Ten oz

All valid points and all points the Ban fails to address.

@Externet, there is never a convenient time, place, or way to protest. It is bad enough Trump is lying g to the American people no reason citizens of other countries should have to tolerate it. In the case of the ban there is a very real risk that it will motivate extremists. I understand why other countries may want to distance themselves.

Trump fired the acting Attorney GeneralSally Yates for not supporting his ban. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/30/us/politics/trump-immigration-ban-memo.html?_r=0 As StringJunky said Trump will lay bare the weakness in our checks and balances. Last POTUS to fire an Attorney General for refusing orders was Nixon and in that case the order refused was to end the Watergate investigations. Nixon was impeached. Sally Yates has been an Attorney since 1985 and worked in the U.S. Attorney's office since 1989. The Attorney Generals office exist as the chief legal brain of the White House. By firing the Attorney General Trump has made clear that what he wants supersedes due diligence. It shouldn't stand without repercussions, action by congress.

I believe the massive coverage Trump receive did play a roll in legitimizing Trump as a candidate. Seeing him all day everyday for over a year normalized his lies and erratic behavior. Exposure is a big deal. Getting into every house hold is a big deal. In terms of alternate facts, the ability to make an alternate fact well known as actual facts is a huge win for alternate facts. Positive vs negative is an individual view point. Just because a headline is negative doesn't mean everyone exposed to that headline adapts a negative view. As for voter sentiment, if we are generalizing the way voters felt, voters wanted Hillary Clinton to be President. She received 3 million more individual votes than Trump. The electoral college delivered the win to Trump and popular voter sentiment. You are literally arguing that the candidate who received 3 million more votes was the less popular candidate. That makes absolutely no sense. Hillary Had more individual suporters and was the more popular choice for President empirically proven by the popular vote she won.

The first link in Swansont's post shows that Trump got over twice as many headlines. Ultimately in isolation both positive Trump headlines and negative Trump headlines were greater than all Clinton's headlines in total. The second link showed that Clinton's were negagtive at a higher percentage. Fewer by over half but more negative. His exposure eclipsed Clinton's in total. Your comments from post #44 "Some might argue that Hillary received just as much media attention and bad press as Trump", was disproven.

I don't believe that. The billions of dollars in free media Donald Trump received, in my opinion, absolutely played a role in both the primary and the general election. As for the apathy amongst young voters and minorities you reference, I believe changes to voter registration laws that trageted minorities and college students supressed their votes.

Emotions impact each other. Just as paint colors can be mixed to create new colors so too can emotions. Not only that but all people don't experience every emotion. So Idon't believe your question has an answer. Many emotions have been critical to human evolution. Without curiosity we wouldn't have explored, no empathy and we would be able to share experiences/knowledge so effectively, and etc. Emotions considered negative have there place too. Without fear humans wouldn't have been cautious enough during our explorations. Without egotism a sense of competition which often has driven invention wouldn't exist. Yet all emotions have their down side. Humans have killed in the name of love and in the name of hate. To answer your question I think the question needs to be considerably more specific.

I am with you. This is obviously directed at Muslims. It is deplorable! That said I believe The White House wins this in court. If Congress did their job ethically Trump would already be impeached but they don't. Agents not complying with the courts is very troubling. If nothing comes of that (Agents lose their jobs at a minimum) we are in a very troubling place where listening to POTUS overrides all others; checks and balances have been trampled.

By default I don't believe in things that aren't real.

Firstly, evidence against the big bang is not evidence of a Christian God or any God at all. Secondly, I find the "the source of energy" argument against specific theories contradictory to the notion of God because if God exists what is its "source of energy".

There is nothing in my life I believe which hasn't been demostrated to be true.

The White House claims the "temp" ban is based on threat assessments. They haven't officially outlined a zone, religion, type of govt, or etc. It is legal. We may all understand what the ban is really about but in court it isn't about what one knows but rather what one can prove. I believe the White House will beat the legal challanges.

You are saying the media should continue as it has been, staus qou. Trump won the primary and general via the status qou. It doesn't work. His success, the success of climate change denial, and etc is proof that the status qou does not help identify B.S. but rather it merely helps perpetuate it.

Elections have consequences. The ban on immigrants from specific Islamic countries is one of Trump's campaign promises. As POTUS he is able to do this. There are questions about conflictsof interest. It appears countries which should be obvious targets for such a ban, give its stated excuse, aren't on the list because Trump does business there. http://www.npr.org/2017/01/28/512199324/countries-listed-on-trumps-refugee-ban-dont-include-those-he-has-business-with Trump's failure to work with theState Dept., DHS, and DOJ to roll this out smoothly reflects Trump's inexperience in gov't. He doesn't appear to understand how changes to policy are made, which depts are impacted, and what precautions are normally exercised. Even top Republicans are upset. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/29/us/politics/republicans-congress-trump-refugees.html As protests grow and courts around the country review complaints what happens next with regards to the ban?

63 million people voted for Trump. He won. Take more than a politicians most staunch supporters to winan election. Trump is a liar and it has become acceptable. His lies now share equal time with the truth. Lets use Climate Change as an example; Climate denial though empircally disproven is still as believed by the general U.S. public as actual climate sceince. Sadly millions of people never get beyond headlines. People tend to error towards the center of debates. If Trump says crime in at all time levels and living our black communities is like lving in hell and then the media fact checks that with real numbers the error moves away from the real numbers towards the hell Trump describes. Splitting the difference between a dry fact and a sensational lie doesn't leave one with the truth. That is society though. We hear the arguments made constantly where people imply both sides lie, all media tilts, the science isn't perfect, and etc. People rationalize the center as the most honest place to be. Sadly the center territory between a lie and the truth is still a lie. I am not advocating the the media don't report on actually news. Rather I am saying that is exactly what they should do. Report that people are detained at the airport. Report of the executive action that created. Report on real matters and invite Trump and his people to comment on those real matters. Stop chasing the tweets. Trump said lied about his crowd size, so what? Why give that front page status for 3 days. and drown out coverage that could have gone to the March on washington?

The media repeated Trump's lies all the way to the White House. It doesn't work. Rather than journalist waking up at 3am every morning to look for Trump tweets to report on they (media) need to start withholding airtime and print less Trump and his team addresses real matters. Allowing Trump to force them (media) to devote billions worth of headlines to things that are fake only benefits Trump. The evidence of this is obvious. He lied his way through the primary and then the general. All along the media pointed out the lies and fact checked him. It didn't hurt him. All the additional coverage had a normalizing effect which actually made his alternative facts seem more legitimate because they were so often covered and repeated. Trump has been given rope since he announced his bin in June of 2015. He used it to swing all the way into power. Everyone knows he is a lying and no one cares. Just par for the course at this point. The media needs to focus on real issues and force Trump to comment on those real issues to earn headlines rather than them just allowing Trump to create his own. "You can fool some people......", Who is the fool here? As an U.S. Citizen Donald Trump is my President! Is he the fool or am I (the people)?

All that is happening by various media outlets attempting to fact check Trump is him getting a bigger audience. Voter Fraud Committed by illegal immigrants isn't real yet has become such a hot headline that to millions of people investing it seems fair. Make something a well known story by giving it exposure only legitimizes it. Trump has been able to bait and switch on so many things by lying g and fighting with the media. At so.e point the media has to be smart enough to stop playing along.

Refusing to attend a briefing where Trump's team is lying about voter fraud and inauguration crowds isn't equal to taking ones eyes off the ball. We don't need lead stories about those lies. Reporting on them only help promote them. FoxNews, Drudge, and many other Conservative outlets will happily promote those lies.

@ Phi for All and DrmDoc, yes the media gave Trump billions of dollars infree coverage. Often just will to run his every movements live an treat it like news. However there was ample coverage of Trump's lies. I don't think the overwhelming majority of voters aren't aware Trump lies, promotes racist and sexist views, has many conflicts of interest, won't relieve his taxes, and knowingly accepted/embraced the help of Russia during the election. The facts are well known but those who support Trump simply do not care. More good journalism fact checking his lies after reporting his lies as news won't change anything. The AI that predicted Trump's win did so using data number for media engagement. Whether it was positive or negative was irrelevant. The more a candidate was the discussed the more likely they were to win. All press in good press. http://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/28/donald-trump-will-win-the-election-and-is-more-popular-than-obama-in-2008-ai-system-finds.html Trump's press person tells a lie about a topic like Voter Fraud, voter fraud doesn't derserve any press at all due to the fact it is not real, and now Voter Fraud is a top trending news item. Doesn't matter that the majority of press is pointing out that voter fraud doesn't exist. What matter is voter fraud is now a leading story everyone is talking about. That is a huge win for Donald Trump. He is being allow to control what gets discussed. If his people are going to just lie, if he (Trump) is going to continue to just lie and refuse to address legit questions, the media needs to stop being party to his propaganda. Why should the media be "obligated" to allow themselves to be used? Trump did an interview with NBC yesterday and spent party of the interview directing the interviewer and audience to watch FoxNews. Just as an agenda is set and agreed to ahead of meetings between countries, corperations, attorneys, and etc in advance of a meeting clear structured guidelines should be set prior to the press meeting with Trump or his staff. Obvious Foxnews will give Trump all the press he wants. That is par for the course. In my opinion everyone else should refuse to attend press conferences, give interviews, or cover events unless they have assurances in place that specific topics will be address. Otherwise what is the point? What did the press get from Trump's press breifing about crowd size at the ignauguration that they couldn't have gotten by just following Trump's people on Twitter? Why allow them (team Trump) to make every news organization carry that story? Calling a lie a lie is not enough. Trump being in the White house is proof of that. The liars I know in my life I ignore. When they swing by my office and tell me things I know aren't true I just ignore them. I don't go office to office repeating the lie while at the same time pointing out it is a lie. Most smart people ignore liars. If Trump agree to take questions about x, y, and z than great the press should be there with sharpen pencils. Otherwise he should be boycotted by the press. The Press should not agree to discuss Voter Fraud and crowd sizewith him if he isn't willing to address a single question they ask;quid pro qou.

The press has been trying to fact check and hold him to the fire since he anounced he was running and it has failed over and over and over. All press is good press, Trump has proved the saying. The press need to stop participating. Stop giving his the air time he so clearly craves. Refuse to interview him, question his press Sec. and etc till such time he agree to address their actually questions. As it stands now we all may as well just follower him on twitter and read his tweets. No one has gotten anything more out of him through this whole process.

What constitutes a viable fetus changes with technology. To say you agree "should it be before the fetus is viable" opens to door to a scale that ultimately errors towards the moments just prior to conception. In nature this choice is overwhelmingly made by mothers. Be it Lions or Mice mothers decide to abondon new borns at birth, allow siblings to strive other siblings, and etc. Fortunately humans are not so dispassionate. I am not implying we should be. Rather I am pointing out that in nature all begun attempts at reprodcution do not result in a successful life. And it is the mothers who ultimately make the tough choice for themselves and their species without communal input. I am sure male Loins want Lioness to keep and nurture all their offspring but ultimately they have no say. Humans are obvious unique. Our intelligence makes of different that other animals. So clearly a direct comparison it absurd. Women shouldn't be able to starve infants the way a bear may allow a cub to starve to the benifit ofother cubs. However the basic child to give birth in the first place, in my opinion, lays with them. How I feel about it is less important to me than their right to it and as such I haven't created a cloudy standard where I imagine individual circamstances and stand judgement overthem. For me it is either they choice or it isn't and I have decided that in my opinion it is.

We (U.S.) haven't fully recovered from Bush 43 in terms of creating greater instability throughout the Middle East and soaring deficits. This looks to be worse. We need true courage and ethical people to combact this. For starters the media has to stop covering alternative facts. Reporters should stage a walkout of the White House press room and refuse to participate in press breifings if they are going to be blatantly lied to. All Democratics in Congress should also walk out and refuse to return the the Capital until Trump releases his taxes and we (the people) how a grasp on what his various conflicts of interest are. This administration is cursing to the heveans daring god to strike them dead for proof god real. Only it isn't really god, it is ethics and the law they are thumbing their noses at. If it stands unchallanged I believe it will only get worse.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qi8F-yaSTnM That video makes me very fearful. I am a big believer in self fullfilling prophecies and Trump seems determined to make this world the dark place he already believes it is. His alternative facts, unfortunately, are the facts being used to lead the United States.

Trickle down sciencetific research money isn't enough.

Military spending is one of the easiest ways for politicians to award large contracts to the corporations of their (politician) choosing. Not giving the Military everything a politician implies the military may need or want is treated as anti patriotic. Kennedy was successful in making going to the moon a matter of national pride which in turn improved attitudes about NASA spending. Not sure what today's equivalent would be but it seems that millions simply don't care about science anymore.