• 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!

CNBC lays out its bias for all to see.

F

fmw

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2013
Messages
14,520
Reaction score
3,785
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
The news this morning has been all about how bad the CNBC moderators were during the republican debate. A good example is John Harwood who attacked Rubio's tax plan saying that it helped the rich more than it helped the poor. He forgot that tweets stay on the internet because he had corrected that position in writing well prior to the debate. Read more here. Surprise! John Harwood Lied About Marco Rubio's Tax Plan
 
fmw said:
The news this morning has been all about how bad the CNBC moderators were during the republican debate. A good example is John Harwood who attacked Rubio's tax plan saying that it helped the rich more than it helped the poor. He forgot that tweets stay on the internet because he had corrected that position in writing well prior to the debate. Read more here. Surprise! John Harwood Lied About Marco Rubio's Tax Plan
Click to expand...

Harwood's highly partisan. Everybody is partisan to some extent, but for a journalist he fails the objectivity test spectacularly. I'm not surprised at Harwood or the conduct of the moderators in the debate. I had my own debate deciding on whether to bother watching it or not because of the anticipated conduct of the moderators. I'm still scratching my head over the RNC ever considering CNBC for a debate for those reasons. What did the RNC expect?
 
humbolt said:
Harwood's highly partisan. Everybody is partisan to some extent, but for a journalist he fails the objectivity test spectacularly. I'm not surprised at Harwood or the conduct of the moderators in the debate. I had my own debate deciding on whether to bother watching it or not because of the anticipated conduct of the moderators. I'm still scratching my head over the RNC ever considering CNBC for a debate for those reasons. What did the RNC expect?
Click to expand...

One has to assume they didn't want criticism for excluding left leaning networks from the process. I did the right thing, however. I watched the KC Royals crush the NY Mets. I don't watch debates. I don't care what politicians say. I care what they do.
 
fmw said:
The news this morning has been all about how bad the CNBC moderators were during the republican debate. A good example is John Harwood who attacked Rubio's tax plan saying that it helped the rich more than it helped the poor. He forgot that tweets stay on the internet because he had corrected that position in writing well prior to the debate. Read more here. Surprise! John Harwood Lied About Marco Rubio's Tax Plan
Click to expand...

You know, in the CNN debate, the CNN moderators were strict and very forward with the Democrats, but they were not disrespectful.

John Harwood was not just disrespectful, he was obviously trying to do harm to the candidates. Cartoon candidacy right off the bat? It was shameful how he was allowed to act - agree with the candidates or not, like the candidates or not, they all, Republican and Democrat alike, deserve respect for their success in life so far, and their wish to serve the nation as President.
 
It's notable that it's even possible for the media to show its ass to such a biased degree as this anymore. That's hard to do.

Next time, just let Hillary and Bernie ask the questions.
 
Beaudreaux said:
You know, in the CNN debate, the CNN moderators were strict and very forward with the Democrats, but they were not disrespectful.

John Harwood was not just disrespectful, he was obviously trying to do harm to the candidates. Cartoon candidacy right off the bat? It was shameful how he was allowed to act - agree with the candidates or not, like the candidates or not, they all, Republican and Democrat alike, deserve respect for their success in life so far, and their wish to serve the nation as President.
Click to expand...

I agree. The reports about CNN were positive and painted the CNN moderators as professional. I think last night may put a black mark on Harwood's reputation, at least temporarily. The moderators are there to ask questions designed to inform the public about the candidates' positions not to argue with the candidates or attack them.
 
fmw said:
One has to assume they didn't want criticism for excluding left leaning networks from the process. I did the right thing, however. I watched the KC Royals crush the NY Mets. I don't watch debates. I don't care what politicians say. I care what they do.
Click to expand...

I watched last night. Unfortunately. CNBC has managed to become the main story, and not the content of the debate. On the plus side, I don't think CNBC has helped themselves in the long run with their effort last night. They richly deserve all the crap they get over this.
 
His plan is different from the usual GOP plans, I'll give him that.
 
humbolt said:
Harwood's highly partisan. Everybody is partisan to some extent, but for a journalist he fails the objectivity test spectacularly. I'm not surprised at Harwood or the conduct of the moderators in the debate. I had my own debate deciding on whether to bother watching it or not because of the anticipated conduct of the moderators. I'm still scratching my head over the RNC ever considering CNBC for a debate for those reasons. What did the RNC expect?
Click to expand...

Harwood knew what he was doing as his intent was to be a hero at the media's cocktail reception.
 
David_N said:
His plan is different from the usual GOP plans, I'll give him that.
Click to expand...

Yes and all the plans are designed to simplify the code and reduce crony capitalism. Having a 72,000 page tax code just demonstrates how incompetent and corrupt the government really is.
 
bubbabgone said:
Harwood knew what he was doing as his intent was to be a hero at the media's cocktail reception.
Click to expand...

Somehow I think his heroism may be met with restrained enthusiasm.
 
bubbabgone said:
Harwood knew what he was doing as his intent was to be a hero at the media's cocktail reception.
Click to expand...
We'll see how much they admire him when they find out their ratings are sucking ass even more after this debate.
 
CNN and CNBC are really showing their anti-Republican bias, by setting the Republican candidates against each other and with stupid insulting questions directly to the candidates, while nothing but softball questions and a love fest for the Democratic candidates. Enough to make you sick.

Any claims of 'there is no media bias' have just been totally and irrevocably invalidated.
The media's anti-Republican bias and pro-Democratic is clearly there for all to see.
 
eohrnberger said:
CNN and CNBC are really showing their anti-Republican bias, by setting the Republican candidates against each other and with stupid insulting questions directly to the candidates, while nothing but softball questions and a love fest for the Democratic candidates. Enough to make you sick.

Any claims of 'there is no media bias' have just been totally and irrevocably invalidated.
The media's anti-Republican bias and pro-Democratic is clearly there for all to see.
Click to expand...
The Fox debate is the only one that got complements, and deservedly so.
 
This post is a bit confusing for me. I read the US News fact check and they confirmed the statement made by John Harwood during the debate.
 
American said:
We'll see how much they admire him when they find out their ratings are sucking ass even more after this debate.
Click to expand...

CNBC is busy today renegotiating their inclusion in cable bundled packages to assure they still have a slot. It's the only way those losers can stay in business.
 
MrT said:
This post is a bit confusing for me. I read the US News fact check and they confirmed the statement made by John Harwood during the debate.
Click to expand...

John Harwood admitted in writing that it was wrong. You can read the tweets in the linked article. US News needs to improve its fact checking. Mainstream media supporting the main stream media.
 
fmw said:
The news this morning has been all about how bad the CNBC moderators were during the republican debate. A good example is John Harwood who attacked Rubio's tax plan saying that it helped the rich more than it helped the poor. He forgot that tweets stay on the internet because he had corrected that position in writing well prior to the debate. Read more here. Surprise! John Harwood Lied About Marco Rubio's Tax Plan
Click to expand...

Looks like he had a Candy Crowley moment.
 
fmw said:
Yes and all the plans are designed to simplify the code and reduce crony capitalism. Having a 72,000 page tax code just demonstrates how incompetent and corrupt the government really is.
Click to expand...

It also raises taxes on the middle class with a 35% rate on incomes above $75,000. How he thinks that will fly with voters I don't know. Those in the middle class are the spenders in the economy, taxing them more is suicide. We need more rate classes not less.
 
They should have brought in Al Sharpton and Kim Kardashian as moderators. They were the only things missing from that spectacle. Harwood is an asshole. Always has been, always will be. No surprise he lied.
 
American said:
The Fox debate is the only one that got complements, and deservedly so.
Click to expand...

I would think so. By far, the most even handed, issues centric presidential debate we've had to date.
 
Beaudreaux said:
You know, in the CNN debate, the CNN moderators were strict and very forward with the Democrats, but they were not disrespectful.

John Harwood was not just disrespectful, he was obviously trying to do harm to the candidates. Cartoon candidacy right off the bat? It was shameful how he was allowed to act - agree with the candidates or not, like the candidates or not, they all, Republican and Democrat alike, deserve respect for their success in life so far, and their wish to serve the nation as President.
Click to expand...

that is about like the time that chris Matthews and I think it was wolf blitzer were fired from covering the RNC that one year.
they were so horrible about it that they lost any and all respect as journalists not that either had any to begin with.
 
eohrnberger said:
I would think so. By far, the most even handed, issues centric presidential debate we've had to date.
Click to expand...

you wouldn't see Hillary or sanders sign up for a fox news debate. they would get slaughtered.
 
In the end what the CNBC debate showed was the distain the biased media has for the candidates attempting to wrest the nomination for presidency of America. Anyone with a modicum of logic could plainly see and hear the contempt, disrespect and dislike shown by the moderators to those on the stage. Then again we can all see that everything that NBC did toward the planning for the debate was geared to demean and humiliate the participants and even the audience. I understand that the auditorium could hold up to 11,000, while NBC only issued 1,000 seats. Something is wrong at NBC, are they so ideologically bent that they cannot practice their profession of Journalism honestly? If so they have no business in journalism or the business of broadcasting the news.
 
iguanaman said:
It also raises taxes on the middle class with a 35% rate on incomes above $75,000. How he thinks that will fly with voters I don't know. Those in the middle class are the spenders in the economy, taxing them more is suicide. We need more rate classes not less.
Click to expand...

We need reduced government spending so the rates don't have to be so high.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom