses freedom of expression with insults to those who are different. To be quite the same nothing at all. Fortunately brains are being detoxified, the truth cannot always be hidden.

As for the current president, before going to jail, it is difficult for him to leave power. Therefore, you will have to continue buying ammunition and weapons. The ridicule of the USA distances it from the developed country. We will try to help you among the developed countries to approach the 21st century in the course of the next decades. You do not exist as a country. Not even by state colors. We will help you.

Shelma1

« Reply #27 on: September 21, 2020, 05:47 »
+3
I'm not familiar with the company. How do you feel about companies taking this firm of a position in politics? Reading further into this shows it's not really about supporting Biden but removing Trump. Would you continue to support them if they firmly were against your preferred candidate? What if it was one of the top three micros wanting to get rid of Biden?

I have a feeling this will quickly go off the rails into hate but I wanted to see if we could have some debate on companies openly trying to influence elections. 

https://www.featureshoot.com/2020/04/introducing-photographersforbiden-a-new-project-by-feature-shoot/

Likewise, Scientific American has come out for Biden, which is really a position against Trump's anti-science stance.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/16/prestigious-us-science-journal-breaks-with-tradition-to-back-biden

Trump has an Anti-Science stance or the liberals are selling and telling us that he has an Anti-Science stance?  ??? Is Biden really suffering from dementia, or are the Republicans just promoting that myth?

Yeah who would have expected that academics who live in the mostly liberal hives of "we know better than everyone else" would support Biden? PBS that the taxpayers pay for, is far left. Talk about Anti-Science, because the shows have a political agenda that ignores anything that doesn't agree with them

Before anyone thinks I'm in favor of Trump, no way. The truth is, I don't like either of them, and we don't have a choice. Same as the last election, when I didn't like either of the candidates.

Here's the way it's looking right now. "This year, Trump will not be able to vilify Biden. The swing voters do not dislike Biden the way they still disliked Hillary Clinton. And, so, Trump is taking a different approach, casting doubt on Biden by focusing on questions of his mental acuity and verbal mistakes. And he will likely get far by alleging Biden's lifetime in politics has not having yielded a single, career-defining achievement." paraphrased and quoted from Rich Thau

Choices: angry, loudmouth (sometimes uninformed) tweeter or someone who has the force and personality of a brown paper bag. Biden is viewed by many as nothing but a mouthpiece for special interests and activist groups. Defunding the police? That will send voters to Trump. Rioters attacking Federal buildings and retail shops? That's going to get more people to vote for Trump. Kind of a backfire for the protesters, isn't it?

Here I am someone who hates the hate in politics and abhors the division that has taken place in the country. We used to fight together, to make the country better. Someone won, they were Our President. Now all I see is people split and fighting each other, mostly for their own gain and self interests. That's not united. Polarization is the worst enemy for our country the way I see things.

If nothing terrible alters the way things are going and mostly progressing towards November. The election will be very, very close. No one is leading or going to overwhelm the other. The side that gets out the vote will win, regardless of policy or promises. We are that equally divided.

What country have you been living in? When did we used to fight together to make the country better? Was it when Obama was POTUS and the right questioned where he was born and went nuts because he wore the same type of tan suit every other modern president had worn at some point? Was it when Reagan had the trickle down approach that led to the current tremendous gap between rich and poor? Was it when women (were the majority of people in the US) werent allowed to vote? Or when slaves were counted as 3/5 of a person so white slave owners in the south would have power beyond their true numbers, outsized power that still, today, puts Republicans in the White House even when they lose the popular vote? Was it when the founding fathers enslaved people? Was it when Europeans invaded, murdered most of the existing population and forced who was left to live on reservations, then broke every treaty made with them? This country has always been about a small group of white men grabbing power for themselves and trying their best to keep everyone else from getting their hands on it. And its always been everyone else fighting them for some small chance at some type of equality or fairness.

« Reply #28 on: September 21, 2020, 07:01 »
0
It is really weird reading some people's opinions of politics. With even the most cursory knowledge of history and politics the manipulation and misinformation being spread is absolutely transparent.
I get how when Burke was writing we plebs basically didnt have access to this stuff so our leaders could hide their real intentions, but nowadays with the internet whats the excuse for falling for the garbage?

I guess some people just want to stick their heads in the sand or more charitably just dont have time when they are slaving away just trying to earn a basic living.

Depressing. If you have the chance I recommend everyone reads up on the Powell Memo, Mont Pelerin, The Trilateral Commission etc. This isnt some big hidden conspiracy. It is all out in the open and an ongoing project.

These people absolutely do not believe in or trust democracy, they believe in oligarchy and they have pretty much achieved their goals over the last 50 years. They arent shy about telling us, so why wont people listen to them? Why do people keep swallowing the propaganda even though with the smallest bit of digging you can find them telling you the lies they are going to use to get you to vote your democracy out of existence. Very, very odd.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
Face2Face project

Started by Istock News Microstock News

0 Replies
1797 Views
Last post March 21, 2007, 17:11
by Istock News
0 Replies
2497 Views
Last post September 27, 2007, 08:44
by ste7e
30 Replies
7736 Views
Last post February 19, 2013, 17:32
by alberto
105 Replies
23249 Views
Last post August 19, 2014, 04:58
by ajt
2 Replies
1865 Views
Last post April 20, 2019, 16:53
by ShadySue

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle