Foolish move by dems to block Fox News from debates. Not everyone who watches is pro Trump and that network dominates the ratings.
To me it it is a conclusive sign that the next election will have candidates that represent the far extremes and people in the middle will not have a viable candidate and be forced to choose from the lesser of evils.
Foolish move by dems to block Fox News from debates. Not everyone who watches is pro Trump and that network dominates the ratings.
To me it it is a conclusive sign that the next election will have candidates that represent the far extremes and people in the middle will not have a viable candidate and be forced to choose from the lesser of evils.
Yeah I think this is a mistake.
I bet thebither networks are not supportive...opens the door for a Fox News only GOP debate moving forward.
Of Course Democrats Shouldn’t Let Fox News Host a Primary Debate
In it, Mayer reveals that, in 2016, a Fox reporter named Diana Falzone had acquired hard evidence of both Trump’s affair with Stormy Daniels and his efforts to buy her silence — only to have an editor kill her story, telling her, in so many words, “Good reporting, kiddo. But Rupert wants Donald Trump to win.” After the mogul’s victory, the network demoted Falzone. She then sued, and won a settlement that included a nondisclosure agreement.
There are many things you can call a media organization that punishes its employees for digging up stories that are politically inconvenient for the Republican Party — “a legitimate news network” is not one of them.
Nevertheless, the DNC’s announcement (bafflingly) inspired “tsk, tsks” from some corners of the Fourth Estate. The AP’s Zeke Miller said of the Democrats’ decision on Twitter, “if you aren’t prepared for tough questions/subjects in a primary debate, how will you handle the general?” NBC News reporter Jonathan Allen echoed this sentiment, tweeting, “There are plenty of quality journalists at Fox, some of whom have been excellent questioners at past presidential debates. And really, if you can’t answer questions — especially if they’re not the questions you want asked — maybe you don’t have good answers.”
The core premise of both these tweets — that Democrats are turning down Fox because they are afraid of tough questions — is bizarre. Imagine someone invites you to play ping-pong at a bar known primarily for hosting dogfights in its basement. If you refuse, is that proof that you are afraid of a competitive game of ping-pong? If you were assured that this bar — where men go to coerce dogs into mauling each other — has plenty of quality ping-pong tables, would you therefore have no excuse not to attend? Or could you reasonably express the concern that those ping-pong tables, as nice as they are, appear to function primarily as a means of softening the image of a fundamentally evil enterprise that deserves to be shunned by all right-thinking people?
This is not a perfect analogy. But, as stipulated above, Fox News is a racist, Republican propaganda outfit that throws a couple of journalists out front to keep up appearances, like so many ping-pong tables at a dogfight bar.
After all, we are talking about a channel whose most-watched program is hosted by one of the Republican president’s most influential advisers. By his own account, Sean Hannity speaks with Donald Trump every night. By the Washington Post’s, White House advisers refer to the cable host as their “shadow chief of staff.” Ahead of the 2018 midterms, Hannity joined Trump onstage at a campaign rally. Two years before that, the host defended himself from allegations of pro-Trump bias by exclaiming, “I’m not a journalist!”
^ They're making a mistake. As bad as Fox is, Shep Smith and Chris Wallace are quality journalists. I'd put a stipulation in that one of those two be the moderators.
^ They're making a mistake. As bad as Fox is, Shep Smith and Chris Wallace are quality journalists. I'd put a stipulation in that one of those two be the moderators.
Perhaps the DNC should stipulate its willing to have Fox host one under the conditions that they will be treated fairly. But that ain't happening.
Its not like the DNC is scared of tough questions, it's the ownership and management of the station is biased against them and is guilty of tipping questions to Trump (something the Rs referred to as "rigging an election" when Hillary and Brazile did it).
But that's not fox' worst crime. Rupert buries a significant story containing criminal activities a week before the election because he wanted Trump to win is disgusting. Fix News should have the word NEWS ripped from its name.
^ They're making a mistake. As bad as Fox is, Shep Smith and Chris Wallace are quality journalists. I'd put a stipulation in that one of those two be the moderators.
Perhaps the DNC should stipulate its willing to have Fox host one under the conditions that they will be treated fairly. But that ain't happening.
Its not like the DNC is scared of tough questions, it's the ownership and management of the station is biased against them and is guilty of tipping questions to Trump (something the Rs referred to as "rigging an election" when Hillary and Brazile did it).
But that's not fox' worst crime. Rupert buries a significant story containing criminal activities a week before the election because he wanted Trump to win is disgusting. Fix News should have the word NEWS ripped from its name.
You're absolutely right....I just feel like, politically, this doesn't help them. It makes them look weak to a large segment of the electorate.
The headline of this article from a few days ago is great. The actual stuff in the article is incredible....and frightening.
And yet people still take focksnooze seriously. As if they were a real, balanced, unbiased, and fair news organization.
The stuff in this article is just bat shit crazy though. Fox has always leaned right....but it has jumped off the deep end these last few years.
We live this every day and are pretty much immune to it by this point. But just the idea of a president in this constant feedback loop with a cable channel is fucking nuts. Getting his ideas from the dopey morning show. Live tweeting the channel throughout the day. Promoting their contributor's books (as if he's ever read anything since middle school). This is the twilight zone.
Exactly. I don't get what the fuss is about. It is the party's primary. It is the party's debate. If the Dems don't want Fox News hosting a Dem primary debate, that makes all the sense in the world. If the GOP only want Fox to host its GOP primary debates, who cares? When it comes to debates between party candidates for the Genearl, then things will have to balance out, but for party primary debates, the parties should decide.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
Exactly. I don't get what the fuss is about. It is the party's primary. It is the party's debate. If the Dems don't want Fox News hosting a Dem primary debate, that makes all the sense in the world. If the GOP only want Fox to host its GOP primary debates, who cares? When it comes to debates between party candidates for the Genearl, then things will have to balance out, but for party primary debates, the parties should decide.
Not a bad point.
I just think that it will continue to drive the division and it certainly allows opposition to cry..."See they only want the Fake News"...ironically of course.
Exactly. I don't get what the fuss is about. It is the party's primary. It is the party's debate. If the Dems don't want Fox News hosting a Dem primary debate, that makes all the sense in the world. If the GOP only want Fox to host its GOP primary debates, who cares? When it comes to debates between party candidates for the Genearl, then things will have to balance out, but for party primary debates, the parties should decide.
Not a bad point.
I just think that it will continue to drive the division and it certainly allows opposition to cry..."See they only want the Fake News"...ironically of course.
No doubt about that. I agree with you that it is bad optics which will definitely generate memes, unfortunately.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
Exactly. I don't get what the fuss is about. It is the party's primary. It is the party's debate. If the Dems don't want Fox News hosting a Dem primary debate, that makes all the sense in the world. If the GOP only want Fox to host its GOP primary debates, who cares? When it comes to debates between party candidates for the Genearl, then things will have to balance out, but for party primary debates, the parties should decide.
The fact that Trump has Fox News in his back pocket... almost like a state-controlled news network, which Trump really really wants badly ... that makes it very problematic either way IMO. Whether it's for the primaries or not, I'm sure everyone would appreciate a non-biased debate, right?
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I actually agree with jeffbr on this. The parties can decide for themselves who moderates. But my concern was that Trump had stated (or at least I read that he stated) he would not participate in any debate that isn't hosted by Fox. I assumed that meant the general election.
I actually agree with jeffbr on this. The parties can decide for themselves who moderates. But my concern was that Trump had stated (or at least I read that he stated) he would not participate in any debate that isn't hosted by Fox. I assumed that meant the general election.
See, this is why Fox has to be ruled out. In a normal world barring a particular network would not be acceptable, but we're talking about Trump and Fox News. The usual rules do NOT apply in this case, IMO. Especially since in this case, Fox would favour Trump, not the other candidates from the Republican party. Of course Trump wants to demand that Fox do it!
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I looked it up to be sure, but it's what I thought
"The moderators were, as always, chosen by the nonpartisan Commission on Presidential Debates, which governs the timing and moderation of the quadrennial events."
I actually agree with jeffbr on this. The parties can decide for themselves who moderates. But my concern was that Trump had stated (or at least I read that he stated) he would not participate in any debate that isn't hosted by Fox. I assumed that meant the general election.
See, this is why Fox has to be ruled out. In a normal world barring a particular network would not be acceptable, but we're talking about Trump and Fox News. The usual rules do NOT apply in this case, IMO. Especially since in this case, Fox would favour Trump, not the other candidates from the Republican party. Of course Trump wants to demand that Fox do it!
you do that and you risk legitimizing their claims of the left wanting to extinguish them and forging an uprising for themselves and trump in the process. it's difficult to ignore that they (apparently) have the highest cable news ratings. how do you legitimately shut that out?
but obviously legitimizing "state news" is also an issue.
I actually agree with jeffbr on this. The parties can decide for themselves who moderates. But my concern was that Trump had stated (or at least I read that he stated) he would not participate in any debate that isn't hosted by Fox. I assumed that meant the general election.
See, this is why Fox has to be ruled out. In a normal world barring a particular network would not be acceptable, but we're talking about Trump and Fox News. The usual rules do NOT apply in this case, IMO. Especially since in this case, Fox would favour Trump, not the other candidates from the Republican party. Of course Trump wants to demand that Fox do it!
you do that and you risk legitimizing their claims of the left wanting to extinguish them and forging an uprising for themselves and trump in the process. it's difficult to ignore that they (apparently) have the highest cable news ratings. how do you legitimately shut that out?
but obviously legitimizing "state news" is also an issue.
Yes, like you say, you also risk allowing Trump to increase the power of Fox News as what would essentially be a state-run media network. I know which one I prefer, and which one is far more dangerous. I personally think that allowing that kind of shit go on just out of a fear of being criticized for doing the right thing that's best for democracy is a terrible idea. This is how fascist ideas take hold over time. At some point, people have to just start fighting back rather than being scared to.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
The White House Press Corps has had one press conference in the last 79-80 days and has had to instead watch as WH officials trot out to the Faux News tent, answer questions for the Faux News correspondents and then try to get answers to shouted questions as they trot back inside of the WH. If you ain’t watching Faux News, you ain’t getting the propaganda. Welcome to AmeriKKKa. The dems are right to exclude Faux from their debates and fuck the optics. Faux News viewers are welcome to tune into reality.
Comments
To me it it is a conclusive sign that the next election will have candidates that represent the far extremes and people in the middle will not have a viable candidate and be forced to choose from the lesser of evils.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
I bet thebither networks are not supportive...opens the door for a Fox News only GOP debate moving forward.
This is not getting better, it’s making it worse.
Of Course Democrats Shouldn’t Let Fox News Host a Primary Debate
In it, Mayer reveals that, in 2016, a Fox reporter named Diana Falzone had acquired hard evidence of both Trump’s affair with Stormy Daniels and his efforts to buy her silence — only to have an editor kill her story, telling her, in so many words, “Good reporting, kiddo. But Rupert wants Donald Trump to win.” After the mogul’s victory, the network demoted Falzone. She then sued, and won a settlement that included a nondisclosure agreement.
There are many things you can call a media organization that punishes its employees for digging up stories that are politically inconvenient for the Republican Party — “a legitimate news network” is not one of them.
Nevertheless, the DNC’s announcement (bafflingly) inspired “tsk, tsks” from some corners of the Fourth Estate. The AP’s Zeke Miller said of the Democrats’ decision on Twitter, “if you aren’t prepared for tough questions/subjects in a primary debate, how will you handle the general?” NBC News reporter Jonathan Allen echoed this sentiment, tweeting, “There are plenty of quality journalists at Fox, some of whom have been excellent questioners at past presidential debates. And really, if you can’t answer questions — especially if they’re not the questions you want asked — maybe you don’t have good answers.”
The core premise of both these tweets — that Democrats are turning down Fox because they are afraid of tough questions — is bizarre. Imagine someone invites you to play ping-pong at a bar known primarily for hosting dogfights in its basement. If you refuse, is that proof that you are afraid of a competitive game of ping-pong? If you were assured that this bar — where men go to coerce dogs into mauling each other — has plenty of quality ping-pong tables, would you therefore have no excuse not to attend? Or could you reasonably express the concern that those ping-pong tables, as nice as they are, appear to function primarily as a means of softening the image of a fundamentally evil enterprise that deserves to be shunned by all right-thinking people?
This is not a perfect analogy. But, as stipulated above, Fox News is a racist, Republican propaganda outfit that throws a couple of journalists out front to keep up appearances, like so many ping-pong tables at a dogfight bar.
After all, we are talking about a channel whose most-watched program is hosted by one of the Republican president’s most influential advisers. By his own account, Sean Hannity speaks with Donald Trump every night. By the Washington Post’s, White House advisers refer to the cable host as their “shadow chief of staff.” Ahead of the 2018 midterms, Hannity joined Trump onstage at a campaign rally. Two years before that, the host defended himself from allegations of pro-Trump bias by exclaiming, “I’m not a journalist!”
The channel’s second-most-watched show is hosted by man who accused the Democratic Party of “plotting a coup” last summer, one that would use immigrants as its shock troops. Tucker Carlson has also told his viewers that immigrants make “our own country poorer and dirtier.” He has excoriated Macy’s for selling fashionable hijabs (insisting that corporations have a moral responsibility not to cater certain forms of consumer demand), and scolded PayPal for refusing to provide payment services to the white nationalist website VDare (insisting that corporations had a responsibility to serve all would-be customers). White nationalists understandably love him.
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/03/dnc-wont-let-fox-news-host-2020-democratic-primary-debate.html
They're making a mistake. As bad as Fox is, Shep Smith and Chris Wallace are quality journalists. I'd put a stipulation in that one of those two be the moderators.
www.headstonesband.com
Perhaps the DNC should stipulate its willing to have Fox host one under the conditions that they will be treated fairly. But that ain't happening.
Its not like the DNC is scared of tough questions, it's the ownership and management of the station is biased against them and is guilty of tipping questions to Trump (something the Rs referred to as "rigging an election" when Hillary and Brazile did it).
But that's not fox' worst crime. Rupert buries a significant story containing criminal activities a week before the election because he wanted Trump to win is disgusting. Fix News should have the word NEWS ripped from its name.
Interesting
As if they were a real, balanced, unbiased, and fair news organization.
We live this every day and are pretty much immune to it by this point. But just the idea of a president in this constant feedback loop with a cable channel is fucking nuts. Getting his ideas from the dopey morning show. Live tweeting the channel throughout the day. Promoting their contributor's books (as if he's ever read anything since middle school). This is the twilight zone.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2016/07/21/a-rigorous-scientific-look-into-the-fox-news-effect/#64b7880c12ab
It's no secret to advertisers that the average Fox News viewer has less formal education and income than the average New York Times reader.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
I just think that it will continue to drive the division and it certainly allows opposition to cry..."See they only want the Fake News"...ironically of course.
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
"The moderators were, as always, chosen by the nonpartisan Commission on Presidential Debates, which governs the timing and moderation of the quadrennial events."
but obviously legitimizing "state news" is also an issue.
www.headstonesband.com
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©