🇳🇱
Wow, democrats are really showing their colors today with this whole "boycott the CNN" thing... Unless I missed soemthing he is a presidential candidate, and one who so far hasnt been found guilty of anything that would disqualify him... and a popular one.
Yes he is a piece of shit, and yes he has no business being in politics... But its not CNNs job to make those decisions. Their job is to let the candidates say their piece and let the public decide from there (or the courts if there are legal questions).
As much as I hate Trump... I lost **so** much respect for the democrats today. Supporting censorship, specifically doing so with the intent of winning an election in their favor, is a new low... dont be that party...
That's an astonishingly terrible take.
The first primary elections are almost a year away. Nevertheless, #CNN gave Trump a two-hour national prime time TV platform, in which he spewed a continuous stream of insurrectionist lies, mostly without challenge.
Trump's own campaign said "'We want to thank CNN for their generous donation to President Trump’s campaign!"
CNN's job is to broadcast truth. They choose instead to broadcast lies.
@barney That could be a valid argument... like if they gave this meeting to Trump and Biden requested a similar venue and was denied, then id completely support your stance and see CNN as making a mistake here.
As far as I know that didnt happen, they didnt show Trump preference over Biden as far as I know.
I expect that #CNN probably plans a similar 2-hour special for Biden (although I haven't actually seen that reported). I still think that having prime-time specials for candidates a year before the primaries even start is an abnormal grab for ratings.
My main point, though, is that last night's debacle was totally unacceptable at any point in the political process. Spending two hours airing lies, many designed to incite violence, is not excused by later giving equal time to the truth.
@barney To some extent I do agree, if political candidates are lying and still primary candidates and given the airtime that goes with that, there is a problem somewhere.... the problem isnt with CNN though as far as I can tell, the problem lies with some combination of the courts for not acting to curb Trump sooner, or the general public for showing such levels of support for such a horrific candidate.
That said, while Trump is one of the worst examples of a bad candidate by the same token we have a pretty close second in office right now, Biden. So the failure that led to him getting in office isnt much better than the failure that is allowing Trump reach the level of popularity he has.
Yes CNN did it not hte courts... the courts are the only ones responsible for denying presidential candidates, not CNN.. so CNN did the right choice, as disgusting as he is. It is not their place to judge which presidential candidates meet their standards to have a voice.. its a shame he got TV time and that he is running at all, but they did right by giving him the same opportunity they will give any other legally recognized candidate.
The **last** thing anyone should be demanding is that news organizations pick what candidates get platforms.
CNN put Trump on TV. They did it because he is a political candidate, and they presumably intend to give his opponents equal time. I question their timing, but not their fairness.
CNN allowed a rapist to slut-shame the woman he raped, on national TV, while the audience laughed at her. They allowed him to spew lie after unchallenged lie, for two hours, thereby facilitating a violent insurrection against the US. Is this okay? And why is your dislike for Biden relevant to your answer?
> CNN put Trump on TV. They did it because he is a political candidate, and they presumably intend to give his opponents equal time. I question their timing, but not their fairness.
Agreed
> CNN allowed a rapist to slut-shame the woman he raped, on national TV, while the audience laughed at her.
As I said I havent seen the actual town hall yet so I cant speak to this point. do you have the specific quote or a link to a video. Until I see it I cant judge this point either way or if your characterization of it is accurate.
> They allowed him to spew lie after unchallenged lie, for two hours, thereby facilitating a violent insurrection against the US. Is this okay?
Is it ok, nope, is it normal, yup... This applies to every Biden Townhall, every Trump Townhall and virtually every town hall we have had. Fact checking has never been an element of town halls, the format has been the norm for decades to allow Q&A and for the host to do little more than facilitate the audience to ask questions... we have never fact checked and have always let the lies from all candidates fly... maybe we should change that, but Trump is hardly new, why not cry fowl when Biden was allowed to lie and not get fact checked?
> And why is your dislike for Biden relevant to your answer?
Because it shows precedence and is a good litmus test to check if you are being impartial towards the candidates and holding them to equal standards.. Biden as a pro-segregationist has an abysmally racist history, would his racist history be a good enough reason for CNN to refuse to host town halls for him, probably not... Usually applying our standards to the things we support is a good litmus test to see if we truly think our standards are good ones to hold.
CNN did what they did last night. The courts did not do it.
CNN put a rapist on television. They let him slut-shame the woman he raped while the audience laughed at her. They allowed him to spew violence-inciting lies for two hours.
The answer to the question of whether or not that is okay does not have anything to do with whether Biden is "a bad candidate." So I invite you to reflect, privately if you wish, on why you chose to express that opinion in this context.
@freemo