• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

CNN Townhall

D

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
25,575
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
I missed it. Anybody watch it?

How did Trump come across? Based on this performance, do you think he is less or more likely to win the nomination/presidency than before?
 
I saw a couple of clips on Twitter. It’s exactly what you would expect. It will have played well to his audience.

He was coherent in the way that the elderly Trump is able to be coherent: petulant, unrepentant. Aggrieved. Self centered.

I saw a couple of wide shots that showed some dressed up white boys cheering/chortling like they were watching and admiring an episode of Jackass, if that show is what I think it is. It’s not my thing. Really, I think he attracts a certain demographic that thinks of him as a grumpy old grandpa who gives no fucks and sticks it to The Man, with the usual racist seasoning one expects from Trump.

I can’t comment on whether this performance is more or less likely to help him get the nomination. He’s Trump only 7 years older. …and deeper in debt.

I think inflation will hurt Biden. I think the general public has little to no understanding that a POTUS cannot simply reverse all the things the firmer guy had put into place. Trump was clever enough to sabotage enough to make it hard to climb out of his morass in a few years.

Worst of all, and most unfortunately, he has given enough cover to a lot of people who are…white supremacist or leaning that way that they are emboldened and brazen.

I know you think I’m a far left radical but I actually think that it’s important that change—progress be made slowly, so that people have an opportunity to adjust and to correct missteps, glitches, any direction that turns out to not be a good one as they come up.
 
If CNN want to be the next FOX this Townhall was an excellent first step.

This youtube clip? CNN made the decision to do the exact opposite.



I hope CNN viewers feel better "informed".
 
I think CNN is seeing Trump like Howard Stern. People that love and hate him tune in. FYI, I won't.
 
Patooka said:
If CNN want to be the next FOX this Townhall was an excellent first step.

This youtube clip? CNN made the decision to do the exact opposite.



I hope CNN viewers feel better "informed".
Click to expand...

I mean wasn't it already, kind of?

As it is I see NYT articles calling the judge in the case the "rape judge" or whatever and I say to myself "regardless of what the article says, that headline is designed to flip folks towards hating the judge, I see headlines which typify progressives as terrorists and which typify terrorists as "protestors", I can't help but think there is something stinking like a fish.

The only question between Faux and CNN and the NYT is how well they hide the fact that they're both pushing viewers the same direction.

If a network talks about the 1/6 terrorists as anything other than terrorist traitors, seditionists, then it's pretty easy to understand that their real motives are to produce a slide towards the right that will be felt by those on the left.
 
Jarhyn said:
Patooka said:
If CNN want to be the next FOX this Townhall was an excellent first step.

This youtube clip? CNN made the decision to do the exact opposite.



I hope CNN viewers feel better "informed".
Click to expand...

I mean wasn't it already, kind of?

As it is I see NYT articles calling the judge in the case the "rape judge" or whatever and I say to myself "regardless of what the article says, that headline is designed to flip folks towards hating the judge, I see headlines which typify progressives as terrorists and which typify terrorists as "protestors", I can't help but think there is something stinking like a fish.

The only question between Faux and CNN and the NYT is how well they hide the fact that they're both pushing viewers the same direction.

If a network talks about the 1/6 terrorists as anything other than terrorist traitors, seditionists, then it's pretty easy to understand that their real motives are to produce a slide towards the right that will be felt by those on the left.
Click to expand...

"Both sides" though, right?
 
CNN is just shit really. They have a great election coverage set up, but otherwise, it is banal news coverage. This Trump deal is disturbing because it treats it more like entertainment than actual news. The guy was just found civilly guilty for sexual abuse of a woman... and CNN lacked the class to pause this right-wing circle jerk? Might as well been an informercial.

This guy incited a riot at the US Capitol... and CNN is giving him free air time to say whatever the heck he wants?! His stupidity and lying was novel before he won in 2016. And CNN seems to want to use it for ratings, post everything he has done. CNN wasn't much news wise, but, they dropped a large amount (despite the low height to begin with), with this stunt. They fire Don Lemon and then do this?!
 
Patooka said:
Jarhyn said:
Patooka said:
If CNN want to be the next FOX this Townhall was an excellent first step.

This youtube clip? CNN made the decision to do the exact opposite.



I hope CNN viewers feel better "informed".
Click to expand...

I mean wasn't it already, kind of?

As it is I see NYT articles calling the judge in the case the "rape judge" or whatever and I say to myself "regardless of what the article says, that headline is designed to flip folks towards hating the judge, I see headlines which typify progressives as terrorists and which typify terrorists as "protestors", I can't help but think there is something stinking like a fish.

The only question between Faux and CNN and the NYT is how well they hide the fact that they're both pushing viewers the same direction.

If a network talks about the 1/6 terrorists as anything other than terrorist traitors, seditionists, then it's pretty easy to understand that their real motives are to produce a slide towards the right that will be felt by those on the left.
Click to expand...

"Both sides" though, right?
Click to expand...

The normal "both sides" narrative says "don't object to the people being bad, because everyone is a little bad". I'm saying "do object to the people being bad, to the extent they are bad."

I think the progressives on the left need to recognize and call out people on our side who are oiling the floor no matter it's elevation at that point.

There are ethical issues with the gradient put on both sides, and if you want to stand in the place that you are and step where it is reasonable, it doesn't pay to try to make footing on the higher part of the funnel, it make sense to step out of the funnel.

"Both sides" as a dishonest tactic says "step to the bottom of the funnel, since over there is also funnel". It's a call to ignore the descent. I am making an explicit call to stop supporting those who shape all parts of the floor as a funnel, especially those who angle it into the hole (such as Faux).
 
The OP was about the CNN Trump Townhall shit fest. Not about whatever issue you seem to want to expand the thread onto. You also didn't cite the "rape judge" accusation.
 
Jarhyn said:
The normal "both sides" narrative says "don't object to the people being bad, because everyone is a little bad". I'm saying "do object to the people being bad, to the extent they are bad."

I think the progressives on the left need to recognize and call out people on our side who are oiling the floor no matter it's elevation at that point.

There are ethical issues with the gradient put on both sides, and if you want to stand in the place that you are and step where it is reasonable, it doesn't pay to try to make footing on the higher part of the funnel, it make sense to step out of the funnel.

"Both sides" as a dishonest tactic says "step to the bottom of the funnel, since over there is also funnel". It's a call to ignore the descent. I am making an explicit call to stop supporting those who shape all parts of the floor as a funnel, especially those who angle it into the hole (such as Faux).
Click to expand...
I was trying to be clever and was making a shorthand about the false equivalency of "both sides" in today's current political climate. For example you mentioned Jan6 and the most obvious counter argument from fascists and white supremacists is comparing that to George Floyd protests. Whilst ignoring the fact nearly 99% of such protests were peaceful and had legitimate grievances unlike Jan6.

I also believe thing are so extreme nowadays that holding the right to account is more necessary than auditing leftists. It's about stopping what can do the most harm first.
 
I wonder if (and please, hear me out) there is not some kind of utility in CNN interviewing Trump and broadcasting it? Don't we all deserve to know if he's still as trumpy as ever? I only watched a couple of short clips of the interview and the person interviewing him did not just lob soft balls in his direction. I think I saw reference to him calling her a nasty person or a nasty woman when she asked a tough question about why he didn't comply with a subpoena for the classified documents?

Like I said: I didn't watch the interview.
 
The failure is with CNN, not the inexperienced person they threw to the wolves.
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
The failure is with CNN, not the inexperienced person they threw to the wolves.
Click to expand...
I don't think that Caitlin Collins was inexperienced. I think she did as well as anyone, including if we could resurrect Walter Cronkite and Barbara Walters and had them plus, Berstien and Woodward, all in their prime conduct the interview, we'd have had much of a different interview.
 
The whole thing was a failure. It never should have happened. Nor provided a WWE like audience in support of him.

As far as interviewing Trump, you'd need a very good psychologist or a top quality hostage negotiator. Someone that is trained to deal with Trump's mental illness.
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
The whole thing was a failure. It never should have happened. Nor provided a WWE like audience in support of him.

As far as interviewing Trump, you'd need a very good psychologist or a top quality hostage negotiator. Someone that is trained to deal with Trump's mental illness.
Click to expand...
My guess is that Trump demanded a friendly audience or would refuse the interview.
 
ZiprHead said:
Jimmy Higgins said:
The whole thing was a failure. It never should have happened. Nor provided a WWE like audience in support of him.

As far as interviewing Trump, you'd need a very good psychologist or a top quality hostage negotiator. Someone that is trained to deal with Trump's mental illness.
Click to expand...
My guess is that Trump demanded a friendly audience or would refuse the interview.
Click to expand...
Well, that'd be a pretty safe assumption. The question is, why in the heck did CNN say yes, other than for ratings. You can't interview Trump, much like interviewing Nixon was difficult, but for somewhat different reasons. Nixon was a skilled and bright politician. Trump is either a very gifted or very bad liar, but ultimately, the result is the same. The trouble interviewing liars like Trump is that you don't know where he'll take it. You can't prep for it as a journalist, you need to be trained for it as a doctor or negoiator.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom