Thanks cutworm!
https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/2021/dec/2020-apportionment-map.html
https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/2021/dec/2020-resident-population-map.html
https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/2021/dec/2020-percent-change-map.html
How did the popular vote square up with the electoral votes in recent elections.
2020-Biden 7 million more votes
https://www.cookpolitical.com/2020-national-popular-vote-tracker
++++++++++++++++++
2016-Clinton 3 million more votes
https://www.nytimes.com/elections/2016/results/president
EPOCH TIMES IS MY "GO TO" SITE, FOR MANY THINGS. (THEY UNCOVER MANY "MISTAKES")
HERE'S ANOTHER https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdCW9Dkgbf0"
THANKS, CUTWORM
__________
(AKA: JEAN N.)
Thanks Jean,
For numerous months, I had their articles delivered to my mailbox, like I've done for dozens of sources for both sides to try them out.
I understand completely why YOU really like them. They have good stuff and they have whacko stuff but always from the right side.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-epoch-times/
Here's another take that likes them more:
https://www.allsides.com/news-source/epoch-times-media-bias
News Media
AllSides Media Bias Rating: Lean Right
How we determined this rating:
This is just like joj likes to get his news from the New York Times and WOP and mcfarm gets his from FOX as well as others here. You all go there because they tell you the news the way that you like to hear/read it.
I'm an oddball. I go to all those sources above and a dozen more, including NPR, CNN a great deal and even Zero Hedge and the best part for me is hearing both sides, then following up with anything new to confirm its validity, instead of believing it because its my go to source that tells viewers/readers what they want to believe and how to think.
Sharing this probably isn't going to change anybody but it totally explains why I'm constantly debunking DISinformation from BOTH SIDES here as well as welcoming all opinions from both sides here........even though they might get debunked by the moderator at this ANTI echo chamber.
I would like to know why they received a "mixed " rating for facts. Mike i always thought that they did a good job on facts. I would like some instances that they were wrong on facts. A person can disagree with their opinions. but I have not had problems with their facts. I do not think that they leave out facts. Would like your take on this.
Yes the stories they cover are right leaning but who else reported on this?
From the above source
The Epoch Times did several things right in its reporting. Multiple AllSides panelists noted that the publication did a good job of citing multiple sources across the political spectrum and of using full quotes in its reporting — not snippets or phrases taken out of context. The publication did not display common types of media bias such as spin, sensationalism, opinion presented as fact, unsubstantiated claims, flawed logic, or omission of source attribution. In today’s increasingly polarized media landscape, the panel agreed it was good to see Epoch Times journalists presenting full quotes from both sides of the aisle in order to present a fair and balanced story.
One team member noted The Epoch Times always used the word “said” or “told reporters,” and avoided common spin words and phrases that confer judgement upon the speaker, such as, “admitted,” “tirade,” “refused to say,” “conceded,” or “bragged.” Much of The Epoch Times’ reporting was balanced; its right bias was mostly displayed via story choice.
I agree with most of that cutworm, thanks.
Here's another take, using Wikipedia a trusted source for joj and one that I've used thousands of times for basic information but don't trust for certain mainstream political information like climate science/change because they will just regurgitate the political opinions of authors that sometimes control mainstream messages.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Epoch_Times
The Epoch Times is a far-right[1] international multi-language newspaper and media company affiliated with the Falun Gongnew religious movement.[29] The newspaper, based in New York City, is part of the Epoch Media Group, which also operates New Tang Dynasty (NTD) Television.[30] The Epoch Times has websites in 35 countries but is blocked in mainland China.[31]
The Epoch Times opposes the Chinese Communist Party,[32][33][22] promotes far-right politicians in Europe,[8][10][22] and has championed former President Donald Trump in the U.S.;[34][35] a 2019 report by NBC News showed it to be the second-largest funder of pro-Trump Facebook advertising after the Trump campaign.[30][36][22] The Epoch Times frequently promotes other Falun Gong-affiliated groups, such as the performing arts company Shen Yun.[34][24][37] The Epoch Media Group's news sites and YouTube channels have spread misinformation and conspiracy theories, such as QAnon and anti-vaccine misinformation,[34][40] and false claims of fraud in the 2020 United States presidential election.[43]
+++++++++++++++++++++
I was getting the Epoch Times articles delivered to my mailbox every day for what must have been over a year. However, their many articles backing the false claims of the 2020 election fraud and anti COVID vax DISinformation just got to be too many lies in 2021 and I had to cut them loose because the garbage was greatly outweighing the good stuff and I only have so much time in the day to skim thru stuff.
++++++++++++++++
Here's a good one from Wikepedia about me:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_denial
Climate change denial, or global warming denial, is denial, dismissal, or unwarranted doubt that contradicts the scientific consensus on climate change, including the extent to which it is caused by humans, its effects on nature and human society, or the potential of adaptation to global warming by human actions.[5][6][7] Many who deny, dismiss, or hold unwarranted doubt about the scientific consensus on anthropogenicglobal warming self-label as "climate change skeptics",[8][6] which several scientists have noted is an inaccurate description.[9][10][11]Climate change denial can also be implicit when individuals or social groups accept the science but fail to come to terms with it or to translate their acceptance into action.[12] Several social science studies have analyzed these positions as forms of denial or denialism,[13][14]pseudoscience,[15] or propaganda.[16]
The campaign to undermine public trust in climate science has been described as a "denial machine" organized by industrial, political and ideological interests, and supported by conservative media and skeptical bloggers to manufacture uncertainty about global warming.[17][18][19]
The politics of global warming have been affected by climate change denial and the political global warming controversy, undermining the efforts to act on climate change or adapting to the warming climate.[20][16][21] Those promoting denial commonly use rhetorical tactics to give the appearance of a scientific controversy where there is none.[22][23][24]
Organized campaigning to undermine public trust in climate science is associated with conservativeeconomic policies and backed by industrial interests opposed to the regulation of CO2 emissions.[25] Climate change denial has been associated with the fossil fuels lobby, the Koch brothers, industry advocates and conservative think tanks, often in the United States.[16][26][27][28] More than 90% of papers skeptical on climate change originate from right-wing think tanks.[29]
As recently as the 1970s, oil companies were publishing research which broadly concurred with the scientific community's view on global warming. Despite this, oil companies organized a climate change denial campaign to disseminate public disinformation for several decades, a strategy that has been compared to the organized denial of the hazards of tobacco smoking by the tobacco industry, and often even carried out by the same individuals who previously spread the tobacco industry's denialist propaganda.[30][31][32]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_denial
"Climate change skepticism" and "climate change denial" refer to denial, dismissal or unwarranted doubt of the scientific consensus on the rate and extent of global warming, its significance, or its connection to human behavior, in whole or in part.[33][34] Though there is a distinction between skepticism which indicates doubting the truth of an assertion and outright denial of the truth of an assertion, in the public debate phrases such as "climate skepticism" have frequently been used with the same meaning as climate denialism or contrarianism.[35][36]
++++++++++++++++++
Now here's my latest statement, which they claim is me denying the truth and part of a far right campaign to undermine the truth about climate change and sabotaging needed efforts to change our energy delivery system.
Note that I always try to show the indisputable proof, always using empirical data and authentic science, am not far right don't have an affiliation with fossil fuel companies and am a practicing environmentalist. What they accuse me of.......is exactly what THEY, including Wikipedia are doing.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/89999/#90034
++++++++++++++++++++++++
They list these studies:
Scientific consensus on causation: Academic studies of scientific agreement on human-caused global warming among climate experts (2010–2015) reflect that the level of consensus correlates with expertise in climate science.[1] A 2019 study found scientific consensus to be at 100%,[2] and a 2021 study concluded that consensus exceeded 99%.[3] Another 2021 study found that 98.7% of climate experts indicated that the Earth is getting warmer mostly because of human activity.[4]
++++++++++++++
I'm one of those scientists (atmospheric scientists) in their studies that believe humans are causing over half of the warming. They are extraordinarily dishonest to take scientists like me and pretend that we also believe in the fake unprecedented extreme weather and fake climate crisis crapola. And even worse, that we think the fake green anti environmental solutions with renewables and batteries have even a remote chance of replacing most fossil fuels.
If 99% of people in group A believe in moderate idea B, but only 60% of them believe in extreme idea C, you can't say that 99% of group A believes in C. This is exactly what they do to mislead people on the authentic science.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/41293/
Again, they are doing what they accuse me of doing.
I would like to know why they received a "mixed " rating for facts. Mike i always thought that they did a good job on facts. I would like some instances that they were wrong on facts. A person can disagree with their opinions. but I have not had problems with their facts. I do not think that they leave out facts. Would like your take on this.
Yes the stories they cover are right leaning but who else reported on this?
cutworm,
I only saw your 2nd comment earlier but just saw this and actually answered well down from the top of the last post without seeing it.
"I was getting the Epoch Times articles delivered to my mailbox every day for what must have been over a year. However, their many articles backing the false claims of the 2020 election fraud and anti COVID vax DISinformation just got to be too many lies in 2021 and I had to cut them loose because the garbage was greatly outweighing the good stuff and I only have so much time in the day to skim thru stuff."
++++++++++++++++
But let's see if I can elaborate on that:
2000 mules was totally busted/debunked here........several times for the unbelievers that preferred the Epoch Times version:
2000 Mules 7-17-22 new thread for Tim/forum
21 responses | Started by metmike - July 17, 2022, 1 p.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/87219/
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Stop the steal. Really? They're still at it I see. I debunked that false narrative 100 times here.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/87530/
https://www.theepochtimes.com/t-stop-the-steal
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
https://www.facebook.com/EpochTimesTrending/photos/a.1646881945565776/2808956262691666/?type=3
nrodeoptsS420g1u 6ua02302Atsutchuff0m37h80c t700h261g3u,00u0 ·
The medical examiner’s office in Hennepin County, Minnesota, said George Floyd may have had a “fatal level” of fentanyl in his system when he died on May 25 in police custody, triggering widespread protests, riots, and unrest.
Chief Hennepin County Medical Examiner Dr. Andrew Baker said there is “no physical evidence suggesting that Mr. Floyd died of asphyxiation,” according to court documents (pdf). It said that Floyd’s level of fentanyl was “pretty high,” and it added that… See mor
I busted that MISinformation a bunch of times here too for the unbelievers who continue to remain unbelievers because of media sources feeding it to them with convincing reading bs.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/88909/#88938
+++++++++++++++++++++
Their COVID vax DISinformation campaign was "Epic" as the distorted study after study and twisted data that shows the risk of issues from COVID are double to triple digit greater than from the vaccine.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/t-myocarditis
I busted all that stuff here too, cutworm:
COVID vaxx DISinformation/information compilation
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/87451/
++++++++++++++++
Thanks cutworm. I'd forgotten why I discontinued getting daily emails from them but remember clearly now. They are pretty bad! The top 3 people below praising them are some of the worst, anti objective, professional DISinfomation spreaders, with 2 of them, Trump and Malone out of 10,000 top sources might be 9,998 and 9,999. Only Alex Jones is worse.
++++++++++++++++++++
Continue Reading Now, Pay Later
Get 2 months of unlimited access for just $1.
Complete your $1 payment now or anytime within 14 days.
If you don't pay, your subscription will be cancelled at no cost to you.
No obligation, no hidden charges, easy opt-out. We don't sell your information.
You're currently logged in as meteormikeXXXXX.com. Switch account.
Donald J. Trump 45th President of the United States "I want to thank The Epoch Times. They’re doing an incredible job." 
Sean Hannity National TV and Radio talk show host "Love the Epoch Times. I read The Epoch Times daily." 
Dr. Robert Malone Inventor of mRNA and DNA vaccine technology "The Epoch Times, by the way, all the way through COVID-19, has been a truth-teller." 
Deborah Mackoy The Epoch Times Subscriber "I thought that 'news' had been lost forever . . . . but then I saw The Epoch Times. Love this read, even if I hate what is going on right now in our country!" 
Leigh E. Kennedy The Epoch Times Subscriber "It’s refreshing to actually read the news that is reported objectively." 
Eric M. Brubacher The Epoch Times Subscriber "I strongly recommend any and all truth-seekers out there subscribe to and read The Epoch Times. You will NOT be disappointed." After going back and evaluating the record/history of Epoch Times as you requested cutworm and refreshing my memory, I have to adjust my opinion of them downward a couple of notches.
Keep in mind that I got and read their stuff, delivered to my mailbox daily with a trial subscription for numerous months. Then I started reading less because of so much DISinformation, then ignored them, then blocked them.
Again, they have some good stuff but readers read them to believe ALL THEIR STUFF, including the blatant DISinformation.
I don't need a news organization specializing in far right DISinformation bombarding my mailbox daily with crap to try to sort thru it in order to find the golden nuggets that might be hidden in there on some days.
LOLOLOL
"I understand completely why YOU really like them. They have good stuff and they have whacko stuff but always from the right side. "
ALLOW ME TO CHANGE A FEW WORDS IN THAT... I understand completely why YOU really DON'T like them. They have good stuff and they have OTHER stuff but always from the WRONG side. HAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
MIKE, BELIEVE ME, OR NOT... YOUR CHOICE... I'M NOT ONE TO READ ONLY WHAT I WANT TO READ ~ I ALSO READ WHAT I LIKE TO READ. I DON'T CONDEMN ANYONE'S PREFERENCE OF WHAT THEY READ, WHEN IT DOESN'T MATCH UP WITH MY OWN PREFERENCE. WHAT'S "WHACK" TO ONE, DOESN'T PROVE IT'S "WHACK" TO ANYONE ELSE. LOL
THANK GOD WE DON'T ALL READ THE SAME STUFF & BELIEVE IT TO BE TRUTH.
Thanks Jean,
I appreciate everybody's viewpoints a great deal, especially yours and even if we might disagree on some things, still value the viewpoints and for sure we strongly agree on many things.
Same with joj who belongs to another party than you but can usually, very intelligently explain why he has his opinions.
My world is defined by authentic facts, data, evidence and science with no party affiliation. cutworm thinks that way too but strongly affiliates with the right.
When cutworm asked for instances of when Epoch Times was wrong on facts, it was an excellent question from a critically thinking person posed to somebody else that thinks and answers that way. He was speaking my language.
I'm certain that a political affiliation with the right or left, causes people to ignore or forget when their sources are wrong and only remember when they are right. The stronger the affiliation, the stronger the affect.
It's been greatly amplified by the power of technology which offers people news and opportunities to interact that fit almost perfectly with their belief system. This amplifies whatever the belief is for most people.
This is not judging or trying to change it. It's understanding it and not being frustrated by the reality. I'll just provide the authentic data for people that want it and allow others to challenge it or ask for explanations and result in me learning too from their contributions about things I never knew.
I've learned more here the past 4 years than I did the previous 24 years.
Especially about people and politics and what makes them tick but also about how to be open minded and fact check, especially about things that I think that I believe.
As I've always said, my favorite posts here are those that disagree with or question me about something. Those offer the best opportunity to learn.
Echo chambers are often people just repeating the same things that those people think they already know. Maybe twisting the latest news to line up with those beliefs but not learning anything new.
