• 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!

Media Apoplectic as Khan Narrative Crumbles

blaxshep said:
The documents have been posted, deal with it.
Click to expand...

That's because you think Breitbat and Shoebat **** crazy made sense when they posted that pile of bilge.

If you actually read the 1983 article you'd know it doesn't come close to the claims you or the bat ****ters are making.

Otherwise you'd post a direct quote of him saying that.

I can find direct quotes from Khan that directly refute what you say.

So, pony up, tiger.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
No, the media didn't do that in particular: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/31/us/politics/donald-trump-abortion.html?_r=0 Note the 'if abortion is banned'
Click to expand...


Well I've seen the news about it in a couple of news channels and the news clip videos they showed didn't give the hypothetical premise.
The news clips was edited and it started with the question, ".....should the woman who's had abortion be punished."




And, given that we already know who he would pick for USSC nominees AND that his running mate has said that Roe v Wade will be overturned if they're elected, your point is rather laughably moot.
Click to expand...

He was frank in that same interview and he'd said that he is pro-life. There's no surprise that if he wins, he means to do some changes.




There simply is no credible evidence that it's rigged.

You sure you understand what that word means?
Click to expand...

Based on the urban definition of "rigged," and from what I've seen....in my view, there is clear evidence.


Bias alert: 94% of news reports blame Trump — not protesters — for campaign violence

Their bias is showing: All three major broadcast networks immediately homed in on the violence during Republican front-runner Donald Trump’s campaign rallies last weekend, to the exclusion of almost everything else.

An analysis by the Media Research Center detects agenda: “ABC, CBS and NBC news coverage found that the left-wing protesters who forced the cancellation of a presidential campaign event escaped nearly all blame, as reporters dumped 94 percent of the blame on Trump and his campaign,” the conservative watchdog group reports.

Analysts Mike Ciandella, Scott Whitlock and Kyle Drennen pored over morning and evening coverage on the three networks from Saturday morning through Monday morning — 45 segments, and almost 85 minutes of airtime. Here is what they found: Reporters criticized Mr. Trump’s campaign over the incidents 46 times. They blamed the protesters only three times, the study found.

“While a presidential candidate — especially a front-runner — should obviously be held to the highest level of scrutiny, the media’s race to blame Trump skirted the role of the left-wing activists whose goal on Friday was not just to demonstrate their opposition to Trump, but to actually force the cancellation of his campaign event,” Mr. Noyes said.
Click to expand...
Bias: 94% of broadcast news reports blame Donald Trump not protestors for campaign violence - Washington Times


The media is a very powerful tool that can manipulate - and rig - the outcome of an election.
 
Deuce said:
No, it hasn't. Some ****in blogger told you it was. You didn't check his source.
Click to expand...

Why would I doubt that a Muslim believes Sharia law supersedes all the laws of man? If he doesn't he's not a very dedicated Muslim. That would be like saying Christians don't really believe in the 10 commandments. Just how deluded are you liberals?
 
The Harvard Republican Club has endorsed every Republican nominee for 128 years, until now.

" ...Donald Trump holds views that are antithetical to our values not only as Republicans, but as Americans. The rhetoric he espouses –from racist slander to misogynistic taunts– is not consistent with our conservative principles, and his repeated mocking of the disabled and belittling of the sacrifices made by prisoners of war, Gold Star families, and Purple Heart recipients is not only bad politics, but absurdly cruel... "

https://www.facebook.com/HarvardGOP/...90758900944693
 
Manc Skipper said:
The Harvard Republican Club has endorsed every Republican nominee for 128 years, until now.

" ...Donald Trump holds views that are antithetical to our values not only as Republicans, but as Americans. The rhetoric he espouses –from racist slander to misogynistic taunts– is not consistent with our conservative principles, and his repeated mocking of the disabled and belittling of the sacrifices made by prisoners of war, Gold Star families, and Purple Heart recipients is not only bad politics, but absurdly cruel... "

https://www.facebook.com/HarvardGOP/...90758900944693
Click to expand...

In a year where voters are justifiably hostile to the status quo, why would an endorsement from the Harvard Rep Club matter?

Further, considering their statement reveals fatal flaws in terms of truth, why would voters, in general, care?

IMO, given the Harvard Rep Club appears to have accepted the lies and manipulation in reporting by the MSM and Hillary for Prez forces, I question the legitimacy of their affiliation.
 
LowDown said:
Well, no. I'm not really a big Trump supporter. Besides which, Ronald Reagan was a big democrat with extensive ties to other democrats until he came to his senses.

Sooner or later people grow up.
Click to expand...


Are you sure it wasn't the Alzheimer's which caused Ronnie to become a Republican?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom