General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFOX News decided that it could praise Zelenskyy and Trump and criticize Biden at the same time...
They hope people will forget that they have been cheerleaders for Putin for the last 5 years. No matter what he did, it was OK with them. But, no more.
It doesn't matter to them that Trump was a puppet of Putin's for his entire Administration and that they were a puppet of Trump's for the same time period. Putin's smell did not rub off on Trump, according to the FOX News talking heads. They are capable of putting the first impeachment out of mind and out of history. They are ready to believe that Trump was not trying to get rid of NATO. They believe he was only trying to get them to pay their dues. It never occurred to them that was his strategy to give him an excuse to leave it. It was all for the benefit of Vladimir Putin. Just like his call to Zelenskyy when he needed the weapons to defend his country in the Donbass region.
But, nothing can stop them from criticizing Joe Biden at every turn. They are always capable of telling half the story when it fits their narrative.
They have no shame.
TheBlackAdder
(28,234 posts).
.
elias7
(4,030 posts)Inflation, immigration, Afghanistan, Ukraine, Climate change, you name they blame him for it and further blame him for not fixing it. Its what they live for. Predictable slamming with never an ounce of credit. How can any intelligent person honestly accept the bias?
kentuck
(111,110 posts)...they will find a way to simply ignore reporting it. Some things they just don't want their viewers to see...
Mr.Bill
(24,344 posts)He spent a good portion of his show talking about Biden's low approval ratings. To be fair, it was in the context of saying people are saying things about Biden that are just plain not true, but he even blamed that on Democrats being very bad at messaging.
ificandream
(9,410 posts)He's a newsman. Being critical is part of his job. And not just of Republicans.
Mr.Bill
(24,344 posts)Democrats. No mention of republicans that I heard, except to mention W's rating was as high as 91%, which he didn't put into the context of being right after 9/11. But then that has to be put in the context of the show being about the SOTU address tonight. His "panel" didn't have much positive to say about Democrats either.
Oh well, we all know about Todd and what he is. I rarely watch him. Partisan politics aside, I have just never thought he was a very good journalist or interviewer.
ificandream
(9,410 posts)And he is a good one. (I worked in newspapers for over three decades.)
Mr.Bill
(24,344 posts)My first paying job was as a journalist, but I didn't pursue it as a career. I actually followed the advice of my high school journalism teacher, who said the people that print the newspaper by and large make more money than the people who write the newspaper. I spent 30+ years running printing presses, but not at a newspaper.
ificandream
(9,410 posts)Mr.Bill
(24,344 posts)An awful lot of people here lately like to put words in other people's mouths.
It won't work with me.
ificandream
(9,410 posts)You went from journalism to printing presses to newspaper executives without actually answering whether Fux was better than Todd. I say he is. Way way way better. To me, all this complaining about Todd is almost Fux bullshit. (You see Fux dumping on their competition daily in the most unprofessional ways.) As I've said before, Todd has a wide open style of questioning. And he doesn't always say things people want to hear. He doesn't have to. I have no problem with his work. Everyone nitpicks little things he says. He wouldn't be NBC's head political guy if they didn't think he was good at what he does.
Mr.Bill
(24,344 posts)and often doesn't even try to call them on it with follow-up questions. He says he doesn't do that because then they won't come on his show. That's not good journalism. That's just chasing ratings. I know TV news is a business, but it shouldn't be at the expense of giving people an opportunity to lie without calling them on it.
If it's raining outside and you report on it, it's not necessarily good journalism to also interview someone who says it's not raining.
ificandream
(9,410 posts)You can call them on their statements. He has. But again, he has a wide-ranging style of interviewing. His interviews are informative. You and I don't have to like what you hear. But that doesn't mean he's doing something wrong.
Bettie
(16,134 posts)actually BE critical of Republicans instead of spending all his time kissing their, um, feet.
Mad_Machine76
(24,450 posts)when half of them time we get drowned out by everybody else on Sunday talk shows (and pretty much every other moment of every day)
CrispyQ
(36,544 posts)Even those not in the cult are brainwashed to a certain extent. They totally believe that the GOP is better for the economy.
U.S. Jobs, Income, GDP Growth 'Startlingly' Higher Under Democratic Presidents: Analysis
BY BENJAMIN FEARNOW ON 2/2/21 AT 5:33 PM EST
https://www.newsweek.com/us-jobs-income-gdp-growth-startlingly-higher-under-democratic-presidents-analysis-1566313
snip...
Nearly all major U.S. economic indicatorsincluding income, productivity, stock prices, jobs and gross domestic product (GDP)show growth under Democratic Party presidents, reflecting a "startlingly large" gap compared to when Republicans are in the White House.
New analysis and economic research seeks answers for why all six presidents who presided over the fastest periods of U.S. job growth were Democrats, while recent Republicans including both Bushes and Donald Trump saw the least expansion. A New York Times analysis released Tuesday, which draws from vast research, asks the question, "Why has the U.S. economy fared so much better under Democratic presidents than Republicans?" The authors noted that GOP presidents in the past several decades have run up larger deficits than Democrats and party control of Congress has shown minimal impact on growth.
Some economists remain unsure about pinpointing exact factors. But the analysis concludes that Democrats have been more pragmatic and "more willing to heed economic and historical lessons" about strengthening economies, while Republicans have clung to "magical" tax cut and deregulation theories in times of crisis.
If the U.S. economy had grown at the increased rate seen under Democrats since 1933, the average income of Americans would be more than double its current level, the analysis found. The data analyzed may also be overly kind to Republicans because it excludes the years of Great Depression that occurred under Republican President Herbert Hoover.
NCDem47
(2,252 posts)It
DOES...
NOT...
MATTER...
what he or FOX "commentators" have done or said in the past. What they say NOW is what is propagandized. Their cult is asked to suspend all disbelief. And they will.
underpants
(182,958 posts)We need to hang that around his neck. Savvy wonderful genius. The cult wont get it but everyone else will.
Crunchy Frog
(26,694 posts)They are perfect illustrations of the phenomena that Orwell described in his books.
mia
(8,363 posts)As if they're fighting for their lives.
Watching them on Fox, now.