Trooper York: It was obvious that the FOX debate was weighted to help some candidates and hurt others. Why should a campaign sign on to this. Future candidates will have to take control. They have to force the RNC to set up debates that help get a Republican elected. Not one that tries to destroy them.
bagoh20: FOX, and Kelly in particular, did their job in a way that we all have been begging for, and as I've said repeatedly, vote Republican if you want a real press fitting a great democracy.
--------------------------
This article is an excellent rundown of Kelly taking apart Rubio and Cruz by showing videos of each playing light and loose with the immigration issue. She begins with Rubio's videos, corners him with questions, then asks Bush's opinion on Rubio's behavior:
When Rubio tried to wriggle away, arguing that the “earned citizenship” he opposed in 2010 was different than the “earned citizenship” he supported in 2013, Kelly threw a softball to Bush: “Do you agree Senator Rubio has not reversed himself on his immigration promise?” Bush essentially committed the Republican primary equivalent of a murder-suicide, reminding the audience that he and Rubio both supported versions of amnesty—but that only Rubio lacked the guts to admit it.
“...He cut and run because it wasn’t popular among conservatives, I guess,” Bush said.
Bush acknowledged that his position might not be popular in the primary, but with a touch of charming I’m-not-Trump self-deprecation, he urged the audience to read his book stating his case, Immigration Wars. “You can get it at $2.99 on Amazon,” Bush said. “It’s not a best-seller, I can promise you.” When Rubio pointed out that Bush had changed his position on citizenship, Bush didn’t even deny it.
“So did you,” he said.
Rubio seemed taken aback. “Well, but you changed the—in the book …”
“Yeah,” Bush countered. “So did you, Marco.”
She did exactly the same with Cruz, showing the videos, cornering, but then turning to Rand Paul for his opinion on Cruz's behavior:
“Senator Paul, you know how Washington works,” she said. “Do you buy that?”
Paul [said...] “What is particularly insulting is, he’s the king of saying ‘You’re for amnesty.’ Everyone’s for amnesty except for Ted Cruz. But it’s a falseness, and that’s an authenticity problem … I was for legalization. So was Ted—but now he says he wasn’t. That’s not true.
33 comments:
When you strip away all the bombast and horseshit, the problem Trump and some of his lemmings have on this specific issue is Kelly is a woman. Mommy issues are a mofo.
C you next Thursday Kelly admitted that Cruz was right and her whole set up was just that. A set up to rattle Cruz. Her agenda was to advance herself. Not to ask questions that would elicit answers from the candidates that would help people decide if they can vote for them.
Her whole approach was gotcha journalism of the worst sort. Loaded questions with loaded videos to further FOX News agenda which is obviously to promote Ricky Retardo Rubio. As has been reported the daughter of the guy who wrote the debate questions works for Rubio.
Trump dodged a bullet by not going to the debate to be manipulated by the likes of Megyn Kelly. Hitting back at her would not be effective as it is a case of diminishing returns. Witness the reaction of the crowd when Cruz protested the way Wallace was loading his questions. He got booed by the partisan Republican crowd. You can only go to that well so many times.
Trump is not Hillary. He gets tough insulting questions from everyone who has him on their program. He fights back. He could have done that in the debate. But why not let Ted Cruz be the punching bag and knock his numbers down. It seems to have worked.
Once again picking on this bitch was a means to an end. It was a strategic way to play the angles. Trump was already ahead in Iowa and Cruz was gaining on him. He wasn't going to help himself too much with another debate. They already had seven of them. Plus he has been all over the media and everyone knows what he stands for one way or another. You are either for him or against him already. It was Cruz that people still have to make a decision about.
By letting Cruz be the punching bag with the loaded questions and the misleading videos worked. It lowered Cruz's numbers and put him on his back foot. FOX is working overtime to pump up Ricky Retardo. Witness wheelchair guy saying that he won the debate. Really? It is just laughable.
Some people just hate New Yorkers so much that Trump makes them crazy. He is the typical New York loudmouth. Pushy. Opinionated. Not a nice guy. Too bad.
Whom does Rupert Murdoch want to see win? I'm embarrassed that I don't know the answer to that because I perhaps I should.
I think the answer may explain a lot.
Also, whom does Carlos Slim favor?
The other interesting part of the equation with the Trump haters is that they make everything sexual. In one way or another. It is pretty funny to tell you the truth.
I mean the meme that people are pushing is that Trump is obsessed with Megyn Kelly sexually. Well guess what guys. Trumps wife is about a 1000 times hotter than this skinny twat.
Rupert Murdoch is in the tank for Ricky Retardo Rubio. As is FOX news. The main executive who is running the debate has a daughter who is Rubio's press secretary. The pundits push Rubio and claim that he won every debate when in fact he looks like a deer in the headlights.
That is why FOX went all in against Cruz at this debate. So much for being "conservative."
FOX is rapidly losing a lot this go round. They should rethink their strategy. Trump is playing them like a fiddle.
The media ask the GOP tough questions.
The media ask the Democrats softballs. and?
The media ask the Democrats softballs. and?
Obama and Hillary collude. She gets elected; he gets appointed.
Polarize, attack, depolarize.
I'd now add that if depolarization is never complete between cycles, stronger acids and bases are called for.
Ugh. I don't like that and. It's corrupt.
I am not a huge fan of the cooch but I would eat Megyn's.
AprilApple said...
The media ask the GOP tough questions.
The media ask the Democrats softballs. and
And we don't have to take it. You take control. You tell them hey I don't have play by your rules. Cancel the debate. Talk over the heads of the News Media directly to the people..
Trump is showing the way.
Talk over the heads of the News Media directly to the people.
That's Reformation talk.
I'm going to have to go with Bags on this one. Even if there was anything FOX could do to help a candidate, I'm not sure how they could. Most of the rest of the field hover at around 5% or less. Cruz doesn't, so could they foreseeably find a way to help him? I suppose, but I don't see how.
Now, if you want to see media boosting a candidate, check this out. That's as open an admission of piggybacking as it gets. And then check out any NYT story on Clinton or Sanders, watch how stacked the comments are against Clinton and in favor of Sanders, and ask yourself if their stories reflect that.
FOX News definitely has all sorts of agendas, most surreptitious and more than a few of them dishonest. But if they really do have one behind the RNC primary process - at least one more direct than whatever war the rest of their "establishment" is waging, wake me up when you find it. I'm sure they'll have all sorts of subtle biases. But that's life, get used to it. When you find one in this potent enough to actually make an impact on this festive, free-wheeling carnival of a primary, though, let me know.
The Cruzzers are saying both Chuckie Schumer and Jeff Sessions said Cruz' amendments were poison pills, but it looks like this is more their opinion than what Cruz told anybody.
The fact he had to tap-dance says something.
Trooper York said...
Rupert Murdoch is in the tank for Ricky Retardo Rubio.
Keep in mind, that little bump Cruz had in the IBD poll was from moderates. Now it comes out some of his minions are trying to pressure said moderates. There's now a shot for Rubio to finish a decent third.
If The One True Ted, however, isn't careful, he may come in third and that would be a disaster for him
FOX is all in for Rubio. They would have been for Bush as there is a shitpot full of former Bush administration toadies on their roster up to and including Karl Rove. But the Bush ship has sailed so they have latched on to Rubio as their tame politician. You can see it in the coverage and the way they beat up on his rivals like Trump and Cruz.
The question is how will this play with their core audience. You can lose your audience you know. It happens all the time. When you get arrogant and haughty and not in touch with your people you can lose your way.
The debates are show biz. And the Republicans don't have a leg to stand on criticizing the gotcha nature of the debates, having prostituted themselves to the showbiz MSM for ratings. There is no reason the RNC couldn't have long ago requested that the Republican debates run on PBS. I doubt PBS would have refused to run them. And yes, PBS is far left but if the RNC insisted on having the say on who the moderator or moderators were the debates could have been and could be substantive. I'd have no problem with George Will as a moderator because I know that he would be mortified by a circus atmosphere. I know he's strongly against Trump but I have confidence his questions would be equally incisive to Rubio or Bush or Cruz. Or if PBS sounds crazy perhaps the debates could be live streamed on a site like Breitbart. The possibilities are many but it won't happen because the RNC is as unserious about good governance as our institutes of higher learning that prostitute themselves to their own alumni to be #1 on the gridiron are about higher learning.
The debates should be on CSPAN and the campaigns should choose the moderators. I would not pick a newsman or a television personality. Rather I would pick someone who is knowledgeable about the subject. Pick an economist for the economic debate. With a working man and a small business man on the panel. Pick a grunt for the foreign policy because his ass will be on the line. Pick normal regular Americans not the elite.
Trooper York said...
FOX is all in for Rubio. They would have been for Bush as there is a shitpot full of former Bush administration toadies on their roster up to and including Karl Rove. But the Bush ship has sailed so they have latched on to Rubio as their tame politician. You can see it in the coverage and the way they beat up on his rivals like Trump and Cruz.
The question is how will this play with their core audience. You can lose your audience you know. It happens all the time. When you get arrogant and haughty and not in touch with your people you can lose your way.
It's called the Ditzy Twits effect.
This exchange covers nicely the part of the debate that causes people to avert their gaze, the nettling on wording, "path to legalization" vs "path to citizenship, vs, path to drivers license + an address gets you the right to vote in American elections so long as that voting is Democrat there can never be any voter fraud or corruption.
And it leave off right at the best part.
Chris Christie chimes in and answers, "See, this is why you are better off hiring a governor. It's okay to change your mind. It's fine to change your opinion on important matters so long as you make your position and your change clear, and THIS is why nobody believes anyone anymore when both hiding behind clouds of parliamentary technicalities and wording.
Nobody could disagree. It was a clever use of the moment.
Can we be honest?
Everyone knows Cruz is the best Republican candidate from the perspective of reliable conservative Republican.
But from the p.o.v. of maximum damage primarily to Republican party and secondarily to Democrat party, for maximum disruption to Washington lobbying efforts and propaganda efforts, then Trump is clearly the best stick of dynamite available.
Because he comes with a whole warehouse of fireworks that can go off any second.
He had only mention to Hillary camp not to bring up trouble with female persuasion lest he get into being honest about Bill and Hillary's support throughout. She shut right the hell up. Who else can do that? No one else can do that. They're all dismissed as more partisan violence against women.
One minor example.
SDA again for Canadian perspective. They picked something small from piece by Tucker Carlson making the round all over the world right now about Trump leaving a message on Carlson's telephone recorder that joke about his hair all you like, Tucker Carlson, I still get more pussy than you. Kate was looking to see if anyone else noticed what she noticed and had it confirmed with the writer of Dilbert. The same thing she was thinking, and not mentioned much here. In an earlier debate Trump is asked how he can be conservative and have Hillary at his wedding. It was supposed to be a killer. Without hesitation Trump answered, "I paid her to be there."
Everyone overlooked that except Trump supporters. They understood the importance of it, that he considers Hillary no different than the hired musicians, the caterers, the cake bakers, the wedding planner, she is equal to hired help. Same as everyone else. And that's the kind of attitude they have. They are unhappy with their hired help and want the whole thing cleared out.
Bingo Chip. That is it exactly. Everybody is trying to say if people really know what Trump is about they would not support. People know what Trump is about. He has been on their TV for twenty years. He is like Jay Leno or Oprah. People are not afraid of him. He disgusts the elites. That is reason enough to vote for him.
He is indeed the chaos candidate. That is a feature not a bug.
150 years ago Billy Sherman had a good take on reporters. Nothing has changed.
The question is how will this play with their core audience. You can lose your audience you know. It happens all the time. When you get arrogant and haughty and not in touch with your people you can lose your way.
FOX News presents itself as a "news" channel. Is this really how a news organization is supposed to operate? As a mirror reflection of its audience's opinion?
There are all sorts of organizations for that - not the least of which would be the campaigns and the PACs supporting them. Maybe the PACs should just clamor for greater transparency than they're currently, legally, comfortable with, and become the ideological media center that apparently not even FOX News can still claim to be. They can start with limited programming leased from other networks at 3 AM, as all paid-advertisements start, and work their way up to becoming an actual network. Political capitalism at its finest!
There's a difference between being a candidate's shill and being unafraid of allowing objective truth collide against viewer preferences.
People don't know about Trump, because they don't want to know. When they hear it, they start yelling LALALALALALA, I'm really mad! , It's that no revelation about him is ever a bad thing, no matter what it is. Immigration? As I pointed out, he is personally responsible for more illegals in this country taking jobs than all the other candidates combined. To attack the others and not him on it is pure Trump blindness. Yet, do you think people know that, and that he was sued for using illegals to screw over union workers. And you guys think the others are traitors on immigration? That seems more biased than Rachel Maddow on the subject of vibrators.
And if the alternative to asking some tough questions is to ask none, then you don't want a democracy at all. Do you think that if the Republicans don't get tough questions that will encourage the media to go after the Dems? That's the plan: to just not ask anybody anything but softballs? The only way to get any tough questions to the Dems at all will require the Republicans taking them too, and first.
These questions, including being forced to face their own statements, were exactly what I want, including if it's aimed at candidates I prefer. I'm not afraid of my guy facing the music, because I'm not in love. I'm hiring a guy for a job, and I don't want to blow it. It's a job interview, not an awards show. Of course one guy didn't even show up for the interview, but Troop saw a tall blonde with boobs walk by and yelled out: "You're hired Toots!
The only way to get any tough questions to the Dems at all will require the Republicans taking them too, and first.
100% true, that.
Wow, that's a first: I agree with both Ritmo and Titus!
All the "news outlets" should lose their "core audience", especially if it's based on political ideology. Instead we have my news and your news, and neither can be counted on for the whole truth, leaving us at best 50% wrong, stupid or confused.
@R&B: Your quasi-denial of Rupert Murdoch calling the shots at FOX News (or at least their overall tone) is weak.
Sorry, not buying.
Bags, LOL about Ritmo and Titus. As we see clearly, this is all about emotion and the emotion is ANGER! Now, anger can be a great motivator in the short run. But, it then implodes in ugly ways.
That is the reason many people have tuned out Downton Abbey. One of the main characters is Mary Crawley who is a condescending know it all. That gets old right quick. People just change the channel.
Mary Crawley is my favorite female character in the series. She always gets her slap downs and takes them well.
I know but she is basically insufferable. She is always snotty and thinks she knows it all.
My favorite character is Mr. Molesley.
Post a Comment