SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the just-line-up-the-sights-on-your-toe-and-squeeeeeeze dept.
Here in the U.S., the presidential election season, like Christmas, seems to start earlier and earlier each time.
In keeping with this, the Democratic National Committee is making waves by announcing that it will exclude Fox News, which has the largest viewership of the major cable news networks by a considerable margin, from debate coverage of DNC presidential candidates.
Thomas Lifson outlines a number of reasons this may not be a good move.
One is that from a historical and strategy perspective:
Presidential debates inevitably favor the challengers. Trump can push them in that direction by agreeing to debates only if Fox News is included. That forces them to either accept FNC or have no debates at all. If they accept, that makes FNC the debate worth watching. The rest are discredited as Democrat "safe spaces,"
And it appears he has pounced and done exactly that from his twitter account:
Democrats just blocked @FoxNews from holding a debate. Good, then I think I’ll do the same thing with the Fake News Networks and the Radical Left Democrats in the General Election debates!
Really all either party has to do is A) not be crazy and/or B) keep their idiot mouths shut to win.
Neither of these seems to be in the cards dealt to either side, so it should be a heck of a ride.
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Monday March 11 2019, @04:04PM (6 children)
The current level of vitriol is somewhat new. At least, before Obama it didn't seem anywhere near this bad. Perhaps I just didn't pay enough attention to politics, before that.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 3, Informative) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday March 11 2019, @05:50PM
They were really fucking nasty [merriam-webster.com] back before national media was a thing.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Monday March 11 2019, @06:16PM (1 child)
Obama contributed, I think. Rewrite your sentence to make it more accurate.
Obama did do some stupid shit, as all presidents do. But Hillary was responsible for the birther movement. Hillary called half the population of the US "deplorables". Hillary wanted so very badly to be the first woman president to invade a foreign nation.
We don't see the snowflakes whining and crying about what we did or didn't do to Obama. It's all about Hillary. While, at the same time, those same lefties have forgotten all about how Hillary corrupted the party, and stabbed Bernie in the back. Hillary divided this nation more than Nixon, or any other recent president has done.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 11 2019, @10:44PM
Don't forget the superpredators. Racism and misandry all in one package.
But, I think she was talking about more than half with deplorables. It's probably code for "working class."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 11 2019, @10:22PM (1 child)
Who cares about vitriol? What we need is policy substance. If that's accompanies by vitriol, then so be it. And, if there's no policy substance, then the problem is with that, not with vitriol.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday March 12 2019, @01:30AM
I know! Just add hydrogen peroxide as the substance.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Monday March 11 2019, @10:37PM
Perhaps I just didn't pay enough attention to politics, before that.
You sure didn't! [mentalfloss.com]
And the Romans, well! Things went a little further, didn't they?
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..