this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2024
234 points (97.6% liked)

politics

19050 readers
4677 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
234
Even Fox News’s Bret Baier Admits Harris Outsmarted Him in Interview (newrepublic.com)
submitted 10 hours ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
23 comments fedilink hide all child comments
all 24 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 66 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

Watched it earlier today and I’m happy to say she kept him in line by repeatedly shutting down his slimy tactics of “ask question, don’t wait for her to answer, something something Biden/Harris plan, ask next question before she can answer even the first one”.

She literally said on camera, “You aren’t even letting me answer the question” to which he eventually did finally shut the fuck up, but while still trying to “gotcha” her the whole time.

He eventually went as far as showing a clip of Trump denying his poisonous rhetoric of wanting to use the USA military on its own citizens, to which she replied “the clip you just played was not the clip of him saying his nasty rhetoric, you and I both know that”.

Kick their fucking teeth in this election, everyone!

[–] [email protected] 25 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

“Great job by Bret Baier in his Interview with Lyin’ Kamala Harris,” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social before ranting about Trump Derangement Syndrome. “Again, congratulations to Bret Baier on a tough but very fair interview, one that clearly showed how totally incompetent Kamala is. For the good of our Nation, her inferior Cognitive ability must be tested at once!”

Lol ok.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

"I'll do it if you do it, Donny. Anytime. Anywhere."

  • Dark Kamala
[–] [email protected] 1 points 44 minutes ago

Darkamala?

[–] [email protected] 17 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

I tried to find a copy of the interview, but it was just edits. Cut edits. When she says or he says. Another trick of Fox to obfuscate and make it seem one way than another. Just break it up and put it out of context.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

I haven't watched it yet but it looks like this might be the full interview:

https://youtu.be/OtQ1ksG7Uug?si=i6rGcz7BpmVd5XDN

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 hours ago

Nah, that's another cut up with very little of the interview

[–] [email protected] 49 points 10 hours ago (6 children)

Unfortunately, a majority of comments I've seen online on that interview say Harris couldn't stop talking about trump or couldn't answer any question she was asked. Absolutely amazing to me the difference here.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 6 hours ago

Bret didn't even give her 10 seconds to respond at times. Some of the questions were loaded questions with 2 negative answers. She tried to explain multiple times where a policy or problem started (in the trump term for example) and that came off as her talking only about Trump. Overall, it was mostly what would be expected with a dem on Faux.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 8 hours ago

I am almost certain at this point that most if not all of those comments you see under the YouTube video are just troll farms from Russia, China, and North Korea.

[–] [email protected] 48 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

Almost as though these interviews and debates don't really matter. They're just fuel for a barrage of bot-powered social media spam and talk radio/podcast spin.

My father-in-law will periodically pop in to hang out. He listens to right-wing radio and has friends who are hooked on it, and he will ask these very bizarre pointed questions about why Harris/Biden are doing XYZ. And all I can respond with is "They're not doing that. That's totally manufactured. Here's proof." He'll acknowledge it. But then he'll come back a week later with another nonsense allegation.

I want to say "Just Google this shit before you ask", but then I Google it myself and find a wall of right-wing hysterical talking points based on how my father-in-law phrased the question.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I appreciate you posting that. My late ex fil did the same thing. Had a total conspiracy minded friend. Was always awkward I had to be the one to say "No, Trudeau didn't do that."

At least he was nice and respectful about it. My cousins on the other hand... well, I get very high at family gatherings now.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

The best way to counter such stuff - instead of disagreeing right away and making their defenses pop up, just ask them where the facts are for the claim. If they say it's something they heard or read, ask where those sources got their info. Letting them dig further helps to show how valid or invalid what they say might be, it might plant a bit of doubt for the next time they run across something that is designed to be accepted without evidence. Maybe. I mean, that's all we can do really, help them be more critical thinking, even if by accident.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 9 hours ago

Letting them dig further helps to show how valid or invalid what they say might be

The problem with this approach is that it requires critical thinking.

If they "see it on the internet on Jimbo's blog" they believe that is equally believable to "its posted on nasa.gov". I attribute some of this to technology getting really good at some things that it makes those that don't know how technology works that other unbelievable things are also real.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 hours ago

Exactly how it went the first time someone mentioned springfield ohio to me

[–] [email protected] 23 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

She definitely couldn't answer the questions asked. She tried, but got talked over when it became clear it wasn't going the direction wanted from Fox.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 9 hours ago

That's what I was seeing. I got annoyed with the interviewer more than once in the first five minutes.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 9 hours ago

google "gaslighting," and look at the GOP over the last 40 years or so

[–] [email protected] 29 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Obama had "the audacity of hope", where Harris has "The audacity of this asshole lying to my face".

[–] [email protected] 11 points 9 hours ago

The audacity of this mo.... former president.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 hours ago

What, like it was hard?

[–] [email protected] -4 points 10 hours ago

New Republic - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for New Republic:

MBFC: Left - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.Newshttps://newrepublic.com/post/187245/kamala-harris-fox-news-bret-baier-roasted-interview
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support