Jump to content

Talk:Big lie

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Lack of Objectivity

[edit]

If you want to viewed as a credible source for information and to continue to receive donations from readers such as myself, it is important to me that you maintain a broad, fair and objective presentation of the facts. I do not believe this is happening. Biased reporting about the “Big Lie”, steal your credibility and promotes a lack of interest in what is on your site - because it is not credible. I want both sides of the truth. 2600:1700:4E1:8380:CFB:74FA:9759:5F64 (talk) 17:25, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Then tell us what you think isn't objective, using reliable sources to support your assertions. Acroterion (talk) 18:56, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article says it's a false claim that "the election was stolen through massive voter and electoral fraud." A non trivial number of people do believe it was stolen. That means there's two sides, yes? The problem is these people tend to believe most of the news media is colluding with the Democrats. *If* they are correct, then there ARE no credible sources for them to cite!
Of course, putting information about Trump in article about Hitler... it's hard to escape the impression that this is another form of claiming "Trump is Hitler". 70.115.246.27 (talk) 22:05, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is the 2020 election a good example?

[edit]

I mean, doesn't it work both ways? What if Trump really did win, the election was actually stolen from him? Couldn't the big lie be that Biden won? If your instinctive reaction is something like "that can't possibly be true", that's the whole point. 70.115.246.27 (talk) 21:04, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He didn't win, and it wasn't stolen. No credible source says otherwise. This encyclopedia is based on reality. There are not two sides. Acroterion (talk)