Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VI

spacecoyote

It's hilarious though the difference in standards that applies.

Warren had this little zinger at a town hall last week

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5KlaEjIqMg

And she is getting digs in some parts of the media saying she is "going low" and itll put off traditional white conservative american men from voting for her.

Itssoeasy

spacecoyote wrote: »

It's hilarious though the difference in standards that applies.

Warren had this little zinger at a town hall last week

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5KlaEjIqMg

And she is getting digs in some parts of the media saying she is "going low" and itll put off traditional white conservative american men from voting for her.

White conservative men don't strike me as a group that are rushing to vote for Elizabeth warren so how can you lose a group that most likely wouldn't vote for you anyway ?

pixelburp

spacecoyote wrote: »

It's hilarious though the difference in standards that applies.

Warren had this little zinger at a town hall last week

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5KlaEjIqMg

And she is getting digs in some parts of the media saying she is "going low" and itll put off traditional white conservative american men from voting for her.

Her socialist credentials might hurt her, but honestly from what I've seen of Warren, she seems to have that kid of folksy charm & charisma that coudl play well in those conservative states. Lord knows Clinton's utter lack of personality (complete with awful manufactured lines like "Pokémon Go to the polls", ergh) make 'like-ability' a non-stater for her; can't see the same being a problem with Warren. If Clinton came off like the stern high maths school teacher you hated, Warren instead gives an air of the music teacher you loved.

spacecoyote

Itssoeasy wrote: »

White conservative men don't strike me as a group that are rushing to vote for Elizabeth warren so how can you lose a group that most likely wouldn't vote for you anyway ?

Theory of the article is that she needs to win back the Voted Obama, Voted Trump voters & by having a dig at one of those types, that she'll struggle to win them back.

Basically that itll play well with her supporters, but wont win her any back, ir something to that effect.

I'm not saying that I agree with it more just pointing out the double-standards that are applied

Itssoeasy

spacecoyote wrote: »

Theory of the article is that she needs to win back the Voted Obama, Voted Trump voters & by having a dig at one of those types, that she'll struggle to win them back.

Basically that itll play well with her supporters, but wont win her any back, ir something to that effect.

I'm not saying that I agree with it more just pointing out the double-standards that are applied

Am I seeing it differently to others then ? He said marriage is between one man and one women and she answered his question with the term he used, although the "if you can find one" as you say will play well to her supporters.

Outlaw Pete

Horowitz report out Friday.

Finally we can get to the real abuse of power and away from these nothing burger sideshows.

ancapailldorcha

pixelburp wrote: »

Her socialist credentials might hurt her, but honestly from what I've seen of Warren, she seems to have that kid of folksy charm & charisma that coudl play well in those conservative states. Lord knows Clinton's utter lack of personality (complete with awful manufactured lines like "Pokémon Go to the polls", ergh) make 'like-ability' a non-stater for her; can't see the same being a problem with Warren. If Clinton came off like the stern high maths school teacher you hated, Warren instead gives an air of the music teacher you loved.

Pokemon Go... to the polls? Christ.

I honestly can't name a single Clinton policy that didn't involve maintaining the status quo in some regard such as the ACA or the Paris accords.

Warren definitely seems to have more in the charisma and personality department which will work in her favor. I don't know if it'll be enough but it'll certainly help.

mcmoustache

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Horowitz report out Friday.

Finally we can get to the real abuse of power and away from these nothing burger sideshows.

It might even be as explosive and game changing as the last one.

everlast75

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Horowitz report out Friday.

Finally we can get to the real abuse of power and away from these nothing burger sideshows.

Like the Mueller report?

Or the WH's own notes of the 25th July call?

Or your latest release, the statement from the former Ukrainian ambassador?

These 3 docs show that Trump abused his power and obstructed justice.

Whatever the findings are of this report, you can try spin it all you want - it cannot change the above facts.

amandstu

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Am I seeing it differently to others then ? He said marriage is between one man and one women and she answered his question with the term he used, although the "if you can find one" as you say will play well to her supporters.

She was in front of an audience committed to LGBTWQ rights and religious conservatives are,I guess a bogeyman to them.

So she was playing to the gallery.Another audience and her response would probably be more measured.

It would have disaffected religious conservatives no doubt but it was not a crass remark ,as much light hearted as anything.

The question for her is whether she can be a focal point for the voters who would not normally vote for the Bilge Party.

Apparently she is something of a team player and may well play to the centre when push comes to shove.

Yes ,she is much more personable than Clinton was and she may need to be if Biden does not make the playoff.

pixelburp

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Pokemon Go... to the polls? Christ.

I honestly can't name a single Clinton policy that didn't involve maintaining the status quo in some regard such as the ACA or the Paris accords.

Warren definitely seems to have more in the charisma and personality department which will work in her favor. I don't know if it'll be enough but it'll certainly help.

Oh yes; a horrendous attempt to give Clinton some sense of trendiness that backfired immediately. Delivered with all the panache of ... well, how I'd probably do stand-up lol. I'm not sure anyone could have made the line sparkle, but her absence of timing or charisma wasn't a help. Every politician has a script, or at the very least a list of talking points, but a good politician can at least feign the ability to think on their feet or ad-lib.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jt6riM2aDLk

Igotadose

Tripped over some right-wing e-site, daily wire or some such, attempting to take issue with Warren and what she said at the debate, and then it segued into her use of some Bible story or other at another event, ranting about her interpretation of it.

Hilarious. Can Trump quote *any* bible stories? Or verses? That footage of him being asked which Testament was his favorite is hilarious. "I like them both!"

Itssoeasy

So the GOP are saying the reason turkey crossed the border into Syria is because of the democrats impeachment inquiry. That’s a new spin of a decision that we have a White House press release announcing the move.

Outlaw Pete

CNN's bias against Trump exposed by whistleblower. Expect some interesting tweets from him today


https://twitter.com/JamesOKeefeIII/status/1183779313197469697

Sonics2k

Speaking of outrageous bias!

After Turkish bombings, a load of ISIS prisoners were able to escape.

Trump is, of course, claiming this is all part of Kurds plan.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-twitter-kurds-isis-prisoners-turkey-syria-bombing-latest-erdogan-tweet-a9155051.html?utm_source=reddit.com

mcmoustache

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

CNN's bias against Trump exposed by whistleblower. Expect some interesting tweets from him today


https://twitter.com/JamesOKeefeIII/status/1183779313197469697

Are you saying that a media organisation shouldn't have a bias?

Otherwise I'm not sure what point you are making other than using the thread to dump the latest the_donald memes.

Brian?

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

CNN's bias against Trump exposed by whistleblower. Expect some interesting tweets from him today


https://twitter.com/JamesOKeefeIII/status/1183779313197469697

I’d lose respect for anyone not biased against Trump at this stage. He’s proven himself to be an amoral criminal.

I don’t know why I bother replying this will go unanswered

Thargor

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

CNN's bias against Trump exposed by whistleblower. Expect some interesting tweets from him today


https://twitter.com/JamesOKeefeIII/status/1183779313197469697

'Video uploading now' lol, yeah because that's such a time consuming process these days isn't it? Didn't make it to press? Or maybe it's just slang for 'get this juicy headline out now to feed the confirmation bias of our moron followers, release barely relevant clip later that backs up nothing we've been claiming later...'

Outlaw Pete

mcmoustache wrote: »

Are you saying that a media organisation shouldn't have a bias?

lol. Are you serious? CNN put themselves forwards as a nonpartisan news organization. Indeed their reputation is built on them delivering news in a non biased way. Hence their incredulity whenever they are accused of bias, particularly by Trump.

Their reputation (what was left of it) as an a non partisan news network is now in tatters and Trump is vindicated for labelling them fake news as that is absolutely a title they deserve. They are activists, not journalists.

"I know that there's a lot of people at CNN that are friendly with Lindsey Graham. Time to knock that off."

If CNN is to survive, Zucker needs to go.

Thargor wrote: »

'Video uploading now' lol, yeah because that's such a time consuming process these days isn't it? Didn't make it to press? Or maybe it's just slang for 'get this juicy headline out now to feed the confirmation bias of our moron followers, release barely relevant clip later that backs up nothing we've been claiming later...'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7XZmugtLv4

StringerBell

Fox put themselves forward as fair and balanced. Who gives a flying ****? CNN don't like trump? Well I'll tell you what, I'm glad that whistleblower came forward with that bombshell! Could never have worked that out at all at all....

Not sure what point you think you are making with that tbh

Inquitus

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

lol. Are you serious? CNN put themselves forwards as a nonpartisan news organization. Indeed their reputation is built on them delivering news in a non biased way. Hence their incredulity whenever they are accused of bias, particularly by Trump.

Their reputation (what was left of it) as an a non partisan news network is now in tatters and Trump is vindicated for labelling them fake news as that is absolutely a title they deserve. They are activists, not journalists.



If CNN is to survive, Zucker needs to go.

I don't see anything wrong in this, he is just telling them to call out Fox News on their partisan BS reporting and focus on the Impeachment story, which to be fair is rightfully the hottest story is American news at the moment. Unless subsequent videos show anything else this is hardly surprising and certainly no smoking gun against CNN.

Outlaw Pete

You need to watch the whole of Part 1 where you'll hear comments like the one below which make it perfectly clear that there are journalists who want to be impartial, and do their jobs with integrity, but Zucker is telling them to stay on script and only report the way he wants them to report:

"There's a lot of people who are out here trying to like just do what they think is the best of journalistic integrity.Then you get on the 9AM call and big boss Jeff Zucker f**king tells you what to do..." - Media Coordinator Nick Neville

That is not journalism but with respect folks, I hardly expect any of you on here to agree given that the talking points on this thread for the guts of three years is akin to watching CNN, and no doubt many of you have been informed by them, indirectly if not directly.

The coverage they gave to the Trump-Russia story in no way matched the evidence that supported the allegations and CNN for sure played a huge part in how congress themselves kept running with it and why the public in turn followed, as sure why wouldn't they when the media and democrats says it's all true.

This is why we had the likes Comey and the DNC leaking bs to the media in 2016 as it informs the electorate and it's about you all opened your eyes to that, that the MSM are the propaganda wing of the left and as we are slowly seeing now, these people don't deal in the truth, the propagate lies and gossip as fact and sadly there are always people that will buy into it all and believe it to be gospel.

FrostyJack

Inquitus wrote:

I don't see anything wrong in this, he is just telling them to call out Fox News on their partisan BS reporting and focus on the Impeachment story, which to be fair is rightfully the hottest story is American news at the moment. Unless subsequent videos show anything else this is hardly surprising and certainly no smoking gun against CNN.

This is the sadest case I have seen in some time. Talk about clutching at straws. The very same people that say CNN have it in for Trump are saying CNN are trying to pass as impartial. Watch the documentary on Fox News a few years back and your mind will be blown if you think this is bad. He is saying stick with the major story and stop licking up to Leningrad Lindsey. What major impartial news agency would say the opposite, like bury the major news story and lick up Graham? Fox news would.

Brian?

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

You need to watch the whole of Part 1 where you'll hear comments like the one in the tweet reply below which make it perfectly clear that there are journalists who want to be impartial, and do their jobs with integrity, but Zucker is telling them to stay on script and only report the way he wants them to report:


https://twitter.com/VikesPessimist/status/1183813680506527745


That is not journalism but with respect folks, I hardly expect any of you on here to agree given that the talking points on this thread for the guts of three years is akin to watching CNN, and no doubt many of you have been informed by them, indirectly if not directly.

The coverage they gave to the Trump-Russia story in no way matched the evidence that supported the allegations and CNN for sure played a huge part in how congress themselves kept running with it and why the public in turn followed, as sure why wouldn't they when the media and democrats says it's all true.

This is why we had the likes Comey and the DNC leaking bs to the media in 2016 as it informs the electorate and it's about you all opened your eyes to that, that the MSM are the propaganda wing of the left and as we are slowly seeing now, these people don't deal in the truth, the propagate lies and gossip as fact and sadly there are always people that will buy into it all and believe it to be gospel.

Again, so what. Trump is a terrible man doing a terrible job as president. Are they telling lies about him, no.

Midlife

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

You need to watch the whole of Part 1 where you'll hear comments like the one below which make it perfectly clear that there are journalists who want to be impartial, and do their jobs with integrity, but Zucker is telling them to stay on script and only report the way he wants them to report:



That is not journalism but with respect folks, I hardly expect any of you on here to agree given that the talking points on this thread for the guts of three years is akin to watching CNN, and no doubt many of you have been informed by them, indirectly if not directly.

The coverage they gave to the Trump-Russia story in no way matched the evidence that supported the allegations and CNN for sure played a huge part in how congress themselves kept running with it and why the public in turn followed, as sure why wouldn't they when the media and democrats says it's all true.

This is why we had the likes Comey and the DNC leaking bs to the media in 2016 as it informs the electorate and it's about you all opened your eyes to that, that the MSM are the propaganda wing of the left and as we are slowly seeing now, these people don't deal in the truth, the propagate lies and gossip as fact and sadly there are always people that will buy into it all and believe it to be gospel.

Cites material by right wing activist group. Claims 'this is not journalism' of others.

Never change Pete, never ever change.

Igotadose

Midlife wrote: »

Cites material by right wing activist group run by a convicted fraud. Claims 'this is not journalism' of others.

Never change Pete, never ever change.

FYP.

26000 Elephants

mcmoustache wrote: »

Are you saying that a media organisation shouldn't have a bias?

Otherwise I'm not sure what point you are making other than using the thread to dump the latest the_donald memes.

He had me until "exposecnn.com" LÒL

Only Pete could rant about media bias with a clip from an obviously biased source without the decency to be even slightly ironic.

Timberrrrrrrr

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

lol. Are you serious? CNN put themselves forwards as a nonpartisan news organization. Indeed their reputation is built on them delivering news in a non biased way. Hence their incredulity whenever they are accused of bias, particularly by Trump.

Their reputation (what was left of it) as an a non partisan news network is now in tatters and Trump is vindicated for labelling them fake news as that is absolutely a title they deserve. They are activists, not journalists.



If CNN is to survive, Zucker needs to go.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7XZmugtLv4

To coin a well used phrase so often used by Trump supporters.


This is a nothingburger.

Overheal

Is the insinuation here that Roger Ailes or the Murdochs never interfere(d) with their journalists?

:pac:

(Breaking news: even newspapers have an Editor in Chief)

Overheal

“There's a lot of people who are out here trying to like just do what they think is the best of journalistic integrity.Then you get on the 9AM call and big boss John Jonah Jameson screams that he wants more pictures of Spider-Man.”

Like is this really scandal worthy that news executive directors direct which news they focus the paid work of their journalists on? I’m also particularly amused that this faux outrage would seemingly ignore the Catch and Kill program(s) Trump outlets have adopted.