The Trump Administration (just Trump) Thread

[Jack Brickman]

I'm on this.

I love reading your posts in sarcastic David Blatt voice.

 

[Sebastian]

I don't know how you're not understanding what I'm saying, but it doesn't appear that you do.

Simply assigning a contributors actions to the network is disingenuous.

I'd argue that it's false. They're responsible for the actions of their employee, but you simply can't act as though they signed off on her actions.


Corey Lewandowski was paid by CNN and was the Trump team.

By your logic, CNN was advising Trump.

Both campaigns agree on questions before the debate.

Not all questions are used but there are no surprise questions. Either way the point is mute.

 

[AZ_]

Both campaigns agree on questions before the debate.

Not all questions are used but there are no surprise questions. Either way the point is mute.

Of course it is, and campaigns know what questions are coming well in advance.

In any event, it's not CNN leaking the questions. That's disingenuous and willfully misrepresented to establish a false narrative of media bias.

 

[billmac91]

Of course it is, and campaigns know what questions are coming well in advance.

In any event, it's not CNN leaking the questions. That's disingenuous and willfully misrepresented to establish a false narrative of media bias.

I guess that is why Jake Tapper said the CNN debate leaks were "journalistically horrifying".

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...ically-its-horrifying/?utm_term=.0be7dc293d7d

CNN’s Jake Tapper blasts leak of town hall question to Clinton campaign: ‘Journalistically it’s horrifying’

It appears that Clinton may have seen the question coming.

“From time to time I get the questions in advance,” wrote Brazile in the pre-town-hall email. At the time, Brazile was vice chair of the Democratic National Committee in addition to being a CNN contributor. She stopped being a contributor in mid-summer, when she started serving as interim DNC chair.

“To find out that someone was unethically helping the Clinton campaign — tipping them off — is just very, very upsetting,” Tapper said in a WMAL radio interview.

Here's the biggest problem....no one has held CNN's feet to the fire to find out how the questions got to Brazille. And if Brazille hadn't lobbed in the part about getting questions "from time to time" it'd be much easier to assert this was a single rogue act. But it doesn't appear to be the case. Sanders got screwed 7 ways to Sunday and this was just another example.

It's pretty easy for CNN to point the finger at TVOne and Roland Martin, but how many debates have they held jointly together? If she's done it more than once, it'd stand to reason TVOne might not be the problem....good on CNN for figuring out what happened though. Glad they sorted it all out....

 

[AZ_]

I guess that is why Jake Tapper said the CNN debate leaks were "journalistically horrifying".

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...ically-its-horrifying/?utm_term=.0be7dc293d7d



Here's the biggest problem....no one has held CNN's feet to the fire to find out how the questions got to Brazille. And if Brazille hadn't lobbed in the part about getting questions "from time to time" it'd be much easier to assert this was a single rogue act. But it doesn't appear to be the case. Sanders got screwed 7 ways to Sunday and this was just another example.

It's pretty easy for CNN to point the finger at TVOne and Roland Martin, but how many debates have they held jointly together? If she's done it more than once, it'd stand to reason TVOne might not be the problem....good on CNN for figuring out what happened though. Glad they sorted it all out....

So, CNN thought it was horrifying?

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

Of course it is, and campaigns know what questions are coming well in advance.

They do? Then why did anyone, including CNN, care about what Brazile did?

Here's the biggest problem....no one has held CNN's feet to the fire to find out how the questions got to Brazille. And if Brazille hadn't lobbed in the part about getting questions "from time to time" it'd be much easier to assert this was a single rogue act.

Exactly.

Said it before, but the worst thing about these debates is the pretense of objectivity/fairness. That could easily be eliminated by changing the format.

 

[billmac91]

So, CNN thought it was horrifying?

It's tough to tell when they didn't do anything about it....

 

[AZ_]

It's tough to tell when they didn't do anything about it....

Until finding out about it, you mean?

Or are you alleging a cover up?

 

[AZ_]

They do? Then why did anyone, including CNN, care about what Brazile did?

Of course, the issue here is getting specific verbiage and where the question is coming from.

It's not like these questions are ever blindsiding candidates, Trump knew Megyn Kelly was going to ask him a pointed question about women.

People like Jake Tapper have to be outraged about this to save face on the integrity of these awful formats.

I don't really see the outrage here, but saying CNN gave Hillary debate questions is false.

That's misrepresentation the facts, which was my whole point.

 

[-Akronite-]

Either way the point is mute.

Moot. Fewer.



Megyn Kelly isn't even at Fox anymore, which hasn't been brought up. Until Trump she was a very reliable conservative mouthpiece. Fox in general seemed to be at odds with Trump until he won the nomination. It took them time to fall in line, just like the rest of the Republican Party.

A lot of people here are equating whether something is biased with whether they "show both sides." Having token liberal/conservative voices doesn't make you unbiased, the very fact that you need a token voice is a problem. The amount of punditry that dominates the news cycle is fucking embarrassing.

Based on years of evidence I don't think it's even a contest, Fox has done far more to drill in conservative talking points to its viewers than any major network has done for the left. Yes, cable news is all shit, but it's not QUITE the same. Better discussion for the Media Bias thread anyway.



And @Huber., let me assure you that there are plenty of liberals that do believe in Jesus. Like Gouri for some reason. But yeah Christianity is bullshit.

Oh shit NONE of my post belongs in this thread? Fuck.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

Of course, the issue here is getting specific verbiage and where the question is coming from. It's not like these questions are ever blindsiding candidates, Trump knew Megyn Kelly was going to ask him a pointed question about women.

There are only a limited number of questions that can be asked, and specific verbiage is very important when practicing for a debate. If you were to tell me the exact questions an appellate panel was going to ask me before oral argument, it would be a huge advantage. That would be doubly true in a public debate, where how smoothly you answer a question counts for a lot with an audience.

And of course, if it's no big deal, you'd have to ask why Brazile would have risked doing it in the first place....

 

[AZ_]

There are only a limited number of questions that can be asked, and specific verbiage is very important when practicing for a debate. If you were to tell me the exact questions an appellate panel was going to ask me before oral argument, it would be a huge advantage. That would be doubly true in a public debate, where how smoothly you answer a question counts for a lot with an audience.

And of course, if it's no big deal, you'd have to ask why Brazile would have risked doing it in the first place....

For what it's worth, CNN had the correct reaction to dismiss her as a contributor. In the grand scheme of things, I think it pales in comparison to the sycophant treatment other news organizations like MSNBC or Fox give to their respective leanings.

People saying CNN gave Hillary debate questions is misrepresenting the facts.

 

[-Akronite-]

Hey Trump stuff to talk about...

 

[-Akronite-]

Anybody have a take on how this isn't horribly stupid? My default when he says anything is that it's horribly stupid, so it's hard for me to have reasoned takes, so please help me out.


Is he honestly happy we are spending less?

Is it a mind game with Putin to show we won't blink in the face of this transgression?

Or is he seriously just letting him off the hook like usual?

This guy said he'd be tough on Putin, so why is he not making any direct comments against what happened?

 

[MediumBaller]

Anybody have a take on how this isn't horribly stupid? My default when he says anything is that it's horribly stupid, so it's hard for me to have reasoned takes, so please help me out.


Is he honestly happy we are spending less?

Is it a mind game with Putin to show we won't blink in the face of this transgression?

Or is he seriously just letting him off the hook like usual?

This guy said he'd be tough on Putin, so why is he not making any direct comments against what happened?

He's trolling. He probably doesn't think it's a significant enough issue to raise a stink about. Instead of being confrontational he's reframing it as "hey thanks Putin, you really helped us out by doing this!"