|
Post by donkey on Sept 11, 2024 10:28:29 GMT -5
What? Liberal late show hosts with TDS mocked Trump? LoL...you don't say. Well I'll be a monkey's uncle.
|
|
|
Post by donkey on Sept 11, 2024 10:31:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by eulenspiegel on Sept 11, 2024 11:26:17 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by donkey on Sept 11, 2024 11:29:56 GMT -5
If Jackie would be a guest, I'd hold my nose and watch Jackie's appearance. Betting markets have barely budged. Trump is till the favorite in the betting markets, Betting markets change constantly, and arent an accurate tool to predict elections anyway.
|
|
|
Post by donkey on Sept 11, 2024 11:31:19 GMT -5
/photo/1
|
|
|
Post by donkey on Sept 11, 2024 11:33:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by donkey on Sept 11, 2024 11:34:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by donkey on Sept 11, 2024 11:36:03 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by donkey on Sept 11, 2024 11:40:00 GMT -5
/photo/2
|
|
|
Post by eulenspiegel on Sept 11, 2024 11:44:02 GMT -5
These all joke medias..polling does not work like that…it‘s not like asking Patriots fans ..which is the best AF club… Or asking in a Patriots fan forum en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leading_Report
|
|
|
Post by donkey on Sept 11, 2024 11:44:24 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by eulenspiegel on Sept 11, 2024 11:45:22 GMT -5
Come on..Dr. Phil is a clown..no real scientist, psych takes him serious..
|
|
|
Post by donkey on Sept 11, 2024 11:47:04 GMT -5
This clip may be the most egregious example of ABC debate moderators' direct actions/inactions to affect viewers’ perceptions of the information presented at the debate.
There are at least seven instances of this within a two-minute span.
This is not “bias."
It’s much worse.
This is direct, planned interference in the debate outcome. When moderators take on the role of “fact checkers" the inference is that the absence of a “fact check” confers validity to the non-fact-checked information.
When one side is repeatedly “fact checked,” while the other is not, that is a signal to the viewer that one side is not reliable and truthful, while the other side is.
The ABC moderators had their orders, and here you see those orders executed.
In this clip:
1) Trump says Pelosi is responsible for security at the Capitol. True. Muir intervenes on Kamala’s behalf by cutting him off with snarky retort, doesn’t acknowledging the validity of Trump’s statement, and immediately redirects to Kamala to set up her “answer" he knows is coming. This is direct action by Muir to affect the outcome of this exchange.
2) Kamala says she was at the Capitol on J6. She was there in the morning, but left to go to DNC HQ prior to the riot. Critical information is omitted. No fact-check.
3) Kamala says Trump incited a mob to attack the Capitol. False. Trump’s “peacefully and patriotically” comments are ignored. Trump is not charged with inciting violence. No fact check.
4) Kamala says that “some" police officers died on January 6. False. No fact check.
5) Kamala recites the Charlottesville “Fine People” hoax. This has been thoroughly and repeatedly debunked. No fact check.
6) Kamala recites the “stand back and stand by” hoax. This is designed to infer that Trump was ordering a “militia” to act on later orders, when he was clearly asking for a cooling of tensions. No fact check.
7) Kamala recites the “bloodbath" hoax. Trump was talking about the automobile industry, not violence. No fact check.
To quote Megyn Kelly on the ABC moderators:
"They did exactly what their bosses wanted."
|
|
|
Post by eulenspiegel on Sept 11, 2024 11:51:41 GMT -5
This clip may be the most egregious example of ABC debate moderators' direct actions/inactions to affect viewers’ perceptions of the information presented at the debate. There are at least seven instances of this within a two-minute span. This is not “bias." It’s much worse. This is direct, planned interference in the debate outcome. When moderators take on the role of “fact checkers" the inference is that the absence of a “fact check” confers validity to the non-fact-checked information. When one side is repeatedly “fact checked,” while the other is not, that is a signal to the viewer that one side is not reliable and truthful, while the other side is. The ABC moderators had their orders, and here you see those orders executed. In this clip:
1) Trump says Pelosi is responsible for security at the Capitol. True. Muir intervenes on Kamala’s behalf by cutting him off with snarky retort, doesn’t acknowledging the validity of Trump’s statement, and immediately redirects to Kamala to set up her “answer" he knows is coming. This is direct action by Muir to affect the outcome of this exchange.
2) Kamala says she was at the Capitol on J6. She was there in the morning, but left to go to DNC HQ prior to the riot. Critical information is omitted. No fact-check.
3) Kamala says Trump incited a mob to attack the Capitol. False. Trump’s “peacefully and patriotically” comments are ignored. Trump is not charged with inciting violence. No fact check.
4) Kamala says that “some" police officers died on January 6. False. No fact check.
5) Kamala recites the Charlottesville “Fine People” hoax. This has been thoroughly and repeatedly debunked. No fact check.
6) Kamala recites the “stand back and stand by” hoax. This is designed to infer that Trump was ordering a “militia” to act on later orders, when he was clearly asking for a cooling of tensions. No fact check.
7) Kamala recites the “bloodbath" hoax. Trump was talking about the automobile industry, not violence. No fact check.
To quote Megyn Kelly on the ABC moderators:
"They did exactly what their bosses wanted." Come on..Trump was lying..it is the job of a journalist to fact check…btw. Harris should have complained…Trump was not clocked..multiple times he was not stopped with his rants..not following the rules.
|
|
|
Post by donkey on Sept 11, 2024 11:51:43 GMT -5
Donald J. Trump
In the World of Boxing or UFC, when a Fighter gets beaten or knocked out, they get up and scream, “I DEMAND A REMATCH, I DEMAND A REMATCH!” Well, it’s no different with a Debate. She was beaten badly last night. Every Poll has us WINNING, in one case, 92-8, so why would I do a Rematch?
|
|