So the “mainstream” media patiently spoon feeds the GOP’s messaging into people’s minds; the GOP just shoves it in.

Well, I realize that even DCUM readers would not consider Katrina Vanden Heuvel to be "middle," but I listened to her on C-Span this morning. She was talking about Russia and Putin. According to her, Biden did not make a "gaffe" when discussing a small incursion--but was just speaking the truth.

But, then she went on to discuss Putin being a former KGB agent--and then said something like "well, George H W Bush was head of the CIA." That is true, but she pretty much was comparing a professional KGB agent with a political appointee head of the CIA. Very troubling.

My question: Do people take her seriously?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Frank Luntz has been a long time Republican strategist.

Yup, so why does the supposedly liberal New York Times trust him to identify who’s an “independent voter”?

Yes, why does the supposedly liberal NYT keep using Republicans as sources and calling them “independent,” “moderates” and “swing voters” when they’re committed Republicans?

Maybe because these voters are indeed independents, moderates and swing voters and have totally soured on Biden and his presidency. Much like these people:

Just because they don't agree with you does not mean they are not independent voters.
Perhaps YOU are out of the mainstream?

When they use right wing talking points, they’re not independent. That’s a fact.

Two thirds of the country disapproves of the job Biden is doing. Nearly 3/4ths of the country thinks the country is on the "wrong track."

If you think these independents must be crypto-Republican because they don't like Biden I have bad news, lately about two out of three US citizens must now by Republicans.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Frank Luntz has been a long time Republican strategist.

Yup, so why does the supposedly liberal New York Times trust him to identify who’s an “independent voter”?

Yes, why does the supposedly liberal NYT keep using Republicans as sources and calling them “independent,” “moderates” and “swing voters” when they’re committed Republicans?

Maybe because these voters are indeed independents, moderates and swing voters and have totally soured on Biden and his presidency. Much like these people:

Just because they don't agree with you does not mean they are not independent voters.
Perhaps YOU are out of the mainstream?

When they use right wing talking points, they’re not independent. That’s a fact.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Frank Luntz has been a long time Republican strategist.

Yup, so why does the supposedly liberal New York Times trust him to identify who’s an “independent voter”?

Yes, why does the supposedly liberal NYT keep using Republicans as sources and calling them “independent,” “moderates” and “swing voters” when they’re committed Republicans?

Maybe because these voters are indeed independents, moderates and swing voters and have totally soured on Biden and his presidency. Much like these people:

Just because they don't agree with you does not mean they are not independent voters.
Perhaps YOU are out of the mainstream?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Frank Luntz has been a long time Republican strategist.

Yup, so why does the supposedly liberal New York Times trust him to identify who’s an “independent voter”?

Yes, why does the supposedly liberal NYT keep using Republicans as sources and calling them “independent,” “moderates” and “swing voters” when they’re committed Republicans?

Anonymous wrote:Frank Luntz has been a long time Republican strategist.

Yup, so why does the supposedly liberal New York Times trust him to identify who’s an “independent voter”?

Frank Luntz has been a long time Republican strategist.

Anonymous wrote:From the allegedly liberal Washington Post, they sampled 10 “suburban swing voters.” “Swing” my left foot. Anyone who uses Trump’s framing about Biden is a right winger. This is the kind of GOP-friendly narrative shaping garbage the right wing media pushes.

Not to be outdone, here’s the Times with a survey of “independent voters“ who do nothing but spew GOP talking points:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:this thread

Sorry. This guy has an agenda. He is very anti-law enforcement and refers to efforts to find and prosecute the criminals as "fascist."

He seems to think there is nothing wrong with the train robberies.

DP. Did you not read the thread or did you not read it closely? That’s not at all what he wrote or what the point was.

This is the gist:

With the actual point being that the corporate media whips up non-issues into the most important thing ever - like the immigrant caravans, for example - while ignoring things that actually affect each of us to a person. The PP who linked to this guy found an absolute brilliant example of the corporate media crafting a message that serves corporations.

These train thefts are hardly a "non-issue." The end result of these thefts, aside from the atrocious environmental issue, is that prices increase for all consumers because the companies shipping items need to recoup their costs.
And, these are organized gangs doing the thefts.
And, if you think the caravans are a non-issue, I can see why you buy into this idiots perspective.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:this thread

Sorry. This guy has an agenda. He is very anti-law enforcement and refers to efforts to find and prosecute the criminals as "fascist."

He seems to think there is nothing wrong with the train robberies.

DP. Did you not read the thread or did you not read it closely? That’s not at all what he wrote or what the point was.

This is the gist:

With the actual point being that the corporate media whips up non-issues into the most important thing ever - like the immigrant caravans, for example - while ignoring things that actually affect each of us to a person. The PP who linked to this guy found an absolute brilliant example of the corporate media crafting a message that serves corporations.

There’s nothing brilliant about any of that. It’s the same type of rhetoric I’ve been hearing for my entire life. Young people think it’s brilliant because they’re inexperienced and sheltered.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:this thread

Sorry. This guy has an agenda. He is very anti-law enforcement and refers to efforts to find and prosecute the criminals as "fascist."

He seems to think there is nothing wrong with the train robberies.

DP. Did you not read the thread or did you not read it closely? That’s not at all what he wrote or what the point was.

This is the gist:

With the actual point being that the corporate media whips up non-issues into the most important thing ever - like the immigrant caravans, for example - while ignoring things that actually affect each of us to a person. The PP who linked to this guy found an absolute brilliant example of the corporate media crafting a message that serves corporations.

Anonymous wrote:this thread

Sorry. This guy has an agenda. He is very anti-law enforcement and refers to efforts to find and prosecute the criminals as "fascist."

He seems to think there is nothing wrong with the train robberies.

this thread

What’s amazing about the chart is just how mush of MSM (WP, PBS, NPR_ is right down the middle or slightly left or right, but are all highly factual. Whereas FOX/OAN etc are firmly biased and less factual, yet MSM is the enemy somehow?