New York Times Media Bias Fact Check Credibility: [High] (Click to view Full Report)> Name: nytimes.com> Bias: Left-Center
> Factual Reporting: High
> Country: United States of America
> Full Report: mediabiasfactcheck.com/new-york-times/
Check the bias and credibility of this article on Ground.News
FooterBeep boop. This action was performed automatically. If you dont like me then please block me.đ
If you have any questions or comments about me, you can make a post to LW Support lemmy community.
According to Mr. Trumpâs post on his social media site, the debate is to take place at a to-be-determined location in Pennsylvania, the must-win battleground state that could help decide the election. Fox News anchors Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum would moderate.
It was unclear early Saturday if Ms. Harris had agreed to the debate and its terms. Representatives for her campaign did not respond to requests for comment. A spokeswoman for Fox News also did not respond to questions.
I think itâs worth waiting to see if Harris has actually agreed to this, in the extremely unlikely chance that Trump lied about a thing.
Also, pretty funny that even if thatâs the case, Trump still needs a month to prepare and it has to be in his safe space network.
I would love if both Fox News and the Harris campaign came back and were like âwtf no one ever told us about this. Old dude with dementia is just making shit up again.â
The Harris campaign on Saturday declined to commit to the Fox News debate and said it was still planning on a Sept. 10 debate hosted by ABC.
âDonald Trump is running scared and trying to back out of the debate he already agreed to and running straight to Fox News to bail him out. He needs to stop playing games and show up to the debate he already committed to on Sept. 10,â
I think this is bad news tbh. Harris can be as capable as she wants, but if the broadcaster doesnt stop Trump from a endless ramble or cut off his mic if he escalates to intolerable levels of behaviour, then this could end badly.
Donât give Fox News respect. Start talking shit about it right now. Call this what it is, a scared old weird man who will only debate Harris on a ânewsâ network currently paying billions for lying to everyone about the last election. Harris will treat Trump and the âjournalistsâ playing moderators like children which is how we shouldâve been treating them for years. Talking to them like adults validates their lies and bullshit.
Harris should call them out. âI said a debate on a news source, not some weird entertainment channel. Might as well have the weather channel moderate the debate!â
While entertaining for us, I donât think thatâd be a wise reaction. If she wants to win, she probably also needs to sway some people that are lifetime FOX junkies. Such a reaction could have a âbasket of deplorablesâ effect (being the stone cold truth, but hardly effective)
Being nice to idiots has proven to be hardly effective. Kamala needs to read word for word the arguments the Fox News lawyers made when they were in court for the dominion case. Fox News isnât news itâs entertainment and they donât employ journalists they employ entertainers. This is what Fox News said.
No, what she needs to do is win this election. Thatâs her job, everything else (like taking entertainment corpos to task for their shady tactics) comes secondary right now.
I fail to see how one impedes the other, in fact I would argue it would help her win. If sheâs running on doing just that why wouldnât she take a shot. Why hide? You think any Fox News fanboys would be swayed by anything Kamala says? Her time would be better spent attracting unregistered voters and she could do that by saying the quiet part out loud.
I fail to see how one impedes the other, in fact I would argue it would help her win
Okay, give me an argument why setting Fox straight will help her win the election, because just saying so isnât an argument. Iâd argue that time spent bickering âwith Fox about Foxâ isnât time spent getting people that wouldnât otherwise vote for her, to vote for her. (and that, by the way, is how one impedes the other)
Why hide?
Nobody said she should hide.
You think any Fox News fanboys would be swayed by anything Kamala says?
And this is the main point: Yes actually. If she makes salient points about matters that are dear to them, something is going to gnaw eventually. Have you seen Bernie Sandersâ appearances on the network? The audience definitely seems to be on his hand some of the time, just because he points out that what they have been told on the network isnât making sense. It can be done. A bunch of them are a lost cause for sure, but certainly she ought to be able to get some of them to vote for her, she running against Trump (for fox sake!).
Her time would be better spent attracting unregistered voters
Agreed 100%, those also watch Fox though. And Trump spouting his garbage freely on that channel without opposing voices will not make them vote for Harris.
You really think itâs not ridiculous to point out how ridiculous it all is? There is value in calling out the elephant in the room however thereâs no value in validating Fox News and giving into the grift. That only benefits Fox News and Trump.
Fucking hell Iâm actually excited. If you had asked me literally a month ago I wouldnât have given a shit and would have laughed if you had told me Iâd be interested. Donât get me wrong I was going to vote either way, but man I cannot wait for Harris to slam the shit out of this dirt bag and make a national embarrassment of him. The shit that worked with Biden sure as hell isnât going to fly with Harris.
I cannot stand his voice; I always end up muting the TV and reading the closed captioning. Those poor people that have to do the live captioning thoughâŠ
When Trump was in office foreign translators got a ton of shit for doing thier job. So many non English speaking people thought the translators were drunk. That made more sense at the time than The President of the United States of America actually saying the things he said. There was also the time he got laughed at by the entire United Nations.
only if harris somehow sneaks a bullhorn/megaphone onto the stage so she can still make sure those fuckers hear her when her mic âmalfunctionsâ.
fox deserves no respect.
You know how fascists are always projecting; the way he treats normal news agencies tells us all we need to know - itâs exactly how we SHOULD be treating his pet agencies.
He made a post saying thatâs the âdealâ. In a way itâs a brave brazen way to try and get a venue change. Harris would have to basically insult Fox News and their entire viewership to avoid looking like sheâs walking away.
If she can go on Fox News and score a couple points against him itâll go very well for her though; going into the proverbial lions den and coming out the other side
No (current) Harris voters are watching Fox News right now, she only stands to gain votes if she handles herself.
Itâs definitely a risk for Harris but itâs the only place anyone watching only Fox will see her debate Trump. Not that itâll change their minds of course, theyâre so heavily brainwashed itâs insane.
Why it should never happen. Trump could go there, shit his pants, and call Harris all the words, and all republicans will lap it up like the mewling little weird cowards they are.
But this isnât Buttigieg, and this isnât a one-on-one interview, so we can only hope if she agrees to this for some reason that sheâs as prepared as he is.
Fox Moderator: âVice President Harris, how would you respond to the accusation that your administration was responsible for the supply-chain crisis, grocery price inflation, massive corporate layoffs, Texas power outages, the summer heat wave, and the border apocalypse?â
Harris: âWhat? Now waitâŠâ
Fox Moderator: âPresident Trump. They say you have the best golf record of any president in history. How did you accomplish this historic feat?â
You know heâd completely fuck up the answer and go on ranting about migrants crossing the border, inflation, how smart he is and other rants. In previous interviews on Fox News they have handed him simple questions on a platter which were written to make him look like a good guyâŠand he completely screws it up and makes him self look like an idiot. Itâs actually pretty hilarious.
Did you see that Fox News one recently where Laura Ingraham repeatedly tried to help Trumpâs public image by giving him numerous opportunities (repeating the same soft ball question 4 or 5 times in a row) to walk back or tone down some of his controversial comments? He could not take the hint at all, just kept rambling about completely irrelevant stuff while she desperately tried to feed him the answer. It was pretty funny.
Yes, the network that had to pay nearly a billion dollars for pushing a false narrative in order to get Trump elected the last time around is the perfect venue. Oh, and a live Fox News audience? What could be bad about that?
Because it wasnât. That blood was the spatter from an actual victim behind him. He has been pretending to have been shot, without any actual injury of any kind.
How could the blood have been from the other victim? They were no where near that close to Trump. They would have had to have been on the stage with him lol
Blood spatter can travel quite a long distance. The shooting victim was in the crowd immediately behind Trump at what looks to be about 15-20 feet away. If he was that close, a high velocity projectile could create spatter that could reach the podium.
Apply Occamâs razor here. Of course heâs milking it for all its worth, but he got hit by something. Bullet graze, shrapnel graze, shattered glass graze, whatever it was it did hit him.
Iâm not completely convinced. There is no visible evidence of an injury. There has been no public release of info regarding the specific nature of the injury or the injuryâs exact size or location. The next day, he appeared in public with a bizarre, fake-looking bandage. And the day after that there was no visible mark at all.
He is world-famous for lying and it is physically possible that itâs not his blood. Without some solid evidence, Iâm just not convinced he was actually injured. He is absolutely the kind of person who would pretend a real victimâs blood is his own if it will bring him some media attention.
I absolutely agree that it is something he would do. I just think the likelihood of him getting hit with blood spatter so perfectly from twenty feet away is quite low. And there seems to be no other blood on the stage area. Nobody else looked bloody that I could see.
Ears bleed a lot from a minor scrape. They also heal very fast. His doctor is a fraud so I do not put any stock in his 2cm wound assessment. This is the same doctor that says Trump was the healthiest person to ever be president while lying about his height and weight.
Her statement should make clear that she is only interested in debates hosted by news networks, citing Fox Newsâ own lawyers who say that they arenât journalists, but rather âentertainersâ.
Maybe also make a point of refusing to work with an organization that was found liable for defaming voting machine manufacturers and poll workers during the last election.
There are endless valid reasons for saying no to this debate, and holding Trump to the original debate schedule he already agreed to.
I want the debate to happen AFTER Trump is sentenced in DC. Depending on what happens there, the debates topics are vastly different. Making a president into a king with literal life or death powers is a power that Trump will misuse.
The biggest issue is many people will have only seen the first headline and not the update. They got inaccurate information and it wonât be corrected, and the NYT is to blame.
âCancelsâ is the wrong verb again. ABC can cancel it, Trump can only decide not to show. ABC and Kamala can go ahead and have a debate with the audience or even put a cardboard cut out in his place and play random quotes heâs made and let Kamala disagree with them. ABC would get views and advertising revenue.
The right neutral verb phrase there is âbacks out ofâ. The one I would pick is âshirksâ or âfearsâ