• 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!

Press encouraged to turn up heat on Trump

Ikari said:
The press should turn up the heat on each and every politician and the overarching Republocrat structure, get back to some damned journalism instead of news-entertainment. Trump, in many ways, presents himself as an easy target though and given that our pres is news-entertainment, I think we'll see them acting more aggressive towards Trump, though not in some positive way where they're assessing anything political, but rather just spewing is Trump-isms all over the place, as if Trump needs help with that.
Click to expand...

But they don't. I only half jokingly said, after Trump was elected, that Trump has put all of the investigative journalists back to work. The amount of protection they gave Obama and then Hillary was embarrassing as an American who once was proud of our free press. It has been corrupted beyond all sense of its original purpose.
 
Born Free said:
Oh so Trumps behaviour is not becoming to you. How about his policies are they becoming to you?
Click to expand...

He's not in office, but stacking his cabinet with high level CEOs bent on removing restriction and regulation on Big Corps is not a comforting start.
 
jmotivator said:
But they don't. I only half jokingly said, after Trump was elected, that Trump has put all of the investigative journalists back to work. The amount of protection they gave Obama and then Hillary was embarrassing as an American who once was proud of our free press. It has been corrupted beyond all sense of its original purpose.
Click to expand...

it was corrupted long before Obama and Hillary, and works not just for the Democrat elite.
 
AlbqOwl said:
Press encouraged to turn up heat on Trump | Washington Examiner

The video at the link is instructive if very limited in all the illustrations that could have been used.

In an election in which the coverage was so shamefully biased and relentlessly negative and questioned every word and nuance of Trump while giving Hillary much more gentle treatment, they are now encouraging the media to double down on that and get tough with Trump?

I am ashamed of the Fourth Estate that I once admired and wanted to be part of. With very few exceptions, there is no longer any attempt to be fair, balanced, or objective.

As a result, we can no longer look to the media for much in the way of the whole truth or sometimes any truth.

I am discouraged that this will be corrected in what's left of my lifetime.
Click to expand...

The alt-left and the progressives in Washington are not going to let one election destroy their identify politics roll. They are going to fight it, and double down on destroying Trump any way they can. The backlash they felt in this election was to them just an anomaly - if they ran a stronger candidate with less baggage and still called everyone that disagrees with them (__enter disgusting name calling here___) they can and still could win. Nothing has been learned; they refuse to accept it, refuse to learn, refuse to moderate their extremist positions. They are willing to destroy America and it's 240 years because the alt-left knows how it could be done better. Scientologists are tame compared to these nuts.
 
There is no alt-left. Trump benefited from ludicrous amounts of free publicity as he made ever more extreme statements testing the outer limits of his fandom and finding none.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
Slate is equating Trump with Dylann Roof, including side by side mug shots:

What gave us Donald Trump is what gave us Dylann Roof.

The Trump heaters have malfunctioned.

The brains are fried I tell ya.

SHORT CIRCUIT
Click to expand...

I'm no fan of Trump, but that's just beyond the pale and incredibly offensive. Dylann Roof is a boil on the butt of humanity and its grossly unfair to attempt to draw any comparison or similarities to Trump.
 
AGENT J said:
If this was say 1985 id want the media to turn up the heat on ALL politiciiatns BUT since its 2016 it really doesnt matter. Many have biased in one way or another and then millions of views dont really care. More PEOPLE have to care first otherwise its meaningless.
Click to expand...

I think people care a lot though. The general election this year proved it. But a newspaper's endorsement means almost nothing other than editorial bias now. They don't endorse by qualification any more but by political party or who they hate. What was most striking about this election is how little power the mainstream media was able to maintain.

Whatever anybody thinks about Donald Trump or some of the more outrageous things he tweeted, said, etc., and now watching how much more measured and non controversial he is in his public statements, I am more and more convinced all that was deliberate to get around a hostile media and go straight to the public. He got more free face time in a media determined to destroy him than probably anybody on the face of the planet. He played the media like a fiddle. And now he is President. Buffoon? No, I don't think so. I think he was brilliant.
 
Ockham said:
The alt-left and the progressives in Washington are not going to let one election destroy their identify politics roll. They are going to fight it, and double down on destroying Trump any way they can. The backlash they felt in this election was to them just an anomaly - if they ran a stronger candidate with less baggage and still called everyone that disagrees with them (__enter disgusting name calling here___) they can and still could win. Nothing has been learned; they refuse to accept it, refuse to learn, refuse to moderate their extremist positions. They are willing to destroy America and it's 240 years because the alt-left knows how it could be done better. Scientologists are tame compared to these nuts.
Click to expand...

I think it is backfiring on them though just as it is backfiring on the mainstream media. The more they try to destroy him, the more his approval ratings are coming up. Not only does he has a pretty good chance to break the vicious hate tool of political correctness in this country, he neutered a vicious and irresponsible media that probably will have to clean up its act before it will have credibility ever again.
 
Ikari said:
He's not in office, but stacking his cabinet with high level CEOs bent on removing restriction and regulation on Big Corps is not a comforting start.
Click to expand...

For me it is, Trump campaigned on getting rid of onerous regulations and restrictions. I love what he is doing, trying to bring jobs back, something liberals have never cared about.
 
AlbqOwl said:
1.) I think people care a lot though.
2.) The general election this year proved it.
3.) But a newspaper's endorsement means almost nothing other than editorial bias now. They don't endorse by qualification any more but by political party or who they hate. What was most striking about this election is how little power the mainstream media was able to maintain.
4.) Whatever anybody thinks about Donald Trump or some of the more outrageous things he tweeted, said, etc., and now watching how much more measured and non controversial he is in his public statements, I am more and more convinced all that was deliberate to get around a hostile media and go straight to the public. He got more free face time in a media determined to destroy him than probably anybody on the face of the planet. He played the media like a fiddle. And now he is President. Buffoon? No, I don't think so. I think he was brilliant.
Click to expand...

SOME people but not nearly enough and thats actually what the election proved. The rest doesn't tie into what I said at all.
 
AGENT J said:
SOME people but not nearly enough and thats actually what the election proved. The rest doesn't tie into what I said at all.
Click to expand...

Is it legal to edit a member's post like that? Why would you do that?

Enough people cared to elect Donald Trump President. That's a damn good start. And the rest of my post addressed the thread topic.
 
AlbqOwl said:
1.)Is it legal to edit a member's post like that? Why would you do that?
2.)Enough people cared to elect Donald Trump President.
3.) That's a damn good start. And the rest of my post addressed the thread topic.
Click to expand...

1.) yes its 100% legal and I was going to take each of your points but there was no need because they were unrelated to what I said LMAO
2.) which again has ZERO to do with what I said.
3.) Again nothing to do with my post and what you replied too.
 
Turn the heat up? No need, look at todays press, now he says Russia did America a favour, WTF!! I believe the man is bipolar, yesterday he doubted the hacking even existed, of course during the election he encouraged the hacking, Trump voters, thanks, you are truly the weakest link.
 
AGENT J said:
1.) yes its 100% legal and I was going to take each of your points but there was no need because they were unrelated to what I said LMAO
2.) which again has ZERO to do with what I said.
3.) Again nothing to do with my post and what you replied too.
Click to expand...

Well it is disappointing to know that one member can edit another's post whether the intent is to make it into something other than was intended or not. On most forums where I post that could get a member banned. I will snip a post sometimes to meet the character limit for posts at DP but I always indicate that I have done that. I will sometimes bold a line in a member's post that I specifically wish to address, but I always indicate I have done that. But to add numbers or words or otherwise alter a member's post SHOULD BE illegal if it is not here.

But, I am sorry that you think my post was non sequitur. I didn't think it was.
 
AlbqOwl said:
I think people care a lot though. The general election this year proved it.
Click to expand...
Not so much. Voter turnout as a percentage of the US population dropped slightly compared to 2012, to 58%. That's a LOT of eligible voters staying at home.


But a newspaper's endorsement means almost nothing other than editorial bias now. They don't endorse by qualification any more but by political party or who they hate. What was most striking about this election is how little power the mainstream media was able to maintain.
Click to expand...
I don't think that is all that clear.

The media has never been able to outright command voters. Candidates, campaign managers, PR flaks, consultants and more have been able to influence the public for decades. The media did not make up Willie Horton, or make Bill Clinton a talented orator, or feed lines to Reagan. Meanwhile, the press is able to move faster than ever, and get more inside looks at Washington than ever before.


Whatever anybody thinks about Donald Trump or some of the more outrageous things he tweeted, said, etc., and now watching how much more measured and non controversial he is in his public statements
Click to expand...
The more what he is? Are you not reading his Twitter account?

He's blasted a magazine for giving one of his restaurants a bad review; he's cast aspersions on the White House over the Russian interference in the election, multiple times; blasted the F-35 and AF1 programs; called NBC news "biased" for no apparent reason; attacked an Indiana union president, for daring to point out that Carrier sent more jobs to Mexico than it kept in the US. And that's just a week or two of Twitter.


I am more and more convinced all that was deliberate to get around a hostile media and go straight to the public. He got more free face time in a media determined to destroy him than probably anybody on the face of the planet. He played the media like a fiddle. And now he is President. Buffoon? No, I don't think so. I think he was brilliant.
Click to expand...
Yeah, well. Brilliant people don't usually run around proclaiming their own brilliance. Sounds more like Dunning-Kruger to me.

The Psychological Quirk That Explains Why You Love Donald Trump - POLITICO Magazine


Anyway.

There should be no question that the press can, and will, maintain if not increase its scrutiny of Trump. He is an enemy of transparency, and as such it will require extraordinary measures to get the administration to admit what it's doing; and it is only by watching his actions that we, the citizens, can decide whether to support or oppose those actions.

Screeching about "bias" can work for his supporters... until it doesn't. If the fate of the middle class doesn't improve, if his trade policies backfire, if his immigration policies fail, if there's a major terrorist attack on his watch? No amount of right-wing media stories, or complaining about bias, will change public perception.

In other words: There's going to be lots of negative stories about Trump. You'd better get used to it.
 
Visbek said:
snip
----------------------------------

In other words: There's going to be lots of negative stories about Trump. You'd better get used to it.
Click to expand...

But if they continue to be not fair they will continue to help Trump while ****-canning what remains of their reputations.
 
Visbek said:
Not so much. Voter turnout as a percentage of the US population dropped slightly compared to 2012, to 58%. That's a LOT of eligible voters staying at home.



I don't think that is all that clear.

The media has never been able to outright command voters. Candidates, campaign managers, PR flaks, consultants and more have been able to influence the public for decades. The media did not make up Willie Horton, or make Bill Clinton a talented orator, or feed lines to Reagan. Meanwhile, the press is able to move faster than ever, and get more inside looks at Washington than ever before.



The more what he is? Are you not reading his Twitter account?

He's blasted a magazine for giving one of his restaurants a bad review; he's cast aspersions on the White House over the Russian interference in the election, multiple times; blasted the F-35 and AF1 programs; called NBC news "biased" for no apparent reason; attacked an Indiana union president, for daring to point out that Carrier sent more jobs to Mexico than it kept in the US. And that's just a week or two of Twitter.



Yeah, well. Brilliant people don't usually run around proclaiming their own brilliance. Sounds more like Dunning-Kruger to me.

The Psychological Quirk That Explains Why You Love Donald Trump - POLITICO Magazine


Anyway.

There should be no question that the press can, and will, maintain if not increase its scrutiny of Trump. He is an enemy of transparency, and as such it will require extraordinary measures to get the administration to admit what it's doing; and it is only by watching his actions that we, the citizens, can decide whether to support or oppose those actions.

Screeching about "bias" can work for his supporters... until it doesn't. If the fate of the middle class doesn't improve, if his trade policies backfire, if his immigration policies fail, if there's a major terrorist attack on his watch? No amount of right-wing media stories, or complaining about bias, will change public perception.

In other words: There's going to be lots of negative stories about Trump. You'd better get used to it.
Click to expand...

I don't have to get used to anything. I will continue to observe this from my own perspective and believe I can be objective because I am no adoring fan of Trump and neither do I loathe, despise, and hate him as do those who can find nothing positive in him.

I also am not one who thinks the media should be in the business of trying to make a president fail and I think they do their readers/viewers a great disservice when they take on that kind of role. Color me silly, I know.

I think the media should be held every bit as accountable as the President-elect.
 
Born Free said:
For me it is, Trump campaigned on getting rid of onerous regulations and restrictions. I love what he is doing, trying to bring jobs back, something liberals have never cared about.
Click to expand...

In fact the liberals have told us those jobs are gone for good. Even the more leftists--described as 'moderate'--Republicans like John McCain have said as much.

If Donald Trump truly does not believe that, and jobs can be brought back, he just might have the ego and hutzpah to make it happen if for no other reason than he will be able to say he did it.

And you know what? I honestly don't care about anybody's motives if the results are what we want and need. That's the 'conservative' way I think. Many of the left/liberals/progressives too often don't seem to care so much about or turn a blind eye to negative results or consequences. If the motive is noble as they see that, then to them it is good.
 
upsideguy said:
Actually, the Pravda endorsed Trump. The only major newspaper/newsite to do so..

The case for Donald Trump - PravdaReport

Probably because he is Putin's puppet.
Click to expand...

Is that true? A Pravda endorsement? Or is it an American, writing for one wing of Pravda, with a less than scathing opinion of Trump? Hmmm?

Be careful of what is true being made into fake news.
 
AlbqOwl said:
1.)Well it is disappointing to know that one member can edit another's post whether the intent is to make it into something other than was intended or not. On most forums where I post that could get a member banned. I will snip a post sometimes to meet the character limit for posts at DP but I always indicate that I have done that. I will sometimes bold a line in a member's post that I specifically wish to address, but I always indicate I have done that. But to add numbers or words or otherwise alter a member's post SHOULD BE illegal if it is not here.
2.)But, I am sorry that you think my post was non sequitur. I didn't think it was.
Click to expand...

1.) LMAO your tried that lie at least 2 other times (in other threads) and each time it ends in the same result. Nobody buys it and I laugh at its dishonesty each time.
2.) it most certainly was, if you disagree you are more than free to show it was not but unless you have a much better reason, and much better logic tying it together then already presented it will end the same. That it had nothign to do with my post :)
 
It would be nice if the media didn't need to turn up the heat and maintained vigilant, tough reporting no matter who is in office.
 
No offense to anyone who supports Trump, but I think that he tweets b/c it allows him to get out a message without being asked questions. Part of his genius is to communicate directly with his followers with out the annoyance of reporters questioning his contradictions and absurdities. My prediction: perhaps he will have a press conference post inauguration, but these will be few and far between. The alleged plan to retain a private security force is another... Seems that they will keep protestors out of his eyesight. That is one of the things that scares me about him. The other aspect of his media-savvy genius is, as Karl Rove suggested, is to keep re-defining reality. By the time his story about voter fraud is debunked, he spins another tall tale or two and the media can't keep up.

Face it... We've elected a nine year old guy (see his comments on China and the recovered drone thingy) who is part Mussolini, part Foghorn Leghorn. Immigrants, refugees, and the truth will suffer, but he will entertain. First act will be confirmation hearings on his appointees.
 
Nickyjo said:
No offense to anyone who supports Trump, but I think that he tweets b/c it allows him to get out a message without being asked questions. Part of his genius is to communicate directly with his followers with out the annoyance of reporters questioning his contradictions and absurdities. My prediction: perhaps he will have a press conference post inauguration, but these will be few and far between. The alleged plan to retain a private security force is another... Seems that they will keep protestors out of his eyesight. That is one of the things that scares me about him. The other aspect of his media-savvy genius is, as Karl Rove suggested, is to keep re-defining reality. By the time his story about voter fraud is debunked, he spins another tall tale or two and the media can't keep up.

Face it... We've elected a nine year old guy (see his comments on China and the recovered drone thingy) who is part Mussolini, part Foghorn Leghorn. Immigrants, refugees, and the truth will suffer, but he will entertain. First act will be confirmation hearings on his appointees.
Click to expand...

We've had a narcissistic man-child in office for the past 8 years, I think the voters have gotten used to a President who has a adolescent level of maturity
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom