"Hosted by Tucker Carlson, with a special guest appearance by Alex Jones."
No fucking thanks.
this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2024
147 points (92.5% liked)
politics
19104 readers
3661 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
The quotes in your comment will make people think you're telling the truth.
"Again, we believe Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum, the faces of our political coverage, are the best choices to moderate."
She shows up and arrests Alex.
Officially kick him in the nuts as hard as she can.
He has no balls. If he didn't he wouldn't be picking on parents with children that died in a horrific manner. That man ain't any sort of man in my measurement. I will applaud his eulogy. Rotting pile of pig shit.
Is he still around? I thought he went to prison or something.
No, he's just gone bankrupt. He's still trying to grift in any way that he can.
Oh right, forgot he’s one of those guys
You mean that Podcaster?
He more of a pocdasdard
The “entertainment network” that paid $750 million for lying to the American public regarding the outcome of last presidential election wants to host the candidates for next presidential election? Color me shocked
How about hosted by Fox News, but moderated by Jon Stewart
I think Jon Stewart and Bill O'Reilly would be interesting moderators.
Bill O'reily paid a women 32 million dollars to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit. What happened to her was never disclosed, but the abuse was over the course of years. He has also settled several other sexual harassment suits, with fox settling even more on his behalf.. It was this last high profile case that got him fired from fox.
He is a vicious, repeat sexual assault offender and should be in a deep, deep hole in the ground, and nowhere else.
I'm not endorsing O'Reilly, but he and Stewart have good chemistry, one's a Democrat and the other is a Republican.
I have, and still believe, that Bill O'Reilly belongs in the depths of hell.
I’d pay to watch that.
No fucking thanks.
It's probably a trap...but beating him there would be a huge huge fucking deal. Trump took the last debate on Biden teams terms and despite that Biden still cocked it up and that made the burn worse(had that debate been on Fox the age issues would have been blamed on their audio mixing and editing and the room being too hot and crap). If Trump loses on his own turf on his rules with his followers watching?
They wouldn't follow the rules though. It would definitely be a trap. They would cut her mike but Trumps mute would 'stop working' for whatever reason. He'd do that creepy hover shit and Fox would zoom in on him with her forehead barely in view while she is the one actually talking, and so on. ABC is at least kind of neutral vs. CNN or Fox. Agreeing to Fox wouldn't even be parity with what Trump agreed too for the first one.
And, he didn't answer a single question! He spend an hour blabbering, "I'm rubber and you're glue."
It's probably a trap
Y’think?
...but
No, no. No, let’s go with the trap idea and avoid it completely.
Is this so Harris will turn it down, and then when Donald turns down a real debate, he can say, “Harris ~~started it~~ did it first”?
It's been a pretty effective strategy for Trump so far. It's pretty much the only effective strategy he's got: Accuse your opponent of anything and everything you're planning on doing. Not only does it put your opponent on the defensive having to defend against false allegations, but when they call you out for actually doing it, their accusations are either written off as no big deal or retaliation.
Right or wrong, it's actually a very effective strategy. Think of two brothers fighting. One runs to mommy to complain. What happens 95% of the time? The one who gets there first gets to tell their story, and whoever gets there second is told "leave your brother alone" and probably gets grounded. And most of the time, mom neither knows or cares who did what.
Trump has mastered being the first kid.
I think it's wonderful. Bring up Fox pushing the stolen election narrative and watch the moderators deflect and sweat like it violates the terms of a lawsuit
Kamala might not want to do this.
What do you figure? Downvoted because you don't like the news?
Yeah I wouldn't take those personally. People are expressing unhappiness with the article, not the poster. Ideally not how this works but it is what it is. At least points don't really matter.
The problem is the display algorithm works on those points.
"Hot sort" crew checking in, your article came through loud and clear.
Idk I mostly sort by new. I'm not sure how the other sort methods work.
What is the display algorithm?
"fox news rejects trumps idea to host debate" would be newsworthy.
Screams desperation
There needs to be an option for a sacrificial comment that can take the brunt.
Basically a "upvote the article for exposure, downvote the comment to disagree with the content of the article".
Co-host it with two moderators from two news networks. It’d be a first and a good ratings gimmick.
Rules: No audiences from either network. Give each moderator a the ability to ask fast follow up questions in the event that the opposing moderator asked a leading question.
Networks: Fox and NBC (with an MSNBC host)
The Harris team should insist that the microphone not be muted. I know this will make the debate unwatchable, but the rule obviously benefits Trump, because Harris already knows how to wait her turn without electronic intervention.