A Gaping Flaw In How Democrats Size Up Campaigns

[toobfreak]

Late last night I caught Amanpour (sp?) on PBS and they were discussing the election so I decided to listen for about 20 minutes. I was struck by a number a seeming gaping holes in their "professional" analysis:

1. The host was interviewing two women who represented democrat activists. There was no one to give an opposing or contrary view, so conclusions were left unchallenged.
2. The two women's interest was mainly in seeing Trump defeated still angry over Hillary's loss! Both were fairly young, and considered Hillary a highly "qualified" candidate; I would have loved to ask them how old they were when the Clintons were in the WH. I bet both were just kids then.
3. In talking, they would often mention aims and goals without ever saying what they actually were like they were a given, yet the host repeatedly passed on asking them to expound on what they were!
4. In talking, they would often say things with gaping holes so large in their assumptions, etc., that you could have flown an Airbus A490 through, yet the host repeatedly passed on doing any journalistic due diligence in testing or exploring anything they said, just shaking his head in agreement. Without testing assumptions, one has no way of knowing how accurate they are.
5. The girls gave several empirical examples of their meeting and talking with Trump supporters and how this showed flagging support for Trump but again, without being tested.
6. Then they brought on a lady who was supposedly a Harvard grad talking about democracy but I found it hard to believe she had a Harvard degree or if so, that it was rather sad. Apparently she thinks democracy is at stake.
7. Apparently Trump doesn't like immigrants. And here I just though he wanted them to be legal. No test on this.
8. Apparently Trump doesn't like healthcare either! And here I thought he just wanted BETTER healthcare. No test on this.
9. Apparently Trump runs his campaign and administration based on Hate, because he criticizes and ridicules that which he disagrees with. Them. Don't you just hate that?!
10. I would love to call PBS some time to tell them why I will never donate any money. Everything from the news to even their science programs is often imbued with one-sided, unchallenged, untested politics.

Based on all of this, I really wonder how they can have any sort of accurate outlook on the prospects of the Biden/Trump election. Any ideas? Apparently this Amanpour is allied with CNN.

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=amanpour+and+company+episodes

 

[Oddball]

Amnpour is a hack from way back.....You'll have this.

 

[johngaltshrugged]

This is the reason MSM only gives soft serve questions to Dems. You can't dig in too deep or you realize the things they say make absolutely no sense.

 

[toobfreak]

This is the reason MSM only gives soft serve questions to Dems. You can't dig in too deep or you realize the things they say make absolutely no sense.

I think you are right! Democrats never go on shows subjecting themselves to actual, objective, tough scrutiny. They will tell you that is because they are just so sure they don't NEED to, but whenever in that rare case they do get challenged about one of their assumptions or claims, they never knock it down with unflappable facts, instead resort to attacking the journalist!

They preach calmness yet are the first to become unzipped if not surrounded by friendlies of their own kind, and seem more concerned with telling themselves what they WANT to hear rather than putting it to fire and KNOWING it is true.

And if they are so sure of their facts, then how did any of them think Hillary had a 99% chance of winning and was so surprised she lost? And if they know they have it in the bag now, then why aren't any of them happy, singing and dancing instead of miserable as ever smoking about all of Trump's lies, cheating and crimes?

Finally, if Trump really is as bad, as incompetent, as corrupt as they claim, then why do they always resort to lying and making outrageous stuff up instead? Or can't they tell facts from their own fiction?

 

[toobfreak]

This is the reason MSM only gives soft serve questions to Dems. You can't dig in too deep or you realize the things they say make absolutely no sense.

I think you are right! Democrats never go on shows subjecting themselves to actual, objective, tough scrutiny. They will tell you that is because they are just so sure they don't NEED to, but whenever in that rare case they do get challenged about one of their assumptions or claims, they never knock it down with unflappable facts, instead resort to attacking the journalist!

They preach calmness yet are the first to become unzipped if not surrounded by friendlies of their own kind, and seem more concerned with telling themselves what they WANT to hear rather than putting it to fire and KNOWING it is true.

And if they are so sure of their facts, then how did any of them think Hillary had a 99% chance of winning and was so surprised she lost? And if they know they have it in the bag now, then why aren't any of them happy, singing and dancing instead of miserable as ever smoking about all of Trump's lies, cheating and crimes?

Finally, if Trump really is as bad, as incompetent, as corrupt as they claim, then why do they always resort to lying and making outrageous stuff up instead? Or can't they tell facts from their own fiction?

I just remembered, I forgot to add another thing: when those two women were talking they said they were active going door to door and calling folks whether Harris/Biden were out themselves or not. If people can't get to the polls, they arrange them transportation! I wonder how that works with Covid? And they even supply food and sandwiches. All this out of their selfless devotion and hatred that Hillary lost. Would you eat their sandwich?