• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Romney vs Putin? Are you kidding me, he's afraid of cub reporters

L

leftofabbie

Well-known member
Joined
May 11, 2012
Messages
723
Reaction score
86
Location
North Woods Wisconsin
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Progressive
So what's Mitt afraid of? That someone will ask an embarrassing question? That someone will get an "unscripted moment"?

Once again, the Guardians Of Plutocracy are terrified of the American People and the Press.

Presidential? Maybe, if some yacht or polo club is looking for a new leader. The United States? Not so much.



http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/17/u...rters-access-and-rope-line-ruckus-erupts.html



ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. — The Romney campaign is known for its hyper-disciplined approach to the news media. Question-and-answer sessions with reporters are rare. Aides avoid on-the-record briefings. And the candidate’s latest outreach to voters, a series of casual meetings with middle-class Americans, is shielded from public view.

After Mitt Romney’s speech here, campaign aides told members of the traveling press corps that they could not approach either the audience or the rope line where Mr. Romney shakes voters’ hands and casually speaks with them. Access to such interactions has long been a zealously protected staple of presidential campaign reporting that allows reporters to capture unscripted moments and pose questions to candidates (who typically ignore or pretend not to hear them).​
 
Dude...you make some of the strangest connections, eh?

Somehow, you connect how Romney will act toward Putin...from an article about how he acts toward the press. This is idiocy.

Anyway, I don't have a problem with how Romney acts toward the press. Why do you?
 
Mycroft said:
Anyway, I don't have a problem with how Romney acts toward the press. Why do you?
Click to expand...


Because I want the American electorate to know as much as possible about their candidates before the election. Why should Romney get a pass from being asked questions?
 
leftofabbie said:
Because I want the American electorate to know as much as possible about their candidates before the election. Why should Romney get a pass from being asked questions?
Click to expand...

shrug...

I think a good portion of the American electorate have already made up their minds. For the ones who haven't, there are many resources for finding all they want about any candidate. The only thing stopping their research is laziness. Heck, from my perspective, it wouldn't matter to me if the media ignored all candidates.
 
leftofabbie said:
Because I want the American electorate to know as much as possible about their candidates before the election. Why should Romney get a pass from being asked questions?
Click to expand...



What the hell does putin have to do with this silly thread..... Second.... Didn't Obama avoid all press that didn't swoon over him? :yes:
 
Mycroft said:
shrug...

I think a good portion of the American electorate have already made up their minds. For the ones who haven't, there are many resources for finding all they want about any candidate. The only thing stopping their research is laziness. Heck, from my perspective, it wouldn't matter to me if the media ignored all candidates.
Click to expand...


So if new information comes to light, those people can't change their minds? (see my sig line)
 
leftofabbie said:
So if new information comes to light, those people can't change their minds? (see my sig line)
Click to expand...

Well, I will vote for Romney for two reasons:

1. I want the Republicans to gain control of the government...either by keeping the House and gaining the Senate, keeping the House and gaining the Presidency or by taking all three.

2. I want Obama out of there.

Because of those two reasons, it doesn't matter to me WHAT new information comes to light. Frankly, I see any new information as being only a weapon to be used by those who oppose any particular candidate...whether that new information is relevant or not. Witness the "bully" issue that you made such a big deal of. Something like that won't change many minds...and certainly not mine.. but you sure made hay with it.

The only information that really matters...such as stands on issues like unemployment, the deficit, the debt, etc...has already been expressed by the candidates. It's already out there. Anything anyone needs to make an informed decision is just an internet search away.
 
leftofabbie said:
No, he didn't duck anything, and still hasn't to the best of my knowledge. Do you have any evidence that he did/does?
Click to expand...


ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. — The Romney campaign is known for its hyper-disciplined approach to the news media. Question-and-answer sessions with reporters are rare. Aides avoid on-the-record briefings. And the candidate’s latest outreach to voters, a series of casual meetings with middle-class Americans, is shielded from public view.

After Mitt Romney’s speech here, campaign aides told members of the traveling press corps that they could not approach either the audience or the rope line where Mr. Romney shakes voters’ hands and casually speaks with them. Access to such interactions has long been a zealously protected staple of presidential campaign reporting that allows reporters to capture unscripted moments and pose questions to candidates (who typically ignore or pretend not to hear them).
Click to expand...

So, Romney limits reporter access with a ropeline that allows him to approach voters so reporters dont crowd them out.

Uhm...good?

A lot of mainstream reporters have become entitled little tyrants that think they are kingmakers. The mindset seems to be any limitation means something to hide, that isnt always true.

Obama is notoriously thin skinned with regards to questions he deems out of bounds. He couldnt handle a half hour interview with even Jake Tapper and hes even handedly fair, not hostile. There is no doubt that several major newspapers have reporters that are overtly hostile to Romney and his campaign.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Can you link to his last interview on say FOX news?
Click to expand...

Well, putting aside the fact that Fox is not a "news" outlet but rather a hyperpartisan propaganda machine for wealthy (and mostly foreign) interests, there's this:

Obama takes questions from Fox all the time. A Fox reporter was given the seat in the front of the White House Press Corps after Helen Thomas resigned.

How craven is the Beltway Village? WH Press Corps awards front-row seat to Fox | Crooks and Liars
 
Last edited:
leftofabbie said:
Well, putting aside the fact that Fox is not a "news" outlet but rather a hyperpartisan propaganda machine for wealthy (and mostly foreign) interests, there's this:

Obama takes questions from Fox all the time. A Fox reporter was given the seat in the front of the White House Press Corps after Helen Thomas resigned.

How craven is the Beltway Village? WH Press Corps awards front-row seat to Fox | Crooks and Liars
Click to expand...



So you say what about FOX and you link to "crooksandliars"? You aren't being serious, are you? :lamo
 
leftofabbie said:
Well, Rushbo didn't report on this, so I had to use a source that exposes crooks and liars.
Click to expand...



Don't listen to rush, all your doing is showing your hackery is equal to those you scorn. Fox is as much (which is none) "news" as MSNBC, which he does interviews on. Please leave out the partisan hack links unless you wish to have them mocked. Thanks. This Ain't DU. We think here.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Don't listen to rush, all your doing is showing your hackery is equal to those you scorn. Fox is as much (which is none) "news" as MSNBC, which he does interviews on. Please leave out the partisan hack links unless you wish to have them mocked. Thanks. This Ain't DU. We think here.
Click to expand...

Lefty is certainly finding this out.
 
leftofabbie said:
I would characterize it more as a "dismissal" than a "concession".
Click to expand...



Yes, given your closed mind, and this weird thread (putin???), I bet you choose to dismiss rather than address... I'd dismiss my points to if I were you, they are incompatible with your bias and reality you have created for yourself.
 
leftofabbie said:
I would characterize it more as a "dismissal" than a "concession".
Click to expand...

You shouldnt dismiss it Lefto...hyper partisanship will always be challenged. Your being a hyper partisan guarantees you will make one sided claims that are untrue and merely opinion and they will be vigorously challenged.
Im a lucky guy...I make no bones about being standing right in the middle, so I can look to the left and tell them they suck and then turn to the right and tell them the same thing....I think the real truth lies smack out of the reach of both the far left and the far right.
 
lpast said:
You shouldnt dismiss it Lefto...hyper partisanship will always be challenged. Your being a hyper partisan guarantees you will make one sided claims that are untrue and merely opinion and they will be vigorously challenged.
Im a lucky guy...I make no bones about being standing right in the middle, so I can look to the left and tell them they suck and then turn to the right and tell them the same thing....I think the real truth lies smack out of the reach of both the far left and the far right.
Click to expand...


I can't help it if the facts have a liberal bias.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom