Comments by "" (@1987BillyBob) on "Facebook's GIFT to Trump: They're ENDING fact-checking" video.

Oh no, you will have to think for yourself for once in your life.
6
As they should because it wasn't fact checking. It was censoring opinions that people needed to see.
4
Censoring of opinions you don't like is not fact checking.
3
@Fluxion11 define "misinformation".
3
@Couldthinkofabettername so you have nothing.
2
If you get your health advice from facebook you are beyond help.
1
How are they an echo chamber if they are going to allow free speech?
1
@randyorr9443 there were a lot of issues regarding the 2020 election. You had the lies of covid, you had the censorship on social media, you had the lies of racism in this nation. Was it stolen on the idea there were ballots pulled out of the basement of a warehouse? Hard to say. But it was based on the censorship on social media and the constant lies.
1
@JamesDeanMichael80 the onus is on your to determine what is true. You are relying on "fact checkers" who are bias which created this problem. A big reason why Trump won in 2024 is because Elon got rid of the "fact checkers" and let people actually give their opinions and people saw the whole truth.
1
So allowing for more free speech is fascism?
1
So you want to live in an echo chamber.
1
So what were the credentials of the so called "fact checkers"? Do people even know? So many that support "fact checking" are doing so blindly without even taking the time to look up the credentials of the "fact checkers". They just blindly believed them.
1
Some people are. I don't have social media but I get a lot of my news from Youtube.
1
The left cannot think for themselves. Look at covid times. They were told it was dangerous and to wear a mask and they did without question. They were told ivermectin is horse paste and thus echo that claim even though doctors were prescribing it, but were quick to allow some stranger in a hazmat suit inject an unknown fluid in their arm in a parking lot.
1
@BertDrumsAlot you guys are scared of getting rid of "fact checking" because the truth is not on your side.
1
@GetheS we can spin this the other way. The "fact checkers" can censor the truth and the easily drooped as you put it will believe that as well. Also, what credentials do these "fact checkers" have? What is their area of expertise?
1
@emm_arr are they lies? Here is the problem with "fact checking". Facts are near the bottom of Bloom's Taxonomy for a reason. You can give two experts the same set of facts and can get two legit, but different answers. JD Vance during the VP debate exposed the flaws of fact checking. When he was "fact check" on the Haitian migrants in Ohio he went into details of what the law actually was, how it was being abused, and how they were not migrants here in a green card waiting for citizenship. So while one can argue that they were here legally, the real issue is should they have been? And what is their actual legal status. So you can say "well the fact is they are here legally", there is a lot more to it than that. And that is were opinions come. And the issue is that important opinions were being censored.
1
@ldfreitas9437 the "fact checking" is flawed. Take the VP debate where JD was "fact checked" in immigration. While you can say the Haitian migrants are here legally, it isn't as simple as them having a green card, as they don't have that. It was arguably due to abusing a law. Also, putting 50,000 migrants of a different culture in a town of 60,000 people will cause problems. But JD was "fact check" on the simple statement of those Haitian migrants were here legally. What that shows is that these issues are complex. There are a lot of moving part. In the same debate the moderators said that scientists say that climate change is a threat. Well, that is not what they say. No legit scientist is going to say that. The issue is far more complex. You guys want fact checking because you can't think for yourself and live in a bubble.
1
@cherokeevolfusa2891 I am not on Facebook, but here on Youtube I quoted a NEJM paper where Fauci was the lead author on. It was censored because it questioned the severity of covid. I was also censored on SB Nation when I was posting covid related information that simply questioned the severity of it. I was citing articles in journals like Science and Nature. That is a problem when these fact checkers are anti science.
1
@afry6400 threats and attacks are different, and those will still get removed. But the reality is that opinions were being censored.
1
@afry6400 the problem with the "fact checkers" is that they were censoring reports. Thinking for yourself is looking at the full story, not just one side of it. You bring up lies, all during covid there was information that the "fact checkers" censor all the time leading to people's lives being destroyed. Remember when the two doctors from Bakersfield were censored for simply asking questions on if the lockdowns were the best approach? That is a problem. Their opinion should be heard as there was a legit argument on if the covid restrictions were really the best route to take.
1
@afry6400 also, the onus is on your to decide what is a lie and what isn't. If you allow "fact checkers' to censor lies, they will also censor the truth. To me covid was the highlight of it. I have literally quoted a NEJM paper from Fauci on Youtube and on SB Nation and was censored.
1
@AWBeng. to start, as a parent the onus is on you to raise your kid. Don't rely on others to do it. You should teach your kid what is true and what isn't. Next, as for the migrants, they were allowed to come in by a wave of a magic wand by Harris that was abusing a law. The law has been challenged and put on freeze at one point but you are allowing nearly 20,000 migrants from a different nation and culture to overrun a town of around 60,000. That will lead to problems. And these are not people here on a green card waiting for citizenship. That is a problem that needs to be discussed. To simply say "fact check, they are here legally" is flawed in so many ways as there is a lot more to it.
1
The problem is that the "fact checkers" were censoring legit opinions they did not like.
1
The left loves "fact checking" because they can't think for themselves.
1
@rocketfighter8 Trump gave details on that. It is hard to lower prices on many goods and services once they go up. The goal is to stop them from going up, or slow the increase of prices while having wage growth be higher like we had in his first term. I don't expect many prices to go down, but I do expect a higher salary.
1
@alterego6075 what was wrong with what I said? I also really don't recall Trump saying he was going to lower the price of groceries.
1
@alterego6075 and here we go. What should I google? Care to point me to an article? I am not denying that he said it, I need proof. How about instead of you telling me to "google it" you point me to an article with a quote. Also, according to the Atlanta Federal Reserve wage growth under Trump was over 3%, and for the lower 1/4 of wage earners it was close to 4% where under Obama wage growth was around 2% and the lower 1/4 of wage earners it was around 1%. And under Trump inflation was less than 2%. So you had a wage growth of over 3% with inflation being less than 2%. That is important. Under Biden wage growth was around 6%, but inflation was over 9%. Inflation was outpacing wage growth. So point is under Trump's first term wage growth outpaced inflation. The data does not lie.
1
@alterego6075 sigh.....you are acting like most leftists now. You can't provide any proof when challenged. Why not give me an article? Why not give me a quote? Again, I am not saying Trump never made that claim, but you need to give me evidence.
1
How is he an idiot?
1
@afry6400 I actually like following Pakman as he is falling apart. It is getting worse everyday.
1