Talk:Chris Jacobs (politician)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chris Jacobs (politician). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070813060748/http://www.dos.state.ny.us/pres/pr2006/confirmed5206.htm to http://www.dos.state.ny.us/pres/pr2006/confirmed5206.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:10, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Infobox
I see a bunch of names and dates in the infobox, many of which are not present in the body of the article. Not sure what the sources of these names and dates are. Anyone? 24.29.56.240 (talk) 06:10, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Removal of Capitol information
I have restored, again, CharlesShirley's removal of reliably sourced content that is neutral and WP:DUE and I'm correcting my mispoken edit summary. The sources clearly say that he voted against the certification and that his actions and comments helped spur the riots. CUPIDICAE💕 18:51, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I have removed the synthesis information again. But on this talk page, you just made a claim again, without providing evidence. You did not provide a reliable source to support your addition. The Verge's headline is the only thing close to supporting your claim, but that is just one source and it is not a reliable source. The NY Times article does not say it and the WIVB article does not say it. You have not provided a reliable source to support your claim. See: SYNTHESIS. Above you claim, without evidence, that Jacobs' vote against certification "helped spur the riots". Where does it say that in the NY Times article? Where does it say that in the WIVB article? Once again, one headline from an "American left-wing technology news website operated by Vox Media" cannot support your synthesis. - CharlesShirley (talk) 20:16, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Also, if you read the Verge article (not a reliable source), the article flat out states that Jacobs' vote came after the attack on the capitol. His vote could not "spur" the morons into action if the vote happened after the attack. It just can't. So all you have provided is a headline to an article from an obscure left-wing website and the body of the article contradicts its own headline. You have not provided a reliable source. There is no there there. - CharlesShirley (talk) 20:33, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * "American left-wing technology news website operated by Vox Media" cannot support your synthesis. - First, it's not my synthesis, second, you're wrong about bias - a biased source doesn't make it unreliable. Go ahead and read up on that before you continue your egregious POV pushing. CUPIDICAE💕  20:42, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Ah, so you see that it is synthesis. It might not be your original idea. But it is synthesis. Where is the reliable source? One headline is all you have provided and the underlying article contradicts the headline. Why are you POV pushing? There are no reliable sources that support your POV but you want to put the POV in the article anyway. Why are you POV pushing? - CharlesShirley (talk) 20:45, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

I have been confused by why CharlesShirley thinks that adding the context of Jacobs's vote is "synthesis," but his comments just above do seem at last to clarify his thinking for me—and make it clear to me that he's in error, I'm afraid. Shirley seems to think that Praxidicae and I are trying to say that Jacobs's vote to object to certifying Pennsylvania's election results inspired the mob that attacked the Capitol. The Verge headline, which seems a little sloppily written, does suggest that, but that is not what I, at least, believe, because it can't be true: the mob attacked the Capitol before Jacobs's vote. I am not trying to "synthesize" those two events, but merely to make sure that both the attack and the vote are in this article, because there is a link between them: both were inspired by belief in (or at least, public adherence to) Trump's spurious and thoroughly discredited claims of election fraud. Shirley is correct that the New York Times article I adduced (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/09/us/capitol-rioters.html) doesn't mention Jacobs, and that the quote I put into the footnote doesn't name him. I only referenced the NYT article because Shirley seemed to be doubting that the mob was inspired by the fraudulent claims of election fraud by Trump and his allies. That those claims are spurious and fraudulent is now a commonplace in reporting by the NYT and the WaPo, among others, and it's well established that the claims were important to the pro-Trump attackers last week. (Here's a line from a WaPo story today: "Supporters of President Trump who believe his false claims that he was the real winner called for a mass demonstration, with Trump tweeting, 'Be there, will be wild!'") If Shirley accepts that it's a commonplace that the attackers were motivated by Trump's spurious claims of election fraud, then no, we don't need a reference to that NYT article or any other to establish it. But I think we do need to say that Jacobs's vote to support Trump's fraudulent claims followed by just hours a violent, armed attack on the Capitol that had been inspired by the same claims, a connection which is established by this NYT article, which does name Jacobs (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/01/07/us/elections/electoral-college-biden-objectors.html). — Rider1819 (talk) 02:22, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Jewish
Article had him tagged under Jewish members of Congress, but I see no sources that he is Jewish. As such, I removed it. Pennsylvania2 (talk) 02:50, 21 January 2022 (UTC)