General Discussion

Orrex

(66,863 posts)

33. Her track record is not great

Wed May 24, 2017, 07:23 AM

May 2017

"it's absurd to claim that people relating what she's saying are 'willing to suspend all skepticism.'"

I would say that it's not at all absurd, because I have seen considerable hostility directed at those who have called for skepticism or corroboration of her claims.

"Funny, really, to find critics making unsupported claims about posters - using inflammatory terms like 'cult' and religious fervor' to knock down the info from Mensch being shared as speculative."

Equally, Mensch's supporters are quick to throw around accusations like "obsessed" and "devateam" and "troll" when faced with someone who is less receptive to Mensch's tweets. Do you tolerate unsupported claims when they're directed at her critics?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

44 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Mensch gets backup from CNN analyst: [View all] Kingofalldems May 2017 OP

We still have jackets JHB May 2017 #1

We all thought that back in MARCH! Chemisse May 2017 #2

Lol. Are you sure you didn't get it from Mensch in March 2016? Hortensis May 2017 #38

And this: Kingofalldems May 2017 #3

Tweet's gone - what did it say? n/t moonscape May 2017 #16

Pretty much what the OP one said. Kingofalldems May 2017 #18

There's some legs to this story, to be sure Mr. Ected May 2017 #4

Thanks for posting Seth Abramson's tweet. N/T emulatorloo May 2017 #5

Thank you. mhw May 2017 #6

Hmm, maybe we should focus on the message, rather than messenger, where Mensch et al are concerned! FreepFryer May 2017 #7

Thanks. You are correct. mhw May 2017 #8

She has a Wikipedia entry, if you want to know more about her. Demit May 2017 #10

Some people here are oddly obsessed with "discrediting" her Warren DeMontague May 2017 #9

So true. Kingofalldems May 2017 #11

She's just not a reliable journalist Bradical79 May 2017 #12

As I said in a different thread, I don't think anyone here is gonna confuse her with the WaPo. Warren DeMontague May 2017 #13

Yeah, that I agree with Bradical79 May 2017 #22

You're making several big statements Orrex May 2017 #30

Are you kidding, man? Warren DeMontague May 2017 #36

95% of their energy, or more? Seriously? Orrex May 2017 #37

Seems a disproportionate amount of energy on the matter. Warren DeMontague May 2017 #41

Fair enough Orrex May 2017 #42

I blame my Warren DeMontague May 2017 #43

Be careful with those things, dammit! Orrex May 2017 #44

sounds like journalism to me bigtree May 2017 #14

Nonsense Bradical79 May 2017 #20

Mainstream journalists bigtree May 2017 #27

Sounds like advocacy, not journalism. kwassa May 2017 #23

we can pretend advocacy isn't part of journalism bigtree May 2017 #25

The tweet in the OP isn't journalism, and it isn't advocacy. It's rumor. Demit May 2017 #35

this is a discussion board bigtree May 2017 #39

Everything you just wrote is exactly what I'm doing. Demit May 2017 #40

This message was self-deleted by its author RandomAccess May 2017 #17

I'm just so uncomfortable with the cult-like response to her tweets. Chemisse May 2017 #15

the 'religious fervor' criticism is bullshit bigtree May 2017 #19

Her track record is not great Orrex May 2017 #33

His tweet thread is interesting - what he thinks of moonscape May 2017 #21

Mensch calls out Seth - "Then and Now" womanofthehills May 2017 #24

+1 bigtree May 2017 #28

I hope so. BainsBane May 2017 #26

It's a yes or no question, and the word "may" makes this something less than a prediction. Orsino May 2017 #29

And the analyst's sources themselves apparently only used the word may! Demit May 2017 #32

Imagining that a Trump cohort might return Trump's famous lack of loyalty by turning on him... Orsino May 2017 #34

Mensch.... berksdem May 2017 #31