3 minutes ago, MichaelGL said:

Nothing against your mom, but I'd ask her and so many folks with this belief, what about under Obama? Like where did the Obama economic doldrums end, and the Trump economic prosperity begin? The answer is that the so called economic prosperity that Americans seemingly experienced under Trump, was set in motion by Obama started under his administration. It sucks that this fact has been lost on the media and on some voters as well. Trump would've been absolutely lost if he had became president in the aftermath of the the Great Recession. He was handed a robust economy on a silver platter in 2016.

I agree - and believe me, I've argued that exact point with her many times.  But my mom is one of those if-it's-on-the-Internet-then-it-must-be-true types.  You can't win with people like that, no matter how hard you try.

10 minutes ago, Khan said:

Honestly, those are the kind of folks who'd have trouble ordering from McDonald's.  [!@#$%^&*] 'em.

I agree, but these are the people who will be the face of voters for the press. Harris can't do anything right - they set her up for failure at every turn.

Just now, Vee said:

Typically for Jeremy Peters, this has already been debunked.

It's always BS, but it's the type of story that tends to stick. People look for reasons to cling to Trump.

3 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

It's always BS, but it's the type of story that tends to stick. People look for reasons to cling to Trump.

It's not gonna stick for anyone who just doesn't want to vote for her. And I'm sorry, but there is no one coming out of last night in media claiming Harris failed, including the Times and Fox News. It was a rout. Jeremy Peters recycling 'undecideds' is all they have left. We can know the media puts the thumb on the scale and still admit that they have ceded to that reality from last night.

Edited September 11, 20241 yr by Vee

6 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

I agree, but these are the people who will be the face of voters for the press. Harris can't do anything right - they set her up for failure at every turn.

That's true.  But I'm also seeing more and more people in this country realizing that the establishment/mainstream media is hopelessly corrupt and therefore not to be trusted.  That's why the MSM are so pissy right now: they've hit at Harris and Walz many times, and so far, nothing's landed, because people are slowly and gradually catching on.

Edited September 11, 20241 yr by Khan

LOL:

4 minutes ago, Vee said:

It's not gonna stick for anyone who just doesn't want to vote for her. 

Exactly.  Those idiots are never going to vote for her, no matter what.  They can pretend to be "undecided" all they want, but again, people are starting to catch on.

 

2 minutes ago, Vee said:

LOL:

Of COURSE they didn't fact-check her, because she actually had facts and logic on her side.  All Trump has is what he heard Floyd the Barber discuss with Andy, Barney and Gomer Pyle at his barber shop.

7 minutes ago, Khan said:

That's true.  But I'm also seeing more and more people in this country realizing that the establishment/mainstream media is hopelessly corrupt and therefore not to be trusted.  That's why the MSM are so pissy right now: they've hit at Harris and Walz many times, and so far, nothing's landed, because people are slowly and gradually catching on.

I think it's also important to credit media people when they do well. I think David Muir and Linsey Davis were very good last night as moderators. And I think most of the analysis on the major networks and the major papers refreshingly did not equivocate: They were very clear on who won and why. I don't lose sight of what Beltway media is as a larger organism, but I don't think each journalist or commentator is created equal or unequal. MSNBC is a for-profit network which deals with its own issues and mandates, but a lot of their on-air people (like Joy Reid, like Symone Sanders-Townsend, like Maddow, O'Donnell and more) still do not want Trump to win. We can say the same for other people at CNN, NBC, ABC, etc. You never let your guard down in critiquing media, but you allow for a changing situation and nuanced individuals.

The other key is this: Corporate media worships power and hates a loser. They saw power last night and then they saw a loser, and power is what they gravitated to.

Edited September 11, 20241 yr by Vee

2 minutes ago, Vee said:

I think it's also important to credit media people when they do well. I think David Muir and Linsey Davis were very good last night as moderators. And I think most of the analysis on the major networks and the major papers refreshingly did not equivocate: They were very clear on who won and why.

Frankly, that's like giving credit to a father for paying child support.  I'm not gonna pat people on their heads for doing what they're supposed to do.

6 minutes ago, Khan said:

Frankly, that's like giving credit to a father for paying child support.  I'm not gonna pat people on their heads for doing what they're supposed to do.

Sure, but I've seen moderators do next to nothing for over a decade. I think they did good work and will likely be fielding death threats over it.

1 hour ago, Khan said:

I hear that all the time even from my own mother, who has been brainwashed by propaganda videos on YouTube (a.k.a. the bane of my existence).  How was your life better when Trump was president, I ask? 

It's one thing to support Trump. It's another to present yourself as (or to allow the media to identify you as) "undecided" in order to offset your bias and give weight to your pro-Trump opinion.

 

I don't understand Megyn Kelly

I mean, obviously she's a hack for cash. 

But, she made her name off of criticizing Trump at the 2016 debate.  Now she's trying to pretend fairness is her main issue. 

She was a never-Trumpster.  Now, she's so fearful of transgender people interacting with her kid, that she supports him (as if the president can intervene at her daughter's private school?)

Like, is this the only way she can get press for whatever media outlet still pays her?  And, honestly, does she deserve the amount of focus that she still gets every time she says something dumb for clickbait?

Edited September 11, 20241 yr by j swift

14 minutes ago, j swift said:

I don't understand Megyn Kelly

I mean, obviously she's a hack for cash. 

But, she made her name off of criticizing Trump at the 2016 debate.  Now she's trying to pretend fairness is her main issue. 

She was a never-Trumpster.  Now, she's so fearful of transgender people interacting with her kid, that she supports him (as if the president can intervene at her daughter's private school?)

Like, is this the only way she can get press for whatever media outlet still pays her?  And, honestly, does she deserve the amount of focus that she still gets every time she says something dumb for clickbait?

These people are attention whores period.  With her, look at the amount of the settlement she got from her failed show at NBC and ask yourself why with that much money she still throws herself into more. It's not money that's for sure.

But, if Megyn Kelly has zero credibility and zero influence (to which I agree), why does she still command multiple headlines every time the media needs to quote a right wing pundit?

Given the recent scandal of Russia paying conservative YouTubers like Dave Rubin $400,000.00 to spread disinformation, the right is doing itself no favors by furthering the narrative that the only reason a person would promote conservative political ideas is for personal profit. 

Also this

Edited September 11, 20241 yr by j swift

Fox copes:

LOL:

 

 

4 hours ago, JaneAusten said:

With her, look at the amount of the settlement she got from her failed show at NBC and ask yourself why with that much money she still throws herself into more. It's not money that's for sure.

She's "settling for more."   

You can tell peeps like Jesse Watters want so badly to attack Kamala Harris for being yet one more Black woman who made Donald Trump look like dogshit, but even they are smart to know that when you cross that line, the game is over.