Well it’s not like they hide the fact, quite the opposite. They pretty clearly state “here’s the Dem partisan and here’s the Republican. Now fight!” I don’t know how she snagged those questions but I really doubt it’s because the CNN guys mistook her for an independent observer.
Well to be fair you’re comparing apples and oranges. One was working for the impartial press, and decided to give one candidate an advantage in the debate. The other was employed by the campaign of a candidate.
Also that CNN (very properly) disclosed that Lewandowski was still getting severance pay from the Trump campaign before they put him on the air. Perhaps if they had done something similar with Brazile it might have helped.
But in this case, they didn’t. In the one case, they made it clear that there might be reasons to believe the Republican was being less than impartial, but not the Democrat.
“By the way, Mr. Lewandowski is still being paid by the Trump campaign - take that into consideration when you listen to him” is a perfectly fair thing to say. Why they didn’t also say “Ms. Brazile attempted to assist one of the candidates in tonight’s debate, but not the other” is something else.
Regards,
Shodan
I disagree. Independance =/= objectivity; the latter is impossible, but the former is not.
People like Chris Matthews, Karl Rove, Stephanopolous etc. were politicos, and no-one seriously thinks they’ve lost their inclinations (any more than ANY journalist is really and truly impartial), but they can and sometimes do differ from the position of “their side.” It’s a lot less likely to see a democrat-leaning pundit take a position contrary to that of her party when she’s actively drawing a paycheck from that party.
Looking back at youtube videos from before she became interim chair, they all seem to show her affiliation. Sometimes they’ll flip her title graphic to just be “political commentator” for a couple seconds before it switches to “Democratic strategist” or “DNC Vice Chair”. When I saw any introductions, it was included. Think you’re wrong here.
Not simply their partisan affiliation - that Brazile was actively intervening on behalf of one of the candidates. Lewandowski used to be part of the campaign, and they reveal that. Brazile still is, and they don’t.
Regards,
Shodan
…And the Minute that Donna Brazile runs for President, you should bring that up.
A prosecutorial accusation of “That person over there cheated & passed something onto a second person, so this third person should be called a cheater” is both weak and ignorant.
I’m surprised that anyone would be so gullible in 2016 to give it credence or air time.
God, will this river of shit never stop flowing.
Not as long as the GOP keeps talking.
Donna Brazile is a long-time Democratic party insider who also worked for CNN. Brazile was rewarded for her underhanded behavior by being promoted to chief bullshit artist of the DNC.
Donna Brazile “should” be ashamed of her actions but that ain’t gonna happen. It’s probably why she took the job in the first place.
CNN should be embarrassed by the way they were so easily fooled by a DNC plant. Unless, of course, Brazile was just one more of those DNC party supporters that CNN seems to prefer to hire?
So you’re saying they should have announced she was in the bag for Hillary when she wasn’t on the Clinton campaign and these question leaks hadn’t been discovered yet? Asking a lot, istm.
Btw, it’s not clear to me that you know this but CNN actually suspended her contract months ago when she became interim DNC Chair.
Hahahaha. CNN suspended Brazile’s contract while she worked for the DNC. Full time for the DNC this time. Suspended until the DNC needed Brazile back at CNN. Yes Hillary. Whatever you wish Hillary. Thank you hillary.
Donna Brazile was always in the bag for Hillary. Over the years CNN tried to pass her off as someone who was impartial. :rolleyes: That just made CNN look less like a news agency and more like a DNC public relations firm.
This doesn’t remotely rise to the level of rigging. To count as rigging there has to be at least some chance the act will affect the outcome. A single question out of the dozens asked during the debates? And just about the least significant question at that, about a highly localized issue affecting .0003% of the population. Short of Hilary or Bernie saying the children of Flint deserve to be poisoned by lead, there was zero chance that question would’ve had any impact whatsoever.
What tends to get lost is the fact that Bernie’s not actually a Democrat, at least not until he decided to run. He’s now switched back to being an Independent. Is it really that surprising the Democratic Party would want a Democrat to lead the party?
Yes, Bernie not being a real Democrat barely got brought up in every thread about him around here. Only a few times per thread, max.
Hillary did say she was prepared…
Of minor interest: Donna Brazile’s first came to the attention of many when she was working for the Dukakis campaign and asserted that GHW Bush “owes it to the American people to fess up” to an alleged extramarital affair, since “"the American people have every right to know if Barbara Bush will share that bed with him in the White House”.
I’m referring to the national discussion well beyond this message board.
Well, I don’t think it was lost in the national discussion either. It was brought up plenty, even if it wasn’t brought up at every mention of his name. And that point certainly got more play than the fact that even as an independent senator Bernie helped fundraise for Democrats and voted with them very reliably.
Frankly, neither is really important here. The fact that it’s not surprising she’d cheat a little to help a fellow Dem is not an excuse.
“Over the years” I’ve watched hundreds of hours of CNN. I’ve never once seen them try to “pass her off as someone who was impartial.” Never once.
They’ve always identified her as a Democrat. And in this campaign season (before she left to chair the DNC) she was always identified as a Hillary supporter.
It’s a debate, not an episode of Jeopardy! What difference does it make if the candidate knows the questions in advance? It’s only important that the questions are about matters relevant to voters.