• Welcome to the PopMalt Forums! Whether you're new to forums or a veteran, welcome to our humble home on the web! We're a 20-year old forum community with thousands of discussions on entertainment, lifestyle, leisure, and more.

    Our rules are simple. Be nice and don't spam. Registration is free, so what are you waiting for? Join today!.

Why do republicans let liberals moderate?

SmilinSilhouette

Registered Member
I don't understand why they continue to let the liberal mainstream media leftists moderate their debates. Not only are they going up against each other, they are going up against 0bama adoring sycophants that would never ask the kind of loaded questions of dear leader. I wish the republican party would recognize that ABCBSMSNBCNN are on the squarely in the democrat camp and they should refuse to participate in their agenda driven sideshow.

Republican Debate | George Stephanopoulos | Media Bias | The Daily Caller

I mean seriously, Stephanopoulous is not a journalist. He's a democrat propagandist.
 

KSpiceFantastic

Haters gonna hate.
That's like having a Democrat debate on Fox News.

Do you understand how ridiculous Fox News sounds with debates. They seem entirely sympathetic for the Republican candidates when they make no sense at all. Maybe a few news sources are biased one way, but there are bunch that go the other way as well.

Welcome to life in the media, my friend. I've gotten used to it, and you should too.
 

CaptainObvious

Embrace the Suck
V.I.P.
That's like having a Democrat debate on Fox News.

Do you understand how ridiculous Fox News sounds with debates. They seem entirely sympathetic for the Republican candidates when they make no sense at all. Maybe a few news sources are biased one way, but there are bunch that go the other way as well.

Welcome to life in the media, my friend. I've gotten used to it, and you should too.
Are we watching the same Fox News? Because I've seen them ask everyone tough questions, Republican and Democrat. I've seen GOP candidates get upset at Chris Mathews plenty of times.

This reminds me of SNL and the election of '08. They would ask Hillary Clinton tough questions but Obama's questions were like "are you comfortable" "would you like some water" and go back to asking Hillary a foreign policy question:lol:

EDIT: speaking about Stephanopolus, he got Griswold slightly wrong when he was questioning Santorum. Santorum either didn't realize it or it caught him off guard and didn't correct him.
 
Last edited:

SmilinSilhouette

Registered Member
Is some hypothetical about states rights more important than the economy? High unemployment? "Recess" appointments? The national debt?

Apparently to ABCBSMSNBCNN none of that stuff is more important than asking loaded questions which are irrelevant. That's because they are solidly behind the democrat party and will do what ever it takes to prop them up.

No wonder those that still believe that ABCBSMSNBCNN are "news" organizations buy into the jibberish.
 

KSpiceFantastic

Haters gonna hate.
In politics, nothing should be irrelevant. It should not just be about the economy or about foreign affairs. Presidents have more decisions to make than that.

Oh, and Fox News is the same company that hired Glenn Beck in the first place. Remember him and his radical shouting sprees? Yeah. The closest thing anyone has compared to what he had is Rachel Maddow, and I love her, and I guess rightfully so.

Media can be biased, it's human nature. I say just to live with it, because Fox News is not as pretty and unbiased as you think it is. If you think they work on the straight and narrow, you are poorly mistaken.

If you don't want biases in your media. Don't watch the news.
 

CaptainObvious

Embrace the Suck
V.I.P.
I think you're missing the point here. The complaint is the GOP contenders agreeing to a debate where Stephanopoulos asking ridiculous hypothetical questions about something as irrelevant as contraceptives. There are far more important issues, like the economy, a subject the media beat to death in '08 but has virtually ignored in this election cycle. The complaint isn't there shouldn't be bias, the complaint is why is this bias tolerated?
 

KSpiceFantastic

Haters gonna hate.
It's tolerated because there is no other alternative.

The media is a collection of corporations that are seemingly as big as some of the political parties themselves. To try to take the biased ones down is trying to take the government down. It is not going to happen. It's tolerated because it is a debate. It should not be set to one topic... and the economy has NOT been ignored this election cycle. Plenty of debates have covered it in depth. I guess it's just these latest ones that are going more general but yet specific.
 

SmilinSilhouette

Registered Member
Pretending that democrat operatives like Stephanopoulous are journalists is a joke. I'm pretty sure democrats would not allow someone like Hannity to "moderate" their debates. But that is what happens when republicans bother with the democrat lame stream media. I wonder when Obama will be asked any tough questions by his adorers and admirers. They are too busy admiring the emperors new clothes.
 

KSpiceFantastic

Haters gonna hate.
I think they will. Even if they are democratic agenda whores like you say they are, the US deserves a sense of honesty in terms of the hard-hitting questions. I think the gloves will come off.
 

MenInTights

not a plastic bag
To be fair, last election cycle there was ONE question asked about Obama's friend/mentor/pastor/Marxist/millionaire/God-Damn America/Jew hating Reverend Wright and it came from Stephanopoulous.

The question was ridiculous: “Do you think Reverend Wright loves America as much as you do?” And didn't really bolster Stephanopoulous's credibility. It just showed what a failure the alphabet media was on the 2004 election cycle.
 
Top