MSNBC and others blacklisted Bernie Sanders in election

[Madmick]

LOL!

Mine was far more relevant, although neither is terribly relevant, to the assessment of honesty for this man's claim.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

Mine was far more relevant, although neither is terribly relevant, to the assessment of honesty for this man's claim.

Not even close. Your comment was about the credibility of the US media.
Phil Donahue, a household name, was fired by MSNBC for speaking out against the Iraq War even though he was hosting the most popular show on the network at the time. Internal memos show this to be true.
Your RT nobody who rage quit, not based on the way RT operates, but for something Russia was doing geopolitically is not even close to being as relevant.

 

[Cirris]

Nothing new, leftists. Us libertarians have been blackballed forever.

 

[VivaRevolution]

Was bernie ever about renegotiating NAFTA?

Bernie once brought a bill to the floor to remove the US from the WTO charter.

 

[curryjunkie]

Well...... Dul!

 

[Stoic1]

I saw the bias during the election coverage.

But to be fair Bernie literally cucked like a bitch when he threw his support to Hillary when he was obviously tanked by his own party. Would have mad respect for him if he wouldn't have done that.

Back on point - yeah MSM bias affected our election much more than "Russia".

 

[Madmick]

Not even close. Your comment was about the credibility of the US media.
Phil Donahue, a household name, was fired by MSNBC for speaking out against the Iraq War even though he was hosting the most popular show on the network at the time. Internal memos show this to be true.
Your RT nobody who rage quit, not based on the way RT operates, but for something Russia was doing geopolitically is not even close to being as relevant.

Again, it is not a matter of credulousness. I believe MSNBC capable of this. It is a matter of his credibility pertaining to comparative claims of journalism. He is shining Putin's ass while on Putin's payroll, and despite all of your Marxist-driven logic, where everything is a matter of money and interests, you overlook that much more direct and explicit correlation.

Her testimony is an example of direct state influence over any narratives pertaining to Russian geopolitical interests, and is happening today: in the post-Trump world of Russian media meddling and Russian-US relations. Donahue being fired prior to the Iraq war (when public support for the war was at an all-time high without MSNBC's help) is something you've cited before, and is a disgrace, but provides little insight into how they would have handled Bernie.

 

[Andy Capp]

I don't believe him.

It's not that I have any respect for MSNBC, or believe them incapable of it, but this is Russian propaganda. The entire point of his testimony is to discredit American media while esteeming RT. Hope he got paid well.

This. Sounds like typical Russian lies. Nothing from RT can be believed, just like Faux News.

 

[VivaRevolution]

 

[Anung Un Rama]

Again, it is not a matter of credulousness. I believe MSNBC capable of this. It is a matter of his credibility pertaining to comparative claims of journalism. He is shining Putin's ass while on Putin's payroll, and despite all of your Marxist-driven logic, where everything is a matter of money and interests, you overlook that much more direct and explicit correlation.

Her testimony is an example of direct state influence over any narratives pertaining to Russian geopolitical interests, and is happening today: in the post-Trump world of Russian media meddling and Russian-US relations. Donahue being fired prior to the Iraq war (when public support for the war was at an all-time high without MSNBC's help) is something you've cited before, and is a disgrace, but provides little insight into how they would have handled Bernie.

What could possibly make Ed Shultz less credible than the nobody who rage quit RT for nothing to do with the network?

Not only does the Phil Donohue memo give more credence to shultz story, the Wikileaks about Clinton’s collusion with the media makes they plausible to the point of near certainty.

 

[HockeyBjj]

Well yeah, WikiLeaks (sketchy as fuck source aside, the email content was never questioned) showed that the DNC gave out marching orders to mainstream media and they obliged. They propped up Hilary, shot down Bernie, swept DNC rigging under the rug as long as they could; and they gave Trump and Cruz the most (albeit negative coverage, but it put those two on people's mind) screen time during primaries so that candidates who Hillary felt she may struggle against with the full RNC power behind them (Kasich) never got attention

It just somehow backfired on them with Trump actually winning on election day despite being a handpicked opponent and she gifted the dem nomination

 

[Scheme]

So he received the ”Ron Paul-treatment” more or less?

Except Ron Paul didn't have insane ideas that would never have a chance at being implemented.

Ron Paul was the hero everyone wanted but no one voted for, because they'd rather have a black neocon in office instead.

 

[Amerikuracana]

For those of us who really followed Bernie and his campaign we could see there was a very real bias against Bernie that just did not add up. Here is some pretty stark evidence MSNBC had it as policy against Bernie. Corporate medial makes a bigger negative effect on our elections than the Russians do.

We have known this.

We know the media has forced a "Russia meddled in the election" narrative, because it was 100% obvious our own media is who was doing that. Hear anybody talking about it? Nope. People still pretend Russia lol.

 

[jefferz]

What could possibly make Ed Shultz less credible than the nobody who rage quit RT for nothing to do with the network?

Not only does the Phil Donohue memo give more credence to shultz story, the Wikileaks about Clinton’s collusion with the media makes they plausible to the point of near certainty.

Ed Shultz is a fucking moron.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

Ed Shultz is a fucking moron.

Irrelevant

 

[Anung Un Rama]

Except Ron Paul didn't have insane ideas that would never have a chance at being implemented.

Ron Paul was the hero everyone wanted but no one voted for, because they'd rather have a black neocon in office instead.

Ron Paul’s FP hnnnngh

 

[Madmick]

What could possibly make Ed Shultz less credible than the nobody who rage quit RT for nothing to do with the network?

Not only does the Phil Donohue memo give more credence to shultz story, the Wikileaks about Clinton’s collusion with the media makes they plausible to the point of near certainty.

Because she quit in protest over the fact that RT was censoring any opinion from her that contradicted Russian interests in Crimea.

Donahue's incident in no way lends any specific credence to Schultz's claim, nor is anything remotely resembling "near certainty" reached by any Wikileak, and I would be interested to hear what "collusion" linked Clinton to MSNBC from that Wikileak. What "collusion" are you referencing?

 

[Jack V Savage]

I agree with what you're saying but some people are single issue voters and if TPP was your single issue I can sort of see it. Sure Hillary ended up saying she was against it but it seemed insincere at the time.

There was no way Clinton would be able to flip on the TPP, given the heat she took for opposing it. I think anyone who expected a reversal there just really doesn't understand politics at all. And opposing the TPP is one of the dumbest things to be a single-issue voter one can imagine.

As for the thread, it's reflective of a broader problem in the discourse, I think. People genuinely don't seem to be able to understand disagreement--about news judgment in this case, but it applies to anything. It's either you agree with me or you are corruptly pretending not to even though you secretly know I'm right. The far left is the worst on this, but it's a problem all over.

Well yeah, WikiLeaks (sketchy as fuck source aside, the email content was never questioned) showed that the DNC gave out marching orders to mainstream media and they obliged.

Another good example. This is utterly insane.

 

[Islam Imamate]

There was no way Clinton would be able to flip on the TPP, given the heat she took for opposing it. I think anyone who expected a reversal there just really doesn't understand politics at all. And opposing the TPP is one of the dumbest things to be a single-issue voter one can imagine.

As for the thread, it's reflective of a broader problem in the discourse, I think. People genuinely don't seem to be able to understand disagreement--about news judgment in this case, but it applies to anything. It's either you agree with me or you are corruptly pretending not to even though you secretly know I'm right. The far left is the worst on this, but it's a problem all over.

Trump is flipping on the TPP and the Clinton delegates at the DNC supported it so I wouldn't be so sure about her not flipping on it. She did praise it herself before the populist surge caused her to flip flop.

Not saying the TPP single issue folks were right, like I said I wouldn't vote for Trump and I was a Bernie voter.

If there was any media "conspiracy" against Bernie I'd imagine it was related to two factors: a) he was perceived as highly unlikely to win and therefore a waste of time and b) he wasn't perceived as good for ratings like Trump who was also perceived as highly unlikely to win.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Trump is flipping on the TPP and the Clinton delegates at the DNC supported it so I wouldn't be so sure about her not flipping on it. She did praise it herself before the populist surge caused her to flip flop.

Not saying the TPP single issue folks were right, like I said I wouldn't vote for Trump and I was a Bernie voter.

If there was any media "conspiracy" against Bernie I'd imagine it was related to two factors: a) he was perceived as highly unlikely to win and therefore a waste of time and b) he wasn't perceived as good for ratings like Trump who was also perceived as highly unlikely to win.

Trump is breaking the rules in a way that Clinton (or anyone else) would never get away with or think they could get away with. I don't think he's a model for how anyone else would act. I feel 100% sure that Clinton would not flip on the TPP.

Side note: I think it's funny that people who buy the right-wing characterization of her as some kind of sleazy politician would think she'd flip, as that would entail massive political costs and would indicate that she's putting (her idea of) the good of the country above her political fortunes. I don't think she'd be that sacrificing, especially over a pretty minor issue. The calculation is different for Trump because he lies so much that no one takes his promises seriously, and he puts almost no thoughts into his positions or actions anyway. So it's easy for Republicans to move him on anything, and his base happily goes along.

Yes, I agree 100% with that last paragraph. The worst thing about the discourse today (evident in the WR too) is the tendency to just see conspiracies everywhere. Even if people are sure that they are right and think the questions are easy, they should realize that stupid people exist, and people trust other people that they shouldn't, etc.