After a disastrous debate performance, the news media, which had been shamelessly gaslighting the public over Joe Biden’s cognitive capacity for years, seemed to turn on the president in unison.
Biden spent his entire career building the system he now 'presides' over only to lose his mental faculties and not be able to function. The irony is sweet.
“Rigged” by Mollie Hemingway presents a perspective on the 2020 U.S election that I found to be fundamentally flawed and unsupported by credible sources. While Hemingway makes bold claims throughout the book, I felt that these assertions often lacked grounding in verifiable facts, which left me deeply unsatisfied as a reader seeking a nuanced exploration of the complex political landscape of that time.
Furthermore, I found the book’s narrative to be constructed with a clear bias, which hindered the ability to present a well-rounded view of the events it attempts to dissect. The tendency to portray events through a singular lens reduced the book’s potential to offer deep insights and encouraged a polarized discourse that does little to bridge the existing divides in the current political climate.
Moreover, I was disappointed with the lack of rigorous analysis of alternative perspectives, which could have enriched the discussion and perhaps provided a more balanced view. Instead, the book often falls into the trap of echo chamber reasoning, continuously reinforcing its own standpoint without critically engaging with opposing viewpoints.
I also perceived a significant number of factual inaccuracies in the book. While every author has the prerogative to present their interpretation of events, it is equally important to base such interpretations on solid factual ground to maintain credibility. Unfortunately, I found “Rigged” to often stray far from this ideal, with many claims feeling more like conspiracy theories than well-reasoned arguments.
Despite my criticisms, Hemingway’s writing style is undeniably compelling, and she manages to craft a narrative that is likely to resonate with readers who share her perspective. However, for readers seeking a comprehensive and nuanced analysis of the 2020 U.S election, I would recommend approaching this book with a critical eye and a readiness to verify the claims made within its pages.
In conclusion, “Rigged” did not meet my expectations for a well-researched and balanced discussion on the 2020 U.S election. While it may appeal to readers who are aligned with Hemingway’s viewpoint, I found it to be a work that leans too heavily on unsupported claims and partial truths, making it a challenging read for those seeking a grounded and credible analysis of recent political events. I'm 13 and I'm trying to work on my writing skills more- Give me your feedback.
Why do the sources used by Hemingway lack credulity? What is an example of an opposing viewpoint that you would have liked Hemingway to engage more deeply? What are examples of the factual inaccuracies that you encountered in the book? What makes her writing style compelling?
Everyone forgets that when he was Obama's VP, Biden was the bumbling, "safe", old white guy on the ticket to calm down the normies.
He was chosen more to reassure the bankers that the “hope and change” rhetoric was campaign theater for the rubes
Biden spent his entire career building the system he now 'presides' over only to lose his mental faculties and not be able to function. The irony is sweet.
I find your comments obnoxious
"how low can we go!"
“Rigged” by Mollie Hemingway presents a perspective on the 2020 U.S election that I found to be fundamentally flawed and unsupported by credible sources. While Hemingway makes bold claims throughout the book, I felt that these assertions often lacked grounding in verifiable facts, which left me deeply unsatisfied as a reader seeking a nuanced exploration of the complex political landscape of that time.
Furthermore, I found the book’s narrative to be constructed with a clear bias, which hindered the ability to present a well-rounded view of the events it attempts to dissect. The tendency to portray events through a singular lens reduced the book’s potential to offer deep insights and encouraged a polarized discourse that does little to bridge the existing divides in the current political climate.
Moreover, I was disappointed with the lack of rigorous analysis of alternative perspectives, which could have enriched the discussion and perhaps provided a more balanced view. Instead, the book often falls into the trap of echo chamber reasoning, continuously reinforcing its own standpoint without critically engaging with opposing viewpoints.
I also perceived a significant number of factual inaccuracies in the book. While every author has the prerogative to present their interpretation of events, it is equally important to base such interpretations on solid factual ground to maintain credibility. Unfortunately, I found “Rigged” to often stray far from this ideal, with many claims feeling more like conspiracy theories than well-reasoned arguments.
Despite my criticisms, Hemingway’s writing style is undeniably compelling, and she manages to craft a narrative that is likely to resonate with readers who share her perspective. However, for readers seeking a comprehensive and nuanced analysis of the 2020 U.S election, I would recommend approaching this book with a critical eye and a readiness to verify the claims made within its pages.
In conclusion, “Rigged” did not meet my expectations for a well-researched and balanced discussion on the 2020 U.S election. While it may appeal to readers who are aligned with Hemingway’s viewpoint, I found it to be a work that leans too heavily on unsupported claims and partial truths, making it a challenging read for those seeking a grounded and credible analysis of recent political events. I'm 13 and I'm trying to work on my writing skills more- Give me your feedback.
TLDR: Chat GPT reveals the pretentious prognostication of a punk.
Yeah! How'd you know I used Openai?
Why do the sources used by Hemingway lack credulity? What is an example of an opposing viewpoint that you would have liked Hemingway to engage more deeply? What are examples of the factual inaccuracies that you encountered in the book? What makes her writing style compelling?
I'm 19, not 13. And I found this off the amazon reviews section of the book- just thought it would be funny to post here.