What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

DNC bars Fox news from 2020 Debates (1 Viewer)

Sand

Footballguy
Interesting and not a good move.  I'm curious as to why they took this action.  I recall the FNC debate in 2016 to be pretty staid affair - nothing outrageous happened there.  The point of these is to reach out to the electorate and certainly Fox does that.   Maybe they don't like Fox since they can't steal the debate questions and feed them to their favorite candidate?

I fully expect the RNC to follow suit and bar liberal news channels from the same.  That means that ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, Newsy, etc. will be out as they are all far left.  It's a moot point - we won't see any debates on that side since it looks like DJT will be running.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The GOP did that with MSNBC in 2016, I assume you made a thread about that also. 
Totally different.  Republicans didn't like some of the questions CNBC asked during an earlier debate. 

Democrats don't like the FOX is a propaganda outfit that's merged its communication team with the Administration's and openly strategizes with the President.

Obviously the first one is way worse.

 
I agree with the main point that a debate should be held on Fox. Conditions are reasonable, though, such as requiring Chris Wallace to moderate.

 
I agree with the main point that a debate should be held on Fox. Conditions are reasonable, though, such as requiring Chris Wallace to moderate.
Fox News is just an extension of the Trump administration now. Why would the Democrats let Donald Trump have a hand in their primary debate? Frankly, I'm surprised that fox would even have the nerve to suggest itconsidering the story that came out this week about how they bury any news stories that might hurt Trump. It's basically the national enquirer

 
Fox News is just an extension of the Trump administration now. Why would the Democrats let Donald Trump have a hand in their primary debate? Frankly, I'm surprised that fox would even have the nerve to suggest itconsidering the story that came out this week about how they bury any news stories that might hurt Trump. It's basically the national enquirer
Nothing that you wrote here is far from the truth. However, the perception among the public is that Fox, while skewed to the right, is a legitimate news network. 

The one card that Trump is trying to play to get re-elected is that the Democrats have gone off the deep end, that they’re too extreme for the American public with the Green New Deal, socialism, refusal to work with Republicans, constant investigations, etc etc etc. He’s going to play this card over and over and over because it’s really the only card he has. This sort of thing helps him, IMO. 

 
Fox rigged two debates for Trump in 2016.

The DNC is wise not give them any opportunity to rig any more of them.
YEAH...they probably gave him the questions before the debate....a cryin' shame!.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nothing that you wrote here is far from the truth. However, the perception among the public is that Fox, while skewed to the right, is a legitimate news network. 

The one card that Trump is trying to play to get re-elected is that the Democrats have gone off the deep end, that they’re too extreme for the American public with the Green New Deal, socialism, refusal to work with Republicans, constant investigations, etc etc etc. He’s going to play this card over and over and over because it’s really the only card he has. This sort of thing helps him, IMO. 
Only with those who were voting for him anyway. 

 
Fox News is just an extension of the Trump administration now. Why would the Democrats let Donald Trump have a hand in their primary debate? Frankly, I'm surprised that fox would even have the nerve to suggest itconsidering the story that came out this week about how they bury any news stories that might hurt Trump. It's basically the national enquirer
YEAH!!  And they would probably fail to lob softball questions at the candidate that the DNC had already chosen to win!

They might even ask questions that expose some hypocrisy in the Democrat Party.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree with the main point that a debate should be held on Fox. Conditions are reasonable, though, such as requiring Chris Wallace to moderate.
I think this is a given.  He has as much integrity as anyone in the business.

 
Not that you'll ever stop watching but this should make any thinking person change the channel in disgust. 
I watch MSNBC in equal amounts, though most time is spent on the three big business channels.   Fully aware of all the biases involved.

 
YEAH!!  And they would probably fail to lob softball questions at the candidate that the DNC had already chosen to win!

They might even ask questions that expose some hypocrisy in the Democrat Party.
Again the only thing exposed here is the hypocrisy of the GOP and Trump supporters who screamed for a year about Hillary and debate questions...but now say nothing when its shown Fox did that for Trump.

Along with completely ignoring how they have been shown to be propaganda and burying the negative stories.

Should they also hold debates on OAN?

If Fox wants to be a legit news network, they should stop doing what they have now been shown to have been doing.

 
Again the only thing exposed here is the hypocrisy of the GOP and Trump supporters who screamed for a year about Hillary and debate questions...but now say nothing when its shown Fox did that for Trump.

Along with completely ignoring how they have been shown to be propaganda and burying the negative stories.

Should they also hold debates on OAN?

If Fox wants to be a legit news network, they should stop doing what they have now been shown to have been doing.
The "screaming" from the right pretty much stopped on November 9, 2016....shortly after the debates

HOWEVER....

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The "screaming" from the right pretty much stopped on November 9, 2016....shortly after the debates

HOWEVER....
Oh, a Hillary screaming joke.

Yeah, no screaming stopped though, rigged primary was screamed all throughout the election and after.  So nice try, but that is BS.

 
Did you miss the news about Fox quashing negative stories about Trump before the election and feeding him debate questions? Not to mention their business plan of pushing whatever stories would create the most outrage. I'm assuming the DNC (who I'm no fan of) made this move as a rather pathetic attempt at retribution for that.

Not that you'll ever stop watching but this should make any thinking person change the channel in disgust. That Trump tried to convince the Department of Justice to kill the AT&T/Time Warner merger (which I'd wager got nary a mention on Fox) because he hates CNN is infinitely more outrageous, but it's just another log on the fire of our democracy that Trump adds to daily so it simply garners a shrug and people move on to the next tweet. 
- Do you have a link saying they gave him debate questions?

- CNN gave Trump loads of air time during the primaries because the Hilllary campaign wanted the MSM to push Trump and Cruz and sandbag guys like Kasich.  Even then, Trump opposed the ATT/TW merger because it was and is bad for America.

 
Interesting and not a good move.  I'm curious as to why they took this action.  I recall the FNC debate in 2016 to be pretty staid affair - nothing outrageous happened there.  The point of these is to reach out to the electorate and certainly Fox does that.   Maybe they don't like Fox since they can't steal the debate questions and feed them to their favorite candidate?

I fully expect the RNC to follow suit and bar liberal news channels from the same.  That means that ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, Newsy, etc. will be out as they are all far left.  It's a moot point - we won't see any debates on that side since it looks like DJT will be running.
They didn't "bar Fox News from the debates." They decided not to have Fox News host one of their debates. Fox can still cover the proceedings like anyone else. And the RNC won't have any debates, for the reasons you say. And they can't counter by doing what you suggest, because despite what you seem to think Fox News is not like those other news channels because no Fox News viewers are going to vote for Dems so there's no great loss of exposure there, but tons of potential GOP voters watch ABC, CBS, NBC and CNN so losing that exposure would harm them.

Also this is hardly unprecedented. Trump himself pulled out of a primary debate on Fox News because Meghan Kelly was set to moderate, and that didn't seem to hurt his standing too much. You might remember it- it's the one he replaced on his schedule with an event where he claimed he was raising money for vets but he was actually just using them as a scam until the Washington Post busted him on it and he was forced to actually make the donation.

As for why they took this action - read the Jane Mayer story that triggered the decision. And FWIW whatever news service conveyed this information without tying it to the story is not doing their job. The DNC explicitly stated that was the reason.

 
They didn't "bar Fox News from the debates." They decided not to have Fox News host one of their debates. Fox can still cover the proceedings like anyone else. And the RNC won't have any debates, for the reasons you say. And they can't counter by doing what you suggest, because despite what you seem to think Fox News is not like those other news channels because no Fox News viewers are going to vote for Dems so there's no great loss of exposure there, but tons of potential GOP voters watch ABC, CBS, NBC and CNN so losing that exposure would harm them.

Also this is hardly unprecedented. Trump himself pulled out of a primary debate on Fox News because Meghan Kelly was set to moderate, and that didn't seem to hurt his standing too much. You might remember it- it's the one he replaced on his schedule with an event where he claimed he was raising money for vets but he was actually just using them as a scam until the Washington Post busted him on it and he was forced to actually make the donation.

As for why they took this action - read the Jane Mayer story that triggered the decision. And FWIW whatever news service conveyed this information without tying it to the story is not doing their job. The DNC explicitly stated that was the reason.
This is well said...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
- Do you have a link saying they gave him debate questions?

- CNN gave Trump loads of air time during the primaries because the Hilllary campaign wanted the MSM to push Trump and Cruz and sandbag guys like Kasich.  Even then, Trump opposed the ATT/TW merger because it was and is bad for America.
Apparently we have a lot of passionate but cheap New Yorker readers who don't want to waste their free articles this month on the story, so here's the bit about the debate question (not among the most explosive claims in the article btw, more a funny anecdote given the hysterics over Clinton and Brazile):
 

Trump has made the debate a point of pride. He recently boasted to the Times that he’d won it despite being a novice, and despite the “crazy Megyn Kelly question.” Fox, however, may have given Trump a little help. A pair of Fox insiders and a source close to Trump believe that Ailes informed the Trump campaign about Kelly’s question. Two of those sources say that they know of the tipoff from a purported eyewitness. In addition, a former Trump campaign aide says that a Fox contact gave him advance notice of a different debate question, which asked the candidates whether they would support the Republican nominee, regardless of who won. The former aide says that the heads-up was passed on to Trump, who was the only candidate who said that he wouldn’t automatically support the Party’s nominee—a position that burnished his image as an outsider.

These claims are hard to evaluate: Ailes is dead, and they conflict with substantial reporting suggesting that the rift between Trump and Fox was bitter. A former campaign aide is adamant that Trump was genuinely surprised and infuriated by Kelly’s question. A Fox spokesperson strongly denied the allegations, and declined requests for interviews with employees involved in the debate.

Kelly also declined to comment, but she broached the subject in her 2016 memoir, “Settle for More.” She wrote that the day before the debate Trump called Fox executives to complain, saying he’d heard that Kelly planned to ask “a very pointed question directed at him.” She noted, “Folks were starting to worry about Trump—his level of agitation did not match the circumstances.” When this passage stirred controversy, Kelly tweeted that her book “does not suggest Trump had any debate Qs in advance, nor do I believe that he did.” Yet her account does suggest that Trump had enough forewarning to be upset, and that he contacted Fox before the debate.

 
Maybe the most damning thing in the whole affair is the Fox News response:

In a statement, Fox News Senior Vice President Bill Sammon said: “We hope the DNC will reconsider its decision to bar Chris Wallace, Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum, all of whom embody the ultimate journalistic integrity and professionalism, from moderating a Democratic presidential debate. They’re the best debate team in the business and they offer candidates an important opportunity to make their case to the largest TV news audience in America, which includes many persuadable voters.”
The didn't even mention "Fox News" or make any attempt to defend themselves in response to the article and the DNC's reasons for pulling out. Instead they just pointed to three of their on-air personalities as being palatable. It's basically an admission by omission that the rest of the organization and its on-air personalities are shills for the Trump administration just as Mayer described.

 
Interesting and not a good move.  I'm curious as to why they took this action.  I recall the FNC debate in 2016 to be pretty staid affair - nothing outrageous happened there.  The point of these is to reach out to the electorate and certainly Fox does that.   Maybe they don't like Fox since they can't steal the debate questions and feed them to their favorite candidate?

I fully expect the RNC to follow suit and bar liberal news channels from the same.  That means that ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, Newsy, etc. will be out as they are all far left.  It's a moot point - we won't see any debates on that side since it looks like DJT will be running.
Well yeah....like they did in 2016.  They are "following" their own precedent.  Least shocking prediction ever!!

 
I fully expect the RNC to follow suit and bar liberal news channels from the same.  That means that ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, Newsy, etc. will be out as they are all far left.
They're most definitely not all "far left".

It's not their fault they have to cover whatever idiotic thing Trump did in the last hour, he's the President and he's a complete trainwreck.

Once again reality has a liberal bias.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
And I don't see any reason why the GOP would want to be on MSNBC for their primary debates, nor do I see any reason why the Dems would want to be on Fox.  It might be a different story in a general election debate.  Even in that instance, I'd want CBS to run the debate or someone like BBC/PBS/NPR.

 
Apparently we have a lot of passionate but cheap New Yorker readers who don't want to waste their free articles this month on the story, so here's the bit about the debate question (not among the most explosive claims in the article btw, more a funny anecdote given the hysterics over Clinton and Brazile):
 
Not exactly conclusive, but if it did happen, those making the claim need to come forward.  For the record, Trump did seem genuinely surprised, and I have seen enough of his cameos in things like Fresh Prince of bel Air and Home Alone to know he’s not that great of an actor.

also, for the record, the “loyalty pledge” question was intended to corner Trump into not running as an independent.  It backfired on the Republicrats bigly. 

 
And I don't see any reason why the GOP would want to be on MSNBC for their primary debates, nor do I see any reason why the Dems would want to be on Fox.  It might be a different story in a general election debate.  Even in that instance, I'd want CBS to run the debate or someone like BBC/PBS/NPR.
I would think the opposite

GOP on MSNBC and Dems on FOX would be good for America.  I did think Harwood’s CNBC performance was terrible, but that is no excuse.  Sometimes , in life, you have face stupid, unfair, and intellectually insulting questions.  It’s best to try to answer them, and not cut and run.  I also have issues with debate formats....but that is another thread....

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not exactly conclusive, but if it did happen, those making the claim need to come forward.  For the record, Trump did seem genuinely surprised, and I have seen enough of his cameos in things like Fresh Prince of bel Air and Home Alone to know he’s not that great of an actor.

also, for the record, the “loyalty pledge” question was intended to corner Trump into not running as an independent.  It backfired on the Republicrats bigly. 
Sure it's not conclusive- like i said it's just an anecdote, not the main thrust of the article. And the people making the claim may not be able to come forward- Fox News makes its reporters sign an NDA. Here's an article from the reporter who was the source of the more explosive allegations in the article- that Fox News spiked the reporter's Stormy Daniels story- about how she can't comment on the allegation and about NDAs more broadly.

 
Also this is hardly unprecedented. Trump himself pulled out of a primary debate on Fox News because Meghan Kelly was set to moderate,
This was moderator specific.  Apples and oranges.   

Maybe the most damning thing in the whole affair is the Fox News response:

The didn't even mention "Fox News" or make any attempt to defend themselves in response to the article and the DNC's reasons for pulling out. Instead they just pointed to three of their on-air personalities as being palatable. It's basically an admission by omission that the rest of the organization and its on-air personalities are shills for the Trump administration just as Mayer described.
No doubt the commentators (Hannity, etc.) are biased.  Heck, we know that.  They pointed to their three senior newscasters.  The hosts make the debate.  This is a valid point by Fox.  Do we really think Chris Wallace would be unfair?  I don't, not any more than Muir or similar would.

 
I would think the opposite

GOP on MSNBC and Dems on FOX would be good for America.  I did think Harwood’s CNBC performance was terrible, but that is no excuse.  Sometimes , in life, you have face stupid, unfair, and intellectually insulting questions.  It’s best to try to answer them, and not cut and run.  I also have issues with debate formats....but that is another thread....
Why?  The people watching Fox aren't voting in the Dem primary and the people voting in the GOP primary aren't watching MSNBC.  It's a complete waste of time.

ETA:  But I also acknowledge that my idea around the purpose of debate is probably different than a lot.  I watch them in case they actually answer the questions so that I might get a little more insight into their positions.  Others watch them and view them as "gotcha" events to zing the other "side" later.  If one is of the latter opinion, I could see why they'd think this was a good idea, but in reality it reinforces my initial opinion that there is zero benefit for the candidates to do something like that.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why?  The people watching Fox aren't voting in the Dem primary and the people voting in the GOP primary aren't watching MSNBC.  It's a complete waste of time.
Maybe they will better understand what they oppose when they hear it from the candidates, rather than second hand from Maddow or Hannity.  It might make for a more productive conversation and reduce the impact of demonization.

 
This was moderator specific.  Apples and oranges.   

No doubt the commentators (Hannity, etc.) are biased.  Heck, we know that.  They pointed to their three senior newscasters.  The hosts make the debate.  This is a valid point by Fox.  Do we really think Chris Wallace would be unfair?  I don't, not any more than Muir or similar would.
The DNC didn't allege that the moderators would be unfair. The problem is the network's broader bias and whether the DNC wants to line the coffers of what is effectively the communications operation of the Trump White House and campaign.  Also the coverage doesn't start and stop with the moderators- they could be concerned that the lead-in and "postgame" where they would have a huge audience would be heavily slanted, which seems like a reasonable concern.

Although honestly I think this was just their way to get a bunch of people to read the New Yorker article who otherwise wouldn't do so.

 
Why?  The people watching Fox aren't voting in the Dem primary and the people voting in the GOP primary aren't watching MSNBC.  It's a complete waste of time.
I would be great TV.  Would I watch a DNC debate on OAN or RNC on MSNBC?  Heck, yeah.  Everyone wants to see the car wreck.

 
Maybe they will better understand what they oppose when they hear it from the candidates, rather than second hand from Maddow or Hannity.  It might make for a more productive conversation and reduce the impact of demonization.
I edited to add to this comment.  This would be a possible net positive if it were a legit debate.  We all know that is not likely to happen.  Run with the percentages and plan accordingly.  That either of these channels would be anything but "gotcha" events is monumentally naive IMO.....especially in a primary.

 
The DNC didn't allege that the moderators would be unfair.
Your comparison backed up to Kelly as a moderator.  Just a small point there.  I understand the point about pre and post, but if you think about what the RNC goes through they get that treatment on every network except Fox and CNBC.

 
They're most definitely not all "far left".

It's not their fault they have to cover whatever idiotic thing Trump did in the last hour, he's the President and he's a complete trainwreck.

Once again reality has a liberal bias.
They were far left before Trump arrived on the scene. 

 
I fully expect the RNC to follow suit and bar liberal news channels from the same.  That means that ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, Newsy, etc. will be out as they are all far left.  It's a moot point - we won't see any debates on that side since it looks like DJT will be running.
There is zero chance that the RNC bans everyone except Fox News from hosting their debates. Their base is getting more and more radical and far right and they aren't about to make moves that takes them even farther away from independents. That would be absolutely suicidal.

 
Your comparison backed up to Kelly as a moderator.  Just a small point there.  I understand the point about pre and post, but if you think about what the RNC goes through they get that treatment on every network except Fox and CNBC.
I wasn't comparing the two, they're obviously different situations. I was just pointing out the hypocrisy of Trump in particular complaining about this because it's funny.

And like I said before, if you think Fox News is just the conservative version of other news networks you're way off the mark, and the proof is in the pudding- the RNC can't restrict their debates to Fox News because they'd lose tons of moderate and independent viewers who watch and trust those networks but not Fox News for a reason.  And I suspect you haven't read the article that is behind this move.  The article is the real story, not the move.

 
There is zero chance that the RNC bans everyone except Fox News from hosting their debates. Their base is getting more and more radical and far right and they aren't about to make moves that takes them even farther away from independents. That would be absolutely suicidal.
They can do anything they want at this point as there are 5 years until they will have any need for a primary debate on the R side.  At that point, though, they can't shut out all those channels despite their inherent bias.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why?  The people watching Fox aren't voting in the Dem primary and the people voting in the GOP primary aren't watching MSNBC.  It's a complete waste of time.
I did two of the last three elections and will this election making it three out of four.  

 
They can do anything they want at this point as there are 5 years until they will have any need for a primary debate on the R side.  At that point, though, they can't shut out all those channels despite their inherent bias.
Again, why would they choose to shut out the viewers of 5 of the top 6 networks?  They need the ABC, CBS, and NBCs to give their side air time.  It would be one thing if Fox was doing battle with one particular network. Trump has convinced his base that every network except Fox is spreading fake news and is the enemy of the people. ABC, NBC, CBS. MSNBC, CNN, Washington Post, New York Times....  do you see a pattern?    Unless the RNC things the 38% of the population (which will continue to dwindle as old white guys die off and more and more millennials come to age) is all the support they'll ever need, they will never isolate themselves that much.

 
I did two of the last three elections and will this election making it three out of four.  
Congrats on being the exception?
I don't think I'm the exception in real life, just maybe in the echo chamber.  If a story comes out that I'm interested in (especially political), I spend time at CNN, Fox, and maybe even MSNBC to get different reads on it and how/if they are covering it.

 
Anyone who thinks there's a liberal bias in media should ask themselves how the media would cover a Democratic president giving a bizarre, unhinged two hour speech filled with lies, fearmongering and juvenile insults to a left wing gathering, as Trump did at CPAC last week. The coverage would be overwhelming and relentless. There would be nonstop questions about the Dem president's fitness and perhaps their sanity. They would not let up until all of the inaccuracies and fearmongering were, at a minimum, addressed by the White House communications team. There would be non-stop calls for apologies. Many would demand that the President undergo mental health screening. And of course you can ask this same question regarding any number of other Trump speeches and actions.

The news media has a clear and obvious pro-Trump bias. In their defense, it is somewhat out of necessity. If they covered him fairly and proportionally and reacted to his words and deeds as they would with a "normal" president there simply wouldn't be enough time in the day or pages in the newspaper.

 
The news media has a clear and obvious pro-Trump bias. In their defense, it is somewhat out of necessity. If they covered him fairly and proportionally and reacted to his words and deeds as they would with a "normal" president there simply wouldn't be enough time in the day or pages in the newspaper.
It is sooooo obvious!

Link

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't think I'm the exception in real life, just maybe in the echo chamber.  If a story comes out that I'm interested in (especially political), I spend time at CNN, Fox, and maybe even MSNBC to get different reads on it and how/if they are covering it.
I don't want to belabor the point, because I wasn't exactly clear in my initial post so this is on me.  I meant those loyal to FoxNews vs those loyal to MSNBC with loyal meaning those channels are their default for media consumption.  There's plenty of PEW research out there pointing out that if the above here is true, you are very much the exception.  Most people have a single source they go to for their news (not including social media).  Meaning, when a story comes out MOST people turn to their station of choice and don't hop around.

Our news media is the echo chamber, so I don't understand the distinction you are making with the bold but I don't think it matters.  Apologies for not being clearer in my initial post.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top