Media Meltdown and also Media Bias 101

[Motown Bombers]

I didn't even know CNN+ even launched yet. 

[Tigerbomb13]

Wow. I didn’t even know it launched yet either. 

[Edman85]

I follow Tapper on Twitter and he was pushing the hell out of it when it first launched.

 

Apparently, Zucker's ouster and Discovery's takeover converged and kneecapped it, but I will say what I said when it came out. Who thought that was a good idea?

[pfife]

wonder how some folks like chris wallace are taking that news.  He seemed on the outs with Fox News anyways for being all truth-y and stuff but he left that gig for cnn+ and now it's toast.

[oblong]

Wallace needs to go to NBC and replace Todd 

[Motown Bombers]

 

[1776]

FWIW, as reported by NPR. 

https://www.npr.org/2016/09/15/494112503/trump-sets-audacious-goal-of-4-percent-economic-growth

[pfife]

I remember there not being much of a plan.

[ewsieg]

#fakebalance - that's ironic.  He's showing his bias in claiming 'both sides'.  

Bullshit that Hillary's plan was 'comprehensive'.

Here is the likely truth on both plans - they likely talked about many of the same things and talked at a very high level on how they would improve each of those issues.  Democrats read Trump's and inferred everything they don't like about the opposition into those high level categories and scoffed that it was fluff.  Republicans did the same thing with Hillary's.

[Tiger337]

2 hours ago, pfife said:

I remember there not being much of a plan.

Taxes were cut which is something that you would never expect from a Republican administration.  

I think cutting taxes when the economy was already doing fine was not a good idea and is probably contributing to inflation.  

[gehringer_2]

On 4/21/2022 at 3:42 PM, oblong said:

Wallace needs to go to NBC and replace Todd 

Nicole maybe.

[ewsieg]

2 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

Taxes were cut which is something that you would never expect from a Republican administration.  

I think cutting taxes when the economy was already doing fine was not a good idea and is probably contributing to inflation.  

Certainly didn't help.

[smr-nj]

5 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

Nicole maybe.

Isn’t that who he was referring to? I believe it was.

[gehringer_2]

1 minute ago, smr-nj said:

Isn’t that who he was referring to? I believe it was.

OK - I assumed he meant Chris since the topic had been CNN+

Edited April 24, 2022 by gehringer_2

[gehringer_2]

28 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

#fakebalance - that's ironic.  He's showing his bias in claiming 'both sides'.  

Bullshit that Hillary's plan was 'comprehensive'.

Here is the likely truth on both plans - they likely talked about many of the same things and talked at a very high level on how they would improve each of those issues.  Democrats read Trump's and inferred everything they don't like about the opposition into those high level categories and scoffed that it was fluff.  Republicans did the same thing with Hillary's.

except the reality is that the Trump admin did send up almost no legislative initiatives, economic or otherwise. And it's not just Trump, heck the GOP is now so policy driven (not) that they've even abandoned the pretense of platforms. You can argue about the value of candidate position papers, but there is no comparison at all between the GOP and the Dems in terms of the their policy shop - at least beyond the anti-gay, anti-franchise, and Christian fascist stuff.

Edited April 24, 2022 by gehringer_2

[oblong]

I was assuming Chris but Nicole would be fine too.  

[oblong]

What about Hillary’s plan wasn’t comprehensive?  You aren’t saying it’s a good idea by using that word. It’s not bias.  The GOP has no governing policies except culture war topics of the day.  Masks. Mandates. Gays. Woke.  That’s it. 

[smr-nj]

24 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

Nicole maybe.

 

10 minutes ago, oblong said:

I was assuming Chris but Nicole would be fine too.  

Well, I’m nothing if not clueless at times. *smh*

[ewsieg]

50 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

except the reality is that the Trump admin did send up almost no legislative initiatives, economic or otherwise. And it's not just Trump, heck the GOP is now so policy driven (not) that they've even abandoned the pretense of platforms. You can argue about the value of candidate position papers, but there is no comparison at all between the GOP and the Dems in terms of the their policy shop - at least beyond the anti-gay, anti-franchise, and Christian fascist stuff.

I disagree with nothing you have stated here, but you're responding based on what you know now, not what was happening at the time this reporter apparently told another reporter that there was no comparison between the economic plans of the two 2016 candidates.

Hillary did not have any grand plan either.  The obvious differences, Hillary probably said she would raise taxes on the wealthy where Trump said everyone needed a tax cut.   They probably both said investment in energy was needed, where Hillary pushed for more green energy and Trump said we should continue to drill.  

Hillary was basically running a status quo campaign as she was riding the coattails of Obama.  So while she probably said 'infrastructure' and 'jobs', I don't remember any specifics in what she'd do outside of 'make everything better'.   

 

[gehringer_2]

42 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

Hillary was basically running a status quo campaign

you'll get arg from me about the limitations of Hillary as a candidate! Hillary was running a victory lap campaign without ever having won anything....🙄

[1984Echoes]

2 hours ago, Tiger337 said:

Taxes were cut which is something that you would never expect from a Republican administration.  

I think cutting taxes when the economy was already doing fine was not a good idea and is probably contributing to inflation.  

The key should have been balancing the budget and initiating an infrastructure plan.

You can cut taxes in some areas (business taxes, which were causing problems with money staying overseas and corporate offices in America doing everything they could to also move overseas because of taxes), and increase them in other areas (drop caps to social security, lower SSN taxes per person, but overall improve SS financing with no caps... it would be a tax against the rich though), road tolls or gas taxes, etc... In order to balance the budget and add in Infrastructure...

But Trump and his Trumpublicans didn't want to do that. They wanted to line their pockets with as much tax cuts as they could get away with, and were perfectly fine with $1 Trillion dollar annual deficit spending. And that's what they did.

Greedy MF'ing ignorant morons.

Not balancing the budget and cutting taxes when the economy was already doing fine is a definite contributor to inflation.

Edited April 24, 2022 by 1984Echoes

[Tiger337]

Also, his trade wars screwed the farmers and he ended up giving them massive payouts.  Another great policy.  

[gehringer_2]

55 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

The key should have been balancing the budget and initiating an infrastructure plan.

You can cut taxes in some areas (business taxes, which were causing problems with money staying overseas and corporate offices in America doing everything they could to also move overseas because of taxes), and increase them in other areas (drop caps to social security, lower SSN taxes per person, but overall improve SS financing with no caps... it would be a tax against the rich though), road tolls or gas taxes, etc... In order to balance the budget and add in Infrastructure...

But Trump and his Trumpublicans didn't want to do that. They wanted to line their pockets with as much tax cuts as they could get away with, and were perfectly fine with $1 Trillion dollar annual deficit spending. And that's what they did.

Greedy MF'ing ignorant morons.

Not balancing the budget and cutting taxes when the economy was already doing fine is a definite contributor to inflation.

I'd have been fine with the corp tax cut if they had started taxing dividends as regular income. That is really the way it should work. The old claim of 'double taxation' on dividends goes down the drain when corp income taxes are low, so there is no reason for the distinction to remain.

[ewsieg]

1 hour ago, Tiger337 said:

Also, his trade wars screwed the farmers and he ended up giving them massive payouts.  Another great policy.  

Exactly, who would have thought that policy you would have expected out of a progressive liberal candidate years before would be so detrimental.

[Tiger337]

45 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

Exactly, who would have thought that policy you would have expected out of a progressive liberal candidate years before would be so detrimental.

Yeah, that was a lberal move for sure.  He has no ideology.  He's a populist demagogue.