US Politics/2016 Election Pick Your Poison Master Thread

[Jellybelly]

And don’t say if he resigns it’ll be better bec Pence will be there. He doesn’t stand a chance against the MSM. I don’t think anyone else in the country could

[ssvarc]

I would say that most people are not including fox when they refer to the MSM bias. Note that he wrote that they are ignoring this while fox is not.

Then most are cherry-picking. If they are excluding every right leaning outlet then they are idiots with their head buried in the sand.

The usual huff and puff.

Compare the Wikipedia pages for CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS and Fox.

Which one, before the other sections, right in the leading paragraphs, mentions accusations of slanted reporting?

Correct, the first four are considered MSM, while Fox isn't.

The need to deny the obvious doesn't look good on you.

By the way, you never did tell us if you consider the Logan Act a dead letter.

Now Wikipedia is your source. ROFLMA!!!
Now you are starting with idiotic statements her.

It's a source to illustrate the commonly understood definition of MSM.

Commonly understood, that is, by those who aren't intentionally obtuse.

Keep on huffing and puffing.

Most are Trumpsters so we can both see why they would want to do it. That doesn't make it correct.

Just watch from here on out. Those that exclude right leaning MSM when saying MSM are Trumpsters. We both know why.

Stop being stupid

In reference to this thread, here is an excerpt from a comment to a NYT article.

"The reasonable questions are: Do the allegations appear to be credible? Are the descriptions consistent? Are the women making them reliable? The New Yorker article is persuasive. If Fox was saying this, it would be one thing. Fact-based reporting from reputable sources is another." (https://nyti.ms/2KMl75k)

As was pointed out, above, Fox isn't commonly thought of as MSM.

Now, let's hear some more huffing and puffing. (Perhaps something original?)

[Yammer]

The 9th circuit is said to be slanted for the D's. He is said to be slanted toward the R's.
Now are we going to have twenty pages going back and forth?

Just to compare the judge here to the one in the 9th district.

The immigration case is a legal/partisan issue so it's fully understandable that a liberal judge would strike it down. Here on the other hand the actual case is not a partisan issue, no left or right. Just a judge venting frustration on the process of a case.

The + posts about the exact wording/beliefs  were too boring for me...
 

Just like I thought, you don't understand.

The point was the person that went after Harvey and was "a prominent #metoo etc " fell on his own sword.

He can claim to be the first and only. It would be HUGE!!!

[ssvarc]

I don't recall reading about this at the time, but here is a (dated) story about another alleged direct Kerry interference with the diplomacy of the United States government.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/01/25/john-kerry-reportedly-coaches-palestinians-not-to-yield-to-trump-in-peace-talks-spurring-backlash.html

I must say, I was surprised when I read it.

Can someone tell me if I'm just ill informed. Excepting co-equal branches, is it regular for private individuals (or former administration officials) to actively work against current foreign policy (through contact with foreign governments - excluding domestic lobbying)?

(Not referring to the legality, but rather the commonality.)

Genuinely curious.

[aygart]

I don't recall reading about this at the time, but here is a (dated) story about another alleged direct Kerry interference with the diplomacy of the United States government.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/01/25/john-kerry-reportedly-coaches-palestinians-not-to-yield-to-trump-in-peace-talks-spurring-backlash.html

I must say, I was surprised when I read it.

Can someone tell me if I'm just ill informed. Excepting co-equal branches, is it regular for private individuals (or former administration officials) to actively work against current foreign policy (through contact with foreign governments - excluding domestic lobbying)?

(Not referring to the legality, but rather the commonality.)

Genuinely curious.

See Jimmy Carter

[ChaimMoskowitz]

In reference to this thread, here is an excerpt from a comment to a NYT article.

"The reasonable questions are: Do the allegations appear to be credible? Are the descriptions consistent? Are the women making them reliable? The New Yorker article is persuasive. If Fox was saying this, it would be one thing. Fact-based reporting from reputable sources is another." (https://nyti.ms/2KMl75k)

As was pointed out, above, Fox isn't commonly thought of as MSM.

Now, let's hear some more huffing and puffing. (Perhaps something original?)

I buried you in the other thread and made you look foolish. Now you are bringing your nonsense here. What's next the NBA thread?

[ssvarc]

See Jimmy Carter

Is there anything in particular where he "actively work[ed] against current foreign policy (through contact with foreign governments - excluding domestic lobbying)"?

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Just to compare the judge here to the one in the 9th district.

The immigration case is a legal/partisan issue so it's fully understandable that a liberal judge would strike it down. Here on the other hand the actual case is not a partisan issue, no left or right. Just a judge venting frustration on the process of a case.

So you believe immigration is a partisan issue but this investigation isn't? Both are partisan issues but neither should be.

 

[ChaimMoskowitz]

See Jimmy Carter

What about Jesse Jackson's visits to Cuba, Syria and other countries?

[aygart]

So you believe immigration is a partisan issue but this investigation isn't? Both are partisan issues but neither should be.

I think he meant ideological. The investigation is nothing BUT partisan.

[aygart]

Don't forget that Kerry's career is built on undermining US foreign policy. As SOS he was the fox in the henhouse. Contrast that to McCain.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Don't forget that Kerry's career is built on undermining US foreign policy.

This is your view or you have facts to back it up?

[ssvarc]

Very persuasive counter explanation. Perhaps someone should explain to you what being "buried" means, so that you can stop digging.

[aygart]

This is your view or you have facts to back it up?

It is an opinion.

[ssvarc]

What about Jesse Jackson's visits to Cuba, Syria and other countries?

How is trying to free hostages "counter to government foreign policy"?

Can you give a specific explanation or example?

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Very persuasive counter explanation. Perhaps someone should explain to you what being "buried" means, so that you can stop digging.

I buried you in the other thread and made you look foolish. Now you are bringing your nonsense here. What's next the NBA thread?

[ChaimMoskowitz]

It is an opinion.

Can you give a couple examples why you feel that way? I would assume like most here you feel the Iran deal would be one of them?

[ssvarc]

Can you give a couple examples why you feel that way? I would assume like most here you feel the Iran deal would be one of them?

His work fighting the Vietnam War.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Anyone find it ironic Trump is against his mirror image?
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/gop-primaries-gauge-the-anti-establishment-fervor-trump-helped-unleash/ar-AAwUuSA?ocid=ientp

[ChaimMoskowitz]

What possible problems could Trump have with Giuliani's statements? 
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-considers-benching-giuliani-from-doing-tv-interviews/ar-AAwUA5o?ocid=ientp