The DNC says no debates on FOX

ridski said:
FNC isn't much more than a cultist station now. Might as well announce you won't be getting LLBN to host a debate. 

 Unfortunately it is the main news source for a large percentage of the electorate. And I still maintain that some of its viewers are people that need to be courted by democrats in the general election next year if they want to win.

mrincredible said:

ridski said:
FNC isn't much more than a cultist station now. Might as well announce you won't be getting LLBN to host a debate. 

 Unfortunately it is the main news source for a large percentage of the electorate. And I still maintain that some of its viewers are people that need to be courted by democrats in the general election next year if they want to win.

I doubt there are any meaningful number of persuadable voters among the Fox audience who aren't watching other news outlets as well.  Anyone who only gets their news from Fox is probably not even considering a Democrat.

Why bother to go on a network and get questions like -- "Why do you want the U.S. to be just like Venezuela?"

ml1 said:

mrincredible said:

ridski said:
FNC isn't much more than a cultist station now. Might as well announce you won't be getting LLBN to host a debate. 

 Unfortunately it is the main news source for a large percentage of the electorate. And I still maintain that some of its viewers are people that need to be courted by democrats in the general election next year if they want to win.

I doubt there are any meaningful number of persuadable voters among the Fox audience who aren't watching other news outlets as well.  Anyone who only gets their news from Fox is probably not even considering a Democrat.
Why bother to go on a network and get questions like -- "Why do you want the U.S. to be just like Venezuela?"

I didn't say "only". I said "main". Remember the 2016 electoral college margin! (Really a clunky slogan for a bumper sticker)

And as far as your closing question, I would be interested to see how the candidates responded to such questions. It could help thin the herd a little if some of them completely fumbled that kind of nonsense. Political Darwinism as it were (ironically on a network with a problematic relationship with science).

Fox viewers, like most Trump voters, should be simply ignored by the candidates. They are too far gone to be worth any kind of investment of time or energy. Waste of resources. At least with more rational people, you can sort of come up with a plan to appeal to them. Not so with these guys. You can't target them in any way that would be consistent with the rest of your message.

All you can hope for in terms of getting Trump voters are those people who had a kind of a hard time voting for Trump. Maybe they can be peeled away. But who knows how many of them there are, or even where they are? You'd need some good polling to find those folks.

The key to the election is holding the base, and increasing turnout. Not getting Trump voters.

Holding the base and increasing turnout, yes of course, crucial.  But i still disagree about writing off all Trump voters.  People had a wide variety of reasons for voting for him, and unless we're going to try to show them that the Dems can and will work toward a better life for them, and a better country for all of us, than the GOP, we're giving up on the US.  Just my opinion as always, db.  You know i love you except for this part.

drummerboy said:
Fox viewers, like most Trump voters, should be simply ignored by the candidates. They are too far gone to be worth any kind of investment of time or energy. Waste of resources. At least with more rational people, you can sort of come up with a plan to appeal to them. Not so with these guys. You can't target them in any way that would be consistent with the rest of your message.
All you can hope for in terms of getting Trump voters are those people who had a kind of a hard time voting for Trump. Maybe they can be peeled away. But who knows how many of them there are, or even where they are? You'd need some good polling to find those folks.
The key to the election is holding the base, and increasing turnout. Not getting Trump voters.

 Exactly!!!! If the Trump supporters who are really interested in watching the debates will look at it..... it's not like they only have Fox news on their tv. Not everyone who watches fox is a member of the cult. Just grab the remote control and get a different view. The problem is the blatant bias and mockery by the Fox news journalism. 

Dems seem to have a talent for shooting themselves in the foot. Ignoring the huge demographic that regularly watch FOX is a sample.

mtierney said:
Dems seem to have a talent for shooting themselves in the foot. Ignoring the huge demographic that regularly watch FOX is a sample.

it's not at all shooting themselves in the foot.  The demographic that watches Fox News is overwhelming white and overwhelmingly elderly.  Not a demographic that votes in any significant numbers for Democrats overall, especially the ones who are watching Fox News.

Would you say the Republicans are shooting themselves in the foot by not trolling for votes among Daily Kos visitors or Mother Jones readers?

mrincredible said:

ml1 said:

mrincredible said:

ridski said:
FNC isn't much more than a cultist station now. Might as well announce you won't be getting LLBN to host a debate. 

 Unfortunately it is the main news source for a large percentage of the electorate. And I still maintain that some of its viewers are people that need to be courted by democrats in the general election next year if they want to win.

I doubt there are any meaningful number of persuadable voters among the Fox audience who aren't watching other news outlets as well.  Anyone who only gets their news from Fox is probably not even considering a Democrat.
Why bother to go on a network and get questions like -- "Why do you want the U.S. to be just like Venezuela?"

I didn't say "only". I said "main". Remember the 2016 electoral college margin! (Really a clunky slogan for a bumper sticker)
And as far as your closing question, I would be interested to see how the candidates responded to such questions. It could help thin the herd a little if some of them completely fumbled that kind of nonsense. Political Darwinism as it were (ironically on a network with a problematic relationship with science).

I'm pretty sure there will be PLENTY of opportunities to see all the candidates in all kinds of settings.  Why any of them would find it necessary to attend a FNC hosted debate is beyond me however.  I wouldn't criticize them if they did.  I just disagree with those saying it's a missed opportunity.  I think each of them would be better off doing almost anything else with the two hours they'd spend on that stage.  Travel to Milwaukee or Altoona or Grand Rapids and meet some voters.  That would be more worthwhile than taking questions from Steve Doocy.

The demographic that ONLY watches Fox, and wouldn't even watch a debate on another network, are probably going to vote GOP anyway.

nohero said:
The demographic that ONLY watches Fox, and wouldn't even watch a debate on another network, are probably going to vote GOP anyway.

 and even if we limit it to people who "mainly" watch Fox, what are the chances that they're considering a Democrat.  The "mainly" Fox viewers are being fed a steady diet of pro-Trumpist propaganda, amid slanders of Democrats.  Fox News was on in a bar I was at last Friday.  So I got to check out Hannity and Ingraham.  It's really astounding what FNC has become.  It was pretty standard right-wing talking points in the past.  But what I saw last week was hysterical fear-mongering about immigrants and people of color.  They were covering Jussie Smollett as if it was the biggest story in history.  Anyone who chooses to watch that channel as their main source of news is enduring pretty heavy brainwashing.  And I know that word sounds ridiculous, but there's really no exaggeration in using it to describe what I was seeing that evening.

nohero said:
The demographic that ONLY watches Fox, and wouldn't even watch a debate on another network, are probably going to vote GOP anyway.

 First, This is the first time I have seen a "Reply to this Comment" option. Not sure I like it. It may just lead to more repetition of entire posts and replies making posts incredibly long.

Now here's what I think you are missing. A Debate on FOX among Democratic Candidates may attract far more Dem viewers that want to see these candidates than usual FOX viewers. The latter may not have any desire to watch. The former may want to watch "our candidates" under fire.

If the FOX reporters ask stupid questions it will just demonstrate to anyone other than FOX's base how stupid and biased FOX really is. And hopefully the candidates will respond "That is a really stupid question"?

I do not see anything negative about additional exposure of the candidates. Whether the questions are serious or silly I do not see many viewers not already inclined to favor Trump being persuaded to support him rather than a Dem. 

And the DNC can insist on input into the format.

STANV said:
 First, This is the first time I have seen a "Reply to this Comment" option. Not sure I like it. It may just lead to more repetition of entire posts and replies making posts incredibly long.


Now here's what I think you are missing. A Debate on FOX among Democratic Candidates may attract far more Dem viewers that want to see these candidates than usual FOX viewers. The latter may not have any desire to watch. The former may want to watch "our candidates" under fire.
If the FOX reporters ask stupid questions it will just demonstrate to anyone other than FOX's base how stupid and biased FOX really is. And hopefully the candidates will respond "That is a really stupid question"?
I do not see anything negative about additional exposure of the candidates. Whether the questions are serious or silly I do not see many viewers not already inclined to favor Trump being persuaded to support him rather than a Dem. 


And the DNC can insist on input into the format.

 Au contraire: This feature trims only the last comment for a response - Love it!

jimmurphy said:
 Au contraire: This feature trims only the last comment for a response - Love it!

 Thanks!!!!

I now see it. Great!!!

Kudos to the Brothers Ross.

STANV said:

And the DNC can insist on input into the format.

 The DNC can insist. The network can refuse.

If a Democratic candidate for President isn't able to handle biased questions from Fox News, they're not qualified to be President.

And the same goes for Republican candidates appearing on NBC, ABC or CBS.

paulsurovell said:
If a Democratic candidate for President isn't able to handle biased questions from Fox News, they're not qualified to be President.
And the same goes for Republican candidates appearing on NBC, ABC or CBS.

 Sure they should be able to handle tough questions.  It would be a sign of respect and trust for the DNC to send their candidates to a debate at Fox.  They don't deserve any favors from the DNC.  It's not like there aren't other networks to host the debates.  

drummerboy said:
Fox viewers, like most Trump voters, should be simply ignored by the candidates. They are too far gone to be worth any kind of investment of time or energy. Waste of resources. At least with more rational people, you can sort of come up with a plan to appeal to them. Not so with these guys. You can't target them in any way that would be consistent with the rest of your message.
All you can hope for in terms of getting Trump voters are those people who had a kind of a hard time voting for Trump. Maybe they can be peeled away. But who knows how many of them there are, or even where they are? You'd need some good polling to find those folks.
The key to the election is holding the base, and increasing turnout. Not getting Trump voters.

 In your 'Fallacy of composition' view of the world, can the same be said about viewers of the CNN or MSNBC cable opinion networks?

lord_pabulum said:
 In your 'Fallacy of composition' view of the world, can the same be said about viewers of the CNN or MSNBC cable opinion networks?

 um, no.

Do you actually think that Fox is somehow equivalent to MSNBC or CNN?

paulsurovell said:
If a Democratic candidate for President isn't able to handle biased questions from Fox News, they're not qualified to be President.
And the same goes for Republican candidates appearing on NBC, ABC or CBS.

they can certainly include a Fox News host on a debate panel at some point.  But there is absolutely no obligation for the DNC to allow Fox News to have their branding all over a debate stage.  They don't need to give Fox any opportunity to use a DNC debate to falsely claim it as proof that they are a "fair and balanced" news outlet.

New Rule:

Presidential Debate questions should be limited to five words or less and only cover the following topics:

1.  Tennis

2. Late 90s Children’s Television Shows

3.  the works of F Scott Fitzgerald; and

4. Pearl Jam’s second record.

ml1 said: "Anyone who chooses to watch that channel as their main source of news is enduring pretty heavy brainwashing.  And I know that word sounds ridiculous, but there's really no exaggeration in using it to describe what I was seeing that evening."

Agree 100% about brainwashing, not ridiculous at all.  All the fearmongering, all the repetition....

drummerboy said:

lord_pabulum said:
 In your 'Fallacy of composition' view of the world, can the same be said about viewers of the CNN or MSNBC cable opinion networks?

 um, no.
Do you actually think that Fox is somehow equivalent to MSNBC or CNN?

 Yes, all three are cable opinion networks.  I prefer news.

Robert_Casotto said:
New Rule:


Presidential Debate questions should be limited to five words or less and only cover the following topics:


1.  Tennis
2. Late 90s Children’s Television Shows
3.  the works of F Scott Fitzgerald; and
4. Pearl Jam’s second record.

 1. Biased against Trump who plays Golf

2. Biased in favor of Pete what's-his-name from South Bend,IN

3. Biased against Trump- Doesn't read.

4. Biased against me - I have no idea.

lord_pabulum said:
 Yes, all three are cable opinion networks.  I prefer news.

 That's just your opinion.

Good one

STANV said:
 That's just your opinion.

 they are all opinion networks for sure.  But only one of them is coordinating between the POTUS and one of their main show hosts.

Red_Barchetta said:

paulsurovell said:
If a Democratic candidate for President isn't able to handle biased questions from Fox News, they're not qualified to be President.
And the same goes for Republican candidates appearing on NBC, ABC or CBS.

 Sure they should be able to handle tough questions.  It would be a sign of respect and trust for the DNC to send their candidates to a debate at Fox.  They don't deserve any favors from the DNC.  It's not like there aren't other networks to host the debates. 

To me it's not a question of being able to handle tough questions. It's, what are the questions?

The Dems have certain issues and positions they want to push out. Green energy; healthcare; income inequality; climate change; voting rights. They're important issues, they're winning issues where Americans are largely in favor of the Dem platform.

How those questions are framed is important, that's certain. But more importantly, are those questions going to be asked at all.

I simply wouldn't trust Fox moderators to bring up those issues. So instead the candidates will be dancing to the tune of whatever issues Republicans think are most important. 

lord_pabulum said:
 Yes, all three are cable opinion networks.  I prefer news.

Trump lies every day, multiple times.

Fox pretends he's telling the truth.

CNN and MSNBC do not.

But yeah, they're all opinion networks. Just two sides of the same coin.

I'm not sure if debating on FOX news is a good or bad idea--but it's not clearly one or the other.