CreateDebate


Debate Info

3
2
Yeppers Nopers
Debate Score:5
Arguments:4
Total Votes:8
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yeppers (3)
 
 Nopers (1)

Debate Creator

Godzilla(63) pic



The Russian lawyer who met with Trump was working with the Democratic opposition research


Democrats Colluded With the Russians

The Russian lawyer who met with Trump was working with the Democratic opposition research firm.


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.themaven.net/theresurgent/api/amp/theresurgent/erick-erickson/democrats-colluded-with-the-russians-OoYcU9mPUkCPMEPf8FbKtg/

Yeppers

Side Score: 3
VS.

Nopers

Side Score: 2
1 point

You misworded …. she was working [ON] Democratic opposition research. (You're welcome … anytime I can be of help to middle-schoolers, I'm available). ;-)

Side: Yeppers
1 point

Bronto, why do you post this complete bullshit? Who exactly do you think is going to be fooled by it? The websites you link are literally like mobile phone burner numbers. They post fake news one day and close down the next.

Erick Erickson does not have a great track record with fact checkers. (7/19/2016) Updated (4/6/2017)

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/red-state/

Oh well, I am SHOCKED to discover this.

Side: Nopers
UncleWanker(67) Disputed
0 points

Media Bias Fact Check: Incompetent or Dishonest?

As Just Facts grows in prominence and reputation, an increasing number of scholars, major organizations, and eminent people have cited and recognized the quality work of Just Facts. With this higher profile, Just Facts has also been subject to deceitful attacks. A recent example of such comes from “Media Bias Fact Check,” an “independent media outlet” that claims to be “dedicated to educating the public on media bias and deceptive news practices.”

In the opening paragraph of her review of Just Facts, Media Bias Fact Check contributor Faith Locke Siewert writes:

On their article http://www.justfacts.com/racialissues.asp#affirmative, they use the Richard Sander’s (law professor at UCLA) essay “A Systematic Analysis of Affirmative Action in American Law Schools.” To support much of their hypothesis, obviously against affirmative action (seeming also to support the notion of black intellectual abilities being inferior).

Those two sentences contain three demonstrable falsehoods:

“A Systemic Analysis of Affirmative Action in American Law Schools” is not just an essay. It is a peer-reviewed journal paper that was published in the Stanford Law Review. Big difference.

Just Facts does not use this paper to support “much of” its research on affirmative action. The research contains more than 60 footnotes, and this paper is just one of them. Just Facts’ full research on racial issues has 498 footnotes, and this paper is two of them.

Just Facts does not offer any “hypothesis” in this research, much less “support the notion of black intellectual abilities being inferior.” To the contrary, the opening section of Just Facts’ research on racial issues covers the topic of science and presents multiple facts that challenge that notion.

The flagrant and simplistic nature of these bogus critiques suggests that Media Bias Fact Check is either inept and/or dishonest.

https://www.justfactsdaily.com/media-bias-fact-check-incompetent-or-dishonest/

Side: Yeppers
UncleWanker(67) Disputed
0 points

Oh well, I am SHOCKED to discover this.

I'm not shocked to see your dumbass meter reads on a scale of 1 to 10 as brainwashed. That would be an 11.

Side: Yeppers