Dnc BANS FOX NEWS FROM DEBATES

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by Hotrod511

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/chr...rimary-debates

What's that say about the dem's and the MSM

Democratic Party Chairman Perez is probably looking for hosts who will turn the primary debates into Democratic Party Love Fests and avoid hard questions.

Chris Wallace, Bret Baier and Shepard Smith on Fox are unbiased and would treat Democratic candidates fairly. Your article also mentions Martha MacCallum. I don't know who she is but bet she'd be fair too.

What about Fox's cable news competitors? What if the tables were turned? I can't think of any of the main commentators on MSNBC who would give Republicans a fair shake. Joe Scarborough maybe, but not if Trump were a participant. He appears to be pussy whipped by his new Democrat wife so that you can't be assured he'd be fair with anyone right of center.

On CNN, Wolf Blitzer would do a fair job, while the rest of the usual suspects, being Anderson Cooper, Don Lemon and Chris Cuomo, would not. A couple of their daytime anchors might be fair with Republicans.

I started watching more MSNBC and CNN since Trump became president, although I find myself watching Fox more and more in recent days. Some of the far left progressives in the Democratic Party championed by these networks are making me think I prefer the devil I know better than the devil I don't.

[themystic]

Originally Posted by Tiny

Democratic Party Chairman Perez is probably looking for hosts who will turn the primary debates into Democratic Party Love Fests and avoid hard questions.

Chris Wallace, Bret Baier and Shepard Smith on Fox are unbiased and would treat Democratic candidates fairly. Your article also mentions Martha MacCallum. I don't know who she is but bet she'd be fair too.

What about Fox's cable news competitors? What if the tables were turned? I can't think of any of the main commentators on MSNBC who would give Republicans a fair shake. Joe Scarborough maybe, but not if Trump were a participant. He appears to be pussy whipped by his new Democrat wife so that you can't be assured he'd be fair with anyone right of center.

On CNN, Wolf Blitzer would do a fair job, while the rest of the usual suspects, being Anderson Cooper, Don Lemon and Chris Cuomo, would not. A couple of their daytime anchors might be fair with Republicans.

I started watching more MSNBC and CNN since Trump became president, although I find myself watching Fox more and more in recent days. Some of the far left progressives in the Democratic Party championed by these networks are making me think I prefer the devil I know better than the devil I don't.

Yeah all three of the networks are biased as fuck. The only two I would fully trust to moderate would be Chris Wallace and Brian Williams. Anyone who thinks Fox aint in bed with Trump is an idiot plain and simple. There are a lot of those in this forum. Im still shocked at how Un American Trump really is and how stupid his fan club is

[bb1961]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

A lawsuit many would deem frivolous. The kind the Republicans have been trying to do away with for years.

Get your shit together, bb1961.

Media gets sued all the fucking time. For stupid shit like this.

But following your crystal clear logic, Trump got sued yesterday for $3.8 million. Over the past three decades, he’s been involved in more than 3,000 lawsuits.

How does that bode for his credibility, bb1961?

Back on topic, I think that the case can be made that Fox News is actually involved in the White House day to day. As such, it cannot be considered a legitimate news media outlet and therefore unfit to participate in anything having to do with a free election.

State run media. Just like in those commie countries y’all love so much.

He has done things I like and things I don't like...but far more good than bad...he's no President Reagan...only one great one in a lifetime!!

[bb1961]

Originally Posted by themystic

Yeah all three of the networks are biased as fuck. The only two I would fully trust to moderate would be Chris Wallace and Brian Williams. Anyone who thinks Fox aint in bed with Trump is an idiot plain and simple. There are a lot of those in this forum. Im still shocked at how Un American Trump really is and how stupid his fan club is

TM you're right about that...defending our boarders is VERY un-American!!

[the_real_Barleycorn]

CENSORSHIP!!!!

[Yssup Rider]

How is that censorship, Barleycorn? I still don’t understand how hosting a presidential debate is a right guaranteed by anybody.

Will this bar Fox from speaking out about the Democratic primary debates or covering them?

No.

Does the Fox audience posses channel changing devices that allow them the option of watching other stations?

Yes.

Does anybody think that the portion of the FOX audience who never watches anything else will pay attention to what the Denocratic candidates have to say or god forbid vote for one of them?

Shiiiiiiit.

Fox has no more right to host a debate than ESPN or Comedy Central or OANN.

WHAT A BUNCH OF BABIES!

[Yssup Rider]

Originally Posted by bb1961

TM you're right about that...defending our boarders is VERY un-American!!

Time must be tough bb1961. How many boarders do you have?

You could do just as well as an AirBNB without having to cook for so many strangers.

I do admire your willingness to defend your boarders.

[oeb11]

Quote:
Originally Posted by gnadfly
Dims won't allow debate, but will allow illegals to vote. Incredible.

TM - you have ZERO evidence gnad



Evidence:
House Dems overwhelmingly reject motion to condemn illegal immigrant voting

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dem...migrant-voting


Nearly every House Democrat on Friday opposed a measure condemning voting in U.S. elections by illegal immigrants, as part of a sweeping election reform bill.
The GOP-backed measure would have added language to the “H.R. 1” election proposal stating that “allowing illegal immigrants the right to vote devalues the franchise and diminishes the voting power of United States citizens.”

Federal law already prohibits non-citizens from voting in elections for federal office. But the GOP motion referenced how San Francisco is allowing non-citizens, including illegal immigrants, to register to vote in school board elections.
The motion was voted down 228-197. All but six Democrats in the House voted against it. Just one Republican opposed it.
Lauren Fine, a spokeswoman for House GOP Whip Steve Scalise, pointed out that an identical resolution was adopted by the House last September. But on Friday, 41 Democrats flipped to oppose the latest measure.
“These 41 Democrats must now answer to voters why they were against illegal immigrants voting in elections six months ago, but are suddenly in favor of it now,” Fine said.
The House on Friday later approved the Democrat-backed election bill. It would institute public financing of congressional campaigns, require presidential candidates to disclose tax returns and make Election Day a federal holiday. But the measure is dead on arrival in the Senate, where Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has blasted the bill.


There are non so blind as those who will not see, None so deaf as those who will not hear, and none so dumb as those who will not Think!


Response- fake news, nazi, russian, dkys, accuse others of name-calling, My "Feelings" are hurt, I have a right to never be "Offended"!

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by themystic

The only two I would fully trust to moderate would be Chris Wallace and Brian Williams.

I forgot about Brian Williams. Yes, he's fair.

[Yssup Rider]

Originally Posted by oeb11

Quote:
Originally Posted by gnadfly
Dims won't allow debate, but will allow illegals to vote. Incredible.

TM - you have ZERO evidence gnad



Evidence:
House Dems overwhelmingly reject motion to condemn illegal immigrant voting

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dem...migrant-voting


Nearly every House Democrat on Friday opposed a measure condemning voting in U.S. elections by illegal immigrants, as part of a sweeping election reform bill.
The GOP-backed measure would have added language to the “H.R. 1” election proposal stating that “allowing illegal immigrants the right to vote devalues the franchise and diminishes the voting power of United States citizens.”

Federal law already prohibits non-citizens from voting in elections for federal office. But the GOP motion referenced how San Francisco is allowing non-citizens, including illegal immigrants, to register to vote in school board elections.
The motion was voted down 228-197. All but six Democrats in the House voted against it. Just one Republican opposed it.
Lauren Fine, a spokeswoman for House GOP Whip Steve Scalise, pointed out that an identical resolution was adopted by the House last September. But on Friday, 41 Democrats flipped to oppose the latest measure.
“These 41 Democrats must now answer to voters why they were against illegal immigrants voting in elections six months ago, but are suddenly in favor of it now,” Fine said.
The House on Friday later approved the Democrat-backed election bill. It would institute public financing of congressional campaigns, require presidential candidates to disclose tax returns and make Election Day a federal holiday. But the measure is dead on arrival in the Senate, where Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has blasted the bill.


There are non so blind as those who will not see, None so deaf as those who will not hear, and none so dumb as those who will not Think!


Response- fake news, nazi, russian, dkys, accuse others of name-calling, My "Feelings" are hurt, I have a right to never be "Offended"!

You’re hijackjng another thread, oeb11.

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

How is that censorship, Barleycorn? I still don’t understand how hosting a presidential debate is a right guaranteed by anybody.

You've got a point Yssup. It's not really a free speech issue. If I were Chairman of the Democratic Party, I'd schedule all the debates for MSNBC and insist on having Rachel Maddow, Lawrence O'Donnell and Stephanie Rule as moderators. And if Chairman of the Republicans, all the primary debates would be on Fox and Sean Hannity, Judge Jeanine and Tucker Carlson would moderate.

[Hotrod511]

Originally Posted by Tiny

You've got a point Yssup. It's not really a free speech issue. If I were Chairman of the Democratic Party, I'd schedule all the debates for MSNBC and insist on having Rachel Maddow, Lawrence O'Donnell and Stephanie Rule as moderators. And if Chairman of the Republicans, all the primary debates would be on Fox and Sean Hannity, Judge Jeanine and Tucker Carlson would moderate.

that would be like watching Rowan & Martin laugh in show from the 60's butt I would have Greg Gutfeld, Hannity, and Carlson

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by Hotrod511

that would be like watching Rowan & Martin laugh in show from the 60's butt I would have Greg Gutfeld, Hannity, and Carlson

Yeah, actually Greg Gutfeld and Kat Timpf would definitely be on my Fox moderator dream team. I'd watch the debate just to see Kat. I'd rather bang her than Alexandria Ocasio Cortez. The after coitus conversation would be a lot more interesting.

[the_real_Barleycorn]

Originally Posted by Tiny

You've got a point Yssup. It's not really a free speech issue. If I were Chairman of the Democratic Party, I'd schedule all the debates for MSNBC and insist on having Rachel Maddow, Lawrence O'Donnell and Stephanie Rule as moderators. And if Chairman of the Republicans, all the primary debates would be on Fox and Sean Hannity, Judge Jeanine and Tucker Carlson would moderate.

It's not really censorship according to the textbook but it is defacto censorship. Imagine a local tv station that says they won't cover anything a particular local candidate says or does. Now comes the legal aspect; the networks who rely on government licenses would be complicit after the fact in a conspiracy to censor. They should lose their license at that point.

[themystic]

Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

It's not really censorship according to the textbook but it is defacto censorship. Imagine a local tv station that says they won't cover anything a particular local candidate says or does. Now comes the legal aspect; the networks who rely on government licenses would be complicit after the fact in a conspiracy to censor. They should lose their license at that point.

If your voting rights are restored someday you will be able to bring up points like this. Until that day comes please don't interfere in adult conversations.