Live data from Hacker News

Trump, our next president, promised to block AT&T/Time Warner merger

arstechnica.com

71–80 of 150 posts

Re: Trump, our next president, promised to block AT&T/Time Warner merger

#71
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have serious doubts. I think the one thing that this election has proven is that fact-checking is dead. PolitiFact rated 70% of Trump's reviewed statements as at least "mostly false" and there were basically zero consequences. The next election cycle is going to be brutal.

> there were basically zero consequences 50%+ of the country voted against him. It's up to us hold his feet to the fire and wake up the other 50%.

Word to the wise, less people voted for Trump than they did for Mitt Romney in 2012 (although they are still counting), and Romney lost. Next time, put someone up who could be voted for, not just point to someone to vote against.

Re: Trump, our next president, promised to block AT&T/Time Warner merger

#72
post #6
post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Either that, or he'll just break his promise and let it go through.

Bingo. Promises, for Trump, are fulfilled upon announcement, and then forgotten. The examples are legion.

just like every politician there ever was?

Re: Trump, our next president, promised to block AT&T/Time Warner merger

#73
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have serious doubts. I think the one thing that this election has proven is that fact-checking is dead. PolitiFact rated 70% of Trump's reviewed statements as at least "mostly false" and there were basically zero consequences. The next election cycle is going to be brutal.

> there were basically zero consequences 50%+ of the country voted against him. It's up to us hold his feet to the fire and wake up the other 50%.

Well that's not quite accurate, because 45% of the country just didn't vote.

Re: Trump, our next president, promised to block AT&T/Time Warner merger

#74
post #65

He's all about removing regulations, and then wants to regulate this?

Could you explain your thoughts on how those two ideas are necessarily inconsistent with each other?

Well, one is removing a thing, and the other is adding the same thing. QED _inconsistent_.

Re: Trump, our next president, promised to block AT&T/Time Warner merger

#75
post #28
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bingo. Promises, for Trump, are fulfilled upon announcement, and then forgotten. The examples are legion.

I think, despite political affiliation, it's our obligation to hold him to the promises we believe in and galvanize his fired-up base to do so as well. I voted for Clinton and volunteered for the campaign, but I'll gladly push him to keep his word on this promise and the others that I believe will benefit our country.

I'm desperately hoping he breaks 90% of his promises. A media merger is the absolute least of our concerns when he's promised to end net neutrality and force companies to give up encryption keys.

Re: Trump, our next president, promised to block AT&T/Time Warner merger

#76
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have serious doubts. I think the one thing that this election has proven is that fact-checking is dead. PolitiFact rated 70% of Trump's reviewed statements as at least "mostly false" and there were basically zero consequences. The next election cycle is going to be brutal.

> there were basically zero consequences 50%+ of the country voted against him. It's up to us hold his feet to the fire and wake up the other 50%.

[deleted]

Re: Trump, our next president, promised to block AT&T/Time Warner merger

#77
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If he doesn't keep his word we'll have ammo to oust him in 4 years, perhaps impeach him sooner, perhaps revise congress in 2 years. Otherwise, we get the change we want.

I have serious doubts. I think the one thing that this election has proven is that fact-checking is dead. PolitiFact rated 70% of Trump's reviewed statements as at least "mostly false" and there were basically zero consequences. The next election cycle is going to be brutal.

"Fact checking" was never more than a partisan exercise. The people going to PoliFact for fact checking are the people who wouldn't vote for Trump anyway.

Re: Trump, our next president, promised to block AT&T/Time Warner merger

#78
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there were basically zero consequences 50%+ of the country voted against him. It's up to us hold his feet to the fire and wake up the other 50%.

Word to the wise, less people voted for Trump than they did for Mitt Romney in 2012 (although they are still counting), and Romney lost. Next time, put someone up who could be voted for, not just point to someone to vote against.

Just for the sake of completeness: And less people voted for Clinton than they did for Mitt Romney in 2012.

Re: Trump, our next president, promised to block AT&T/Time Warner merger

#79
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Politifact is blatantly biased. Bernie and Trump made the same claim about african american youth unemployment, and they rated Trump a liar and Bernie honest [0][1]. [0]: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jul/... [1]: http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2016/jun/20/do...

The primary difference there appears to be that the Sanders campaign answered a request for where their numbers came from with references, and the Trump campaign did not respond, leaving the (different) author to attempt to research the topic themself.

The Sanders article they published dates almost a year before the Trump one... They should have found their own article if they attempted serious research

Re: Trump, our next president, promised to block AT&T/Time Warner merger

#80
post #74
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you explain your thoughts on how those two ideas are necessarily inconsistent with each other?

Well, one is removing a thing, and the other is adding the same thing. QED _inconsistent_.

You'll first have to prove your premise that he is all about removing regulations (no matter what regulations), because that assertion is hardly an axiom.
Post reply on HN