Speaking of mainstream media, this is a great debate between Doubly Murray and Malcom Gladwell. Sadly, I lost a lot of respect for Gladwell; dude’s brain is clearly captured by ideology.
Also, it had the largest swing in the crowds view pre and post debate in the shows history.
Thanks for posting. I confess, the only one I had heard of prior to listening to this debate was Matt Taibbi. Apparently, Gladwell had not heard of him though - he kept mis-pronouncing his name even after being corrected repeatedly. Interesting debate tactic, as is taking the tone of the bemused professor, particularly ironic given his lack of postgraduate study. His father was a professor though, so possibly it is a familial affectation. At any rate, it didn't play well with the audience, and seemed to lend itself to the idea that the mainstream press are tone-deaf elitists.
I like the format idea to take a poll before and after the debate to measure effectiveness. So however skewed the audience is one way or another, the marginal change can be measured.
I wouldn't even call that debate. One side repeatedly used ad hominem and straw men arguments and devoted almost no time to trying to actually make a persuasive rebuttal.
The whole debate is actually a good representation of our current times. One side (the affirmative) points out examples of obvious mainstream media bias and how have lost credibility, and the other side resorts to ridicule and personal attack (and references to the state of journalism 20 years ago) to try to discredit their very rudimentary observations.
I mean, think about it. The Russiagate hoax itself should have automatically thrown all of the mainstream news networks and newspapers out of business. Instead, people from the WaPost and NYT won Pullitzer prizes for their "coverage" of it.
Dick Cheney endorsing Kamala Harris because, of course....democracy.
People are so brainwashed. All of a sudden, everything that anyone doesn't like is a threat to "democracy".... the funny thing is that our whole system of government is meant to prevent against direct democracy. Three tyrannies that our gov't protects against:
1. Tyranny of the one (dictatorship)
2. Tyranny of the few (oligarchy)
3. Tyranny of the majority (direct democracy)
All of the outrage against Cheney for all of these years was fake.... the dude is representative of everything that is wrong with polictics and is a high-class criminal, and here is a whole party embracing him on the false notion of upholding a concept that doesn't even exist?
In HS my buddies dad made Impeach Cheney First buttons. I wish I still had one, lol.
The excuses are so on point too because the SCOTUS 2000 decision that led to him as VP is so conveniently left out of their insane "democracy is at stake" protestations.
It's also hilarious because that party is truly the anti-democratic party. If the DNC wasn't outright colluding with the candidates in 2016 and 2020, Bernie Sanders would have easily been the nominee. In 2024, the nominee got exactly ZERO primary votes and was one of the least popular primary candidates in 2020.
dd10snoop28 wrote: ↑Sun Sep 15, 2024 7:32 pm
It's also hilarious because that party is truly the anti-democratic party. If the DNC wasn't outright colluding with the candidates in 2016 and 2020, Bernie Sanders would have easily been the nominee. In 2024, the nominee got exactly ZERO primary votes and was one of the least popular primary candidates in 2020.
Amazing. "Democracy" for thee, not for me.
Interesting timing on this "democracy" discussions....the guy who just tried to assassinate the former president, said via Twitter on August 22nd, 2024: "Trump should be MASA....make Americans slaves again....DEMOCRACY is on the ballot and we cannot lose. We cannot fail."
Dude got sucked into the ridiculous narrative being pushed that "Democracy is on the line" and then tried to murder the former president.
Just a reminder:
1. Democracy is not a key tenet of American government structure. In fact, the founders were opposed to direct democracy,
2. Even if this was a real principle, only one party has had 3 straight presidential nominees chosen via entirely un-democratic means.
