Very disappointed to see the narrative here about the interview.

[Drunken Irishman]

Most of the topics are critical of Mika, complaining about how her questions were bad and then deflecting everything by asking why they didn't interview Trump.

There's only a smattering of messages about what Joe actually said or how he did in answering those questions.

If I didn't know any better, coming on DU and seeing the subject lines, I would just assume the interview was a hit job that made matters worse and Joe buckled under it. You know, attack the messenger.

It's unsettling to me that this is the forming narrative because now it's actually making me doubt Biden did well. I think there's a lot of truth to the idea that when things like this go wrong, it's easier to attack the media/narrative than to question the actual response.

I don't think that's the case here, but reading DU, you wouldn't know it.

[writes3000]

2. Good call out.

This board does focus on the negative, in part, because our frustration with Republicans binds us more than our support of any one candidate.

We all need to support Compassionate Joe.

[riversedge]

3. I said Joe was handling it well.....

for what it is worth.
and as I said--maybe it is good prep for what is to come--and come it will.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=13374519

[Cirque du So-What]

4. If any of the armchair pundits entertain thoughts of going pro

I recommend they don't give up their day jobs any time soon.

[ibegurpard]

5. Yup

Didn't see it and based on the responses here you'd think the whole thing was a disaster for Biden.

Which i have no doubt is a deliberate narrative being pushed by some.

[Ninga]

6. Here is what I've sadly learned about some responses.

1. People opine without first reading any links provided in the OP. Kinda a hit and run job.

2. In the case of Mika’s hard hitting interview, some people opine abandoning their critical thinking
skills. More emotional hit and run responses.

3. In the case of our next President Joe Biden, his demeanor and answers served him well and he
did not wither under her constant and repetitive questioning.

[COLGATE4]

9. Asking the same question over and over (and over)

although it has already been answered is generally not considered "hard-hitting journalism"

[Ninga]

18. Oh dear. Soft ball interview then? Hammering repeated questions is what then? Suggesting

that his U of Dv papers be scrutinized is what then?

Reade herself said she filed a complaint but has no copy of although she has her employment papers from the same year.

Search for the filed complaint in the National Archives. Period.

[COLGATE4]

26. In a court that type of repeated questioning would be

closed off as "asked and answered". If continued it would be badgering the witness. Neither is appropriate.

[JustAnotherGen]

7. He held his position

Mika kept hammering on the University of Delaware Congressional and Presidential Records. Those do NOT contain anything Human Resources related. It's called OPRA. She's a journalist - she can request it.

Ms. Reade has an attorney - correct? Why not let them request a search of the 'digital' (if they are?) records for her name.

Meantime - VP Biden is correct - the Senate Secretary can pull the HR records.


Seems to me Mika doesn't understand that. I really wanted Biden to say - You are a journalist - could you use the OPRA to get the answer?

He's too respectful.

And I DGAF what he said about Ms. Ford two years ago. He answered the question.

Should women be believed. Yes.

Then AFTER that - investigate it.

You mean to tell me Mitch McConnell can't do that? Why wouldn't the GOP be salivating over records they have access to?

Is it because she lifted the 'story' from her dead daddy's book?

[uponit7771]

12. THIS !!!! ... and Biden said it multiple times that believing women doesn't end the matter its the

... beginning.

I thought if he had to dumb it down from there it would've been embarrassing for her

[TreasonousBastard]

8. I heard abut half of it, and in that half Mika admitted she was going to ask from...

several different directions. This is a basic interviewing technique and is normally intended to get the subject to slip up.

Since this interview is in a press room, not a police station, Mika may had had some agreement to hit him hard-- maybe as practice for both of them. Real journalists (not internet commentators on journalists) walk a thin line between hard questions that will get real answers and ones that will inspire more lies or lead the subject to just walk out. I will remember fondly until my dying day how that "sweet little lightweight" Terry Gross brilliantly got big bad O'Reilly so flummoxed that he had to walk off the set, leaving her with an empty chair and some dead air.

Dead air, you may know, is a broadcaster's worst nightmare, and I'm sure Gross was not expecting the walkout. (But, she's not above bragging about it in promos for her show.)

Anyway, all this bullshit about Trump and Kavanaugh is not only bald-faced whataboutism, but ignores the impossibility of getting either of them on the show.

[uponit7771]

10. Did you see the interview? tia

[Drunken Irishman]

13. Yes and if the narrative that Mika did a poor job & not Biden clearing the air, we lose.

We lose in reference to the narrative, I mean.

We can either choose to focus on how the interview was handled or we can focus on how Biden handled the interview.

If we focus just on what Mika was asking, we lose the substance of Biden's answer and it's a look that will raise questions about his effectiveness in deflecting the allegations. If that becomes the narrative, then we're in trouble.

[uponit7771]

16. Mika did a poor job, she read into Biden's statement something that wasn't there due to confirmation

... bias that was clear with the constant asking of the same question.

She continued to read the statement "start off with the presumption ... " as if Joe was saying "start then end with the presumption ..." and that's not what Biden said.

It was damn near embarrassing that Mika didn't get the fact that believe women was the start of the matter not the end of it.

This is text book confirmation bias.

Also

The overt push into false equivalency between Biden and Kav was gob smacking, Biden is inviting and investigation Kav did not.

She did not do well and I like her IE the focus.

[Drunken Irishman]

19. Cool. Guess what...

None of your damn post said anything about Biden's answers or how he handled those questions. Your continued focus on her tells me Biden won't be able to shake these allegations because what he said in that interview is being drown out by people bitching about the interviewer.

If that's the narrative out of this, Biden is cooked because everything he said will be ignored and those who need to hear it the most, voters on the fence, will see the left not defending or praising Biden's answers but their complaining about the questions. And they'll deduce from that that Biden didn't appropriately answer the questions because you know who attacks the interviewer? The losing side.

It's no different than sports. You rarely ever hear the winning team criticize the officiating, even if it's bad, but you'll sure hear it from the losing team.

So, I can only assume that Biden buckled and didn't handle the interview well and because of that, this will still continue to be an issue.

I say that because most the posts here, and the complaining on twitter, isn't stating Biden made a strong case despite some really dumb, pushy questions from Mika. Instead, what I'm seeing a lot of is that Mika was awful. Cool. But how was Biden?!

[cwydro]

20. You make some good points. Nt

[Demsrule86]

28. Sorry to tell you ...but Biden is not cooked. He dealt with this shit the entire primary. If MSNBC

isn't careful,they are cooked. Biden did fine and Mika was awful...two things can be true.

[cwydro]

34. I'm sorry, where did I say he was "cooked?"

[uponit7771]

22. This is false when you said 'none' ... that's not true at all.

[Drunken Irishman]

23. Okay.

... bias that was clear with the constant asking of the same question.

She continued to read the statement "start off with the presumption ... " as if Joe was saying "start then end with the presumption ..." and that's not what Biden said.

It was damn near embarrassing that Mika didn't get the fact that believe women was the start of the matter not the end of it.

This is text book confirmation bias.

Also

The overt push into false equivalency between Biden and Kav was gob smacking, Biden is inviting and investigation Kav did not.

She did not do well and I like her IE the focus.

Show me where you said anything about how Biden did in the interview. You only mentioned he invited an investigation but none of your post tells me how Biden handled the interview. Your post doesn't mention whether he credibly denied the allegations. Your post doesn't even mention whether he gave good answers to those questions.

Reading your post gives me no insight into how Biden actually handled the interview.

[uponit7771]

24. You said, "None of your damn post said anything about Biden's answers ..." this is false (link)

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=13375334

I had multiple post about Biden's answers, they were good ... Biden thrives.

I like Mika so ... MOST ... of my focus was my embrassment for her confirmation bias.

[Drunken Irishman]

30. Your post I replied to was not about how well Biden did.

[Demsrule86]

29. Biden did not buckle and many have posted about it...if you assume that he did poorly, It is because

you choose to believe it.

[Drunken Irishman]

33. No. I assume we need to drive the narrative.

Spending time tearing down Mika tells no one anything about how Biden did and whether he credibly denied the accusations.

Right now, there are eight posts on the front page (GD) about Biden. Only two are positive and about the interview. Meanwhile, there are eight posts specific to the interviews and all of them are about how the interview was conducted, not how Biden conducted the interview.

That should be the narrative.

[Demsrule86]

31. That is nonsense.

[Drunken Irishman]

32. Nope.

[Vinca]

11. I didn't bother to watch it since I've thought the story was BS from the start, but

if Mika was posing tough questions, that's a good thing. If she'd thrown softballs the narrative would have been worse.

[hlthe2b]

14. It seems apparent you did not watch the interview. Biden did well despite Mike going way overboard

and beyond professional critical questioning. She seemed intent to make some kind of statement herself.

Biden was appropriate, beyond patient, and consistent IMO. Mika hurt herself.

[Peacetrain]

15. Of course he handled it well.. I just want fair treatment and would prefer

he went on a regular 5:30 news show with reporters and not commentators as on the cable stations

[lagomorph777]

17. Joe's response was clear and well-presented. I haven't seen anybody say or imply otherwise here.

Maybe you're reading different threads than I have.

There's a ton of evidence out there that the accuser is non-credible.

No credible evidence has emerged in her favor.

Joe is clearly saying to stick with the facts; and so far it appears the facts are very much in his favor.

[Drunken Irishman]

21. Their not mentioning Biden's response is doing just that.

Message after message about Mika. Tweet after tweet about her, too. But not as much mentioning how Biden did. If that's the optics, people who didn't see the interview will conclude he failed to answer the questions because shooting the messenger is what losing sides do.

You rarely ever hear a winning team complain about the officiating, even if it's bad. You hear it a lot, though, from the losing team.

[The Magistrate]

25. No One Here Doubts Mr. Biden Did Well, Sir

That can be, and is, taken for granted. He is a professional of long experience and some skill.

People are aware, however, of the danger of media bias, of the herd mentality it displays at times, worrying away at some trifle as if it were the keys to the kingdom. People commenting here in the manner which seems to distress you are trying to get out ahead of that. Social opprobrium is a powerful force, and it is quite proper to mobilize it not just against the lying flake who concocted these 'charges', but against media figures who promote and peddle them. In fact, it is not only proper but necessary.


"Defeat of a dangerous enemy is something to be for."

[Demsrule86]

27. Another questionable post IMHO. Biden did just fine and people said so...doesn't change the hostile

nature of the interview. Mika was awful with here crossed arms and nasty hectoring tone. She certainly attempted to harm Biden. She didn't succeed thankfully as Biden is a great person. it doesn't change what she tried to do. I am done with MSNBC...last straw for me.

[LakeArenal]

35. Mika is an "as the wind blows" journalist.

She has very little credibility.

Giving her this much attention is like giving Sarandon or Moore a platform to spew.

It’s time we call the Democratic nominee our full support. Believe him and support him.

The sources of this smear ARE NOT CREDIBLE. Quit giving them any credibility.

Read can have her day in court. But of course, she won’t testify in court because she’s a liar.