• 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!

Donna Brazile finally admits she shared debate questions with Clinton campaign

RickJames3000 said:
The entire argument here is about your contention that the MSM is suffering from "self-inflicted wounds".
And the only evidence you've provided to bolster your claim is a pair of goofy polls that have absolutely no resonance in the real world.

The reality is that the MSM has seen increased ratings, more profits, and a wave of new attention from audiences representing the entire political spectrum.
It doesn't matter if you don't think that's fair.
Your emotions don't matter to the media corporations.
Click to expand...

The self inflicted wounds are reflected in the polls you are laughably trying to dismiss.

The left's MSM partners have decided to erase a large portion of the audience market in order to attract a smaller portion attracted to their liberal agenda.

Your claim about attracting "the entire political spectrum" is totally unsupported by any data. In other words, you're just making that up.

Perhaps you could post something more than your biased opinion to support your claims.
 
ocean515 said:
The self inflicted wounds are reflected in the polls you are laughably trying to dismiss.

The left's MSM partners have decided to erase a large portion of the audience market in order to attract a smaller portion attracted to their liberal agenda.

Your claim about attracting "the entire political spectrum" is totally unsupported by any data. In other words, you're just making that up.

Perhaps you could post something more than your biased opinion to support your claims.
Click to expand...

Higher Ratings/Huge profits > Low Poll Numbers. Simple as that.

Do you think the GOP-led Congress gives a crap about their low approval rating?
Their poll numbers have been in the toilet for YEARS, and yet somehow they continue to achieve their single objective... to stay in power.

The media's goal is to MAKE MONEY... not please their critics.
They are succeeding wildly, and in great health, and look to remain so for the foreseeable future.

Your position is entirely dictated by your emotions, and that is why your argument is failing.
 
RickJames3000 said:
Higher Ratings/Huge profits > Low Poll Numbers. Simple as that.

Do you think the GOP-led Congress gives a crap about their low approval rating?
Their poll numbers have been in the toilet for YEARS, and yet somehow they continue to achieve their single objective... to stay in power.

The media's goal is to MAKE MONEY... not please their critics.
They are succeeding wildly, and in great health, and look to remain so for the foreseeable future.

Your position is entirely dictated by your emotions, and that is why your argument is failing.
Click to expand...

It's pretty clear you have no clue what you're talking about, so I leave it at that.

You might try learn something about the media business. It would be a step in the right direction if you want to debate the topic.
 
RickJames3000 said:
I don't know the answers to your questions about Hillary.
But it really doesn't seem to be on the Trump administration's agenda to address any issues regarding HRC.

Trump doesn't seem at all concerned about those accusations.
Why do you think that might be?
Click to expand...

We have this tradition in US politics of not going after the other side with all your new power. Granted Clinton, Inc. is an extreme case, but we just don't feel that it's in the best intersts of the country to make martyrs of former opponents, (apparently) no matter how crooked they are.

Third world countries do that.

But in return the opposition doesn't do that to the other side when power changes hands.
 
ocean515 said:
It's pretty clear you have no clue what you're talking about, so I leave it at that.

You might try learn something about the media business. It would be a step in the right direction if you want to debate the topic.
Click to expand...

I accept your concession.:applaud
 
chuckiechan said:
We have this tradition in US politics of not going after the other side with all your new power. Granted Clinton, Inc. is an extreme case, but we just don't feel that it's in the best intersts of the country to make martyrs of former opponents, (apparently) no matter how crooked they are.

Third world countries do that.

But in return the opposition doesn't do that to the other side when power changes hands.
Click to expand...

So you'd think the Right's obsession with HRC would end.
And yet it continues to endure.
 
RickJames3000 said:
I accept your concession.:applaud
Click to expand...

Don't go there RickJames3000. My decision to leave you to your ignorance on the subject is not a concession to the point, but a concession to the futility of you ever understanding it at this stage in your life.
 
ocean515 said:
Don't go there RickJames3000. My decision to leave you to your ignorance on the subject is not a concession to the point, but a concession to the futility of you ever understanding it at this stage in your life.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you are a bit chapped by being owned in this thread.
I'll take it easier on you next time!:2wave:
 
RickJames3000 said:
Sounds like you are a bit chapped by being owned in this thread.
I'll take it easier on you next time!:2wave:
Click to expand...

LOL

No, that wouldn't be it.

When you get a bit older and wiser, you will learn you don't need fake validation in order to think you accomplished something.

Have a good day. :peace
 
ocean515 said:
I've wondered what kind of simple mind must be present to turn President Trumps joke about getting the Russians to try and find the emails Hillary destroyed into proof he is partners with them.

It's one of those eye opening revelations.

Sadly, the media has become so ideologically corrupted, I have a hard time imagining it will ever recover from their self inflicted wounds. That's not a good thing.
Click to expand...

No, it's not. Tte Fourth Estate--a free and fair press--is essential.
 
But...but...but...the RUSSIANS...

 
VanceMack said:
But...but...but...the RUSSIANS...

Click to expand...


Obviously the Russians, in collusion with the Trump campaign, have now blackmailed Donna Brazille into admitting something that she didn't do in order to cover their asses. Maybe British Intelligence has video of Trump peeing on Brazile, or was it the other way around?
 
Skeptic Bob said:
Why would she own up to it now after people have mostly forgotten about it?
Click to expand...

Exactly because of that. Everyone's lost interest in the story, so it's now safe to do so, no repercussions.
Later, should she raise to political fore again, she can claim she apologized for that, showing the tape.
 
RickJames3000 said:
I don't know the answers to your questions about Hillary.
But it really doesn't seem to be on the Trump administration's agenda to address any issues regarding HRC.

Trump doesn't seem at all concerned about those accusations.
Why do you think that might be?
Click to expand...

It's the FBI's job. Then the DoJ.
 
ocean515 said:
I've wondered what kind of simple mind must be present to turn President Trumps joke about getting the Russians to try and find the emails Hillary destroyed into proof he is partners with them.

It's one of those eye opening revelations.

Sadly, the media has become so ideologically corrupted, I have a hard time imagining it will ever recover from their self inflicted wounds. That's not a good thing.
Click to expand...

It is amazing.

It's not like he said to Medvedez, Tell Vladimir I'll have more flexibility after the election.

Or unloaded 20% of US Uranium through a Kanuckistani, in order to fill his pockets.

That element of the press is a corpse... rotting and stinking up society. Then they complain when their dereliction of duty is challenged.
 
eohrnberger said:
Exactly because of that. Everyone's lost interest in the story, so it's now safe to do so, no repercussions.
Later, should she raise to political fore again, she can claim she apologized for that, showing the tape.
Click to expand...

Greetings, Erik. :2wave:

I think it's just great that anyone can learn new ways to be devious just by reading what some are doing in DC - and the best part for them is that their jobs are all paid for by taxpayers! How self serving do they have to become, if the tendency was not there before, to no longer be bothered by a guilty conscience, or is that generally not a problem in politics? :shock:
 
Out of all the outcry over the DNC leaks this was probably the dumbest. I don't like Brazile, but you have to be pretty naive if this surprised you. Aside from the fact that what she did was obviously wrong, there is the fact that the leaked questions were obvious to anyone. Wasn't her biggest leak that Clinton would be asked about lead poisoning in Flint, MI? Do you think the Clinton campaign didn't see that coming? The DNC and RNC both look to promote certain candidates over others. Remember the whole Ron Paul fiasco? The difference with Trump was that they saw an opening to become the party of the working class, and they were smart enough not to stand in the way.
 
Risky Thicket said:
Your obsession with Hillary's ass is immoral.
Click to expand...

Who's obsessed? It's just hard to miss. It's wider then the Grand Canyon. And her pantsuits must be made of Kevlar.
 
zimmer said:
It's the FBI's job. Then the DoJ.
Click to expand...

I'm sure they just await the go ahead from the chief. What's he waiting for, in your opinion?

I asked you this before. Let's see if you can man up and quit deflecting.
 
yankintx said:
A little thing called conflict of interest, look it up, over and out.
Click to expand...

What conflict?

As you brought it up, and I'm not clairvoyant, what is this conflictus maximus?
 
RickJames3000 said:
I'm sure they just await the go ahead from the chief. What's he waiting for, in your opinion?

I asked you this before. Let's see if you can man up and quit deflecting.
Click to expand...

They don't need to wait. They were investigating before the election. The author of the book Clinton Cash twice sat with the FBI. Seems they have used it as a starting point.

Trump doesn't have to do squat.

May justice be served.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom