As pointed before, it will be a bit difficult with Bernie, but with Trump in the ballot Bernie has also the advantage over Trump in the latest poll too.
Basically, as the law uses the term, a lobbyist is someone who spends more than 20% of their work meeting with (or preparing to meet with) government officials to try to convince them to do something on behalf of the person’s clients.
One could spend 110% of one’s time meeting with government officials to advocate for something or another, and so long as you are not acting as an agent on behalf of some clients, you are not a lobbyist.
As often used, the word “lobbying” can be defined to mean the action of meeting with an official to try to convince them to do something. So, your local Boy Scout troop can meet with your congressman to try to convince him to support some bill or whatever. What they are doing may be lobbying in the most common use of the word, but they are not lobbyists, nor are they engaged in lobbying in the legal sense of the word (which generally means they are representing a client rather than themselves).
Is that clear?
You never did answer my question, doorhinge. Based on what you believe reporters should be doing, as you describe above, do you believe that Fox News, in general, is doing “reporting”?
Forgetting about the boring nitpicking about whether he’s an official lobbier or not*, the question remains: is Ramos a biased douchebag who Trump was right to throw out when he started lecturing?
To which the answer is “yes”.
If you’re a reporter and you savage an author exposing a sleezy “Foundation” (that you happen to contribute to), without disclosing your involvement in said foundation, you’re a biased douchebag.
And when your daughter is a mid-ranking party apparatchik flack for someone who’s opposing the candidate you’re about to lecture** and you don’t disclose that, you’re being a biased douchebag.
Trump is a barely functioning idiot who’d be a disaster if he got into the White House. I’ve voted Republican all my life and I’d probably switch parties just to vote against him…but no matter how bad Trump is (and lord knows, he’s awful), it doesn’t change the fact that Ramos is a sleazebag. Both statements (“Trump=dangerous moron” & “Ramos=sleazebag”) are not mutually exclusive.
*of course he’s not.
Fox has no reporters, then?
He disclosed that back in June and curiously many right wing sites did pounce on that. I guess many on the right also forget things quickly. 
But many of those sources are now reporting on that disclosure like if it took place just now after the encounter with Trump or like if Ramos just admitted it. As usual I wonder when many conservatives will demand better from their sources of information.
But yes, I have to thank you for telling other conservatives that Trump is not what America is all about.
It’s not forgetting, it’s that I never heard it before. I don’t know which right-wing sites you’re visiting, but I never saw them (that said, outside of Drudge and whoever he links to on a given day, I don’t generally follow political sites.)
Regardless, Ramos needs to disclose it each time he interviews anyone running for President. Including Sanders, Biden, O’Malley and Hillary herself. “Mr/Ms Candidate. Jorge Ramos here for Univision. Before I ask my question, in the interests of full disclosure, my daughter works for Hillary. That said: can you explain how, exactly, the oppossum got into your blender?”
Note:
- Full disclosure
- A question, not a douchy lecture (which Ramos did with Trump when he was thrown out). A reporter’s job is NOT to lecture the candidates. I also applauded Clinton and Bush doing their best to ignore that crazy old anti-Semitic bat…what the hell was her name *) who kept giving 5-7 minute crazy-person rant/lectures in the White House Press Room (Obama’s guys eventually started ignoring her too).
*Helen Thomas! That was the Jew-Hating bitch’s name.
PS: Trump is orders of magnitude dumber than Biden who’s as dumb as Quayle.
Then that is worse, you have my condolences for the circle of friends and family that you have that send you that. 
But seriously I can not be mad for a conservative that has choice words directed to Trump.
Breitbart was the one where I saw that disclose that was made a bit early than June 20:
As for disclosure of that in actual reporting, I’m not sure I have ever seen any other reporter do that for relatives that are already adults and responsible for their own actions, his daughter is 27. IMHO an open and public disclosure of that is good enough.
Nah–I like Drudge for what it is. There’s a ton of links, his headlines range from “Listen to the crazy person ranting on the street” to “Heh–ok, that’s kinda funny” to “What the HELL is up with Drudge’s bizarre homoerotic fixation on O’Malley without his shirt on?”
It’s a decent site, you just have to take it for what it is. Which is a biased site with utterly strange headlines that has a ton of interesting links.
PS: Trump is funny looking and probably smells bad.
No, I didn’t. I wonder if it’s because I believe you are trying to hijack this “Is Trump’s pettiness over Megyn Kelly going to hurt him [plus Ramos incident]” thread?
Sounds to me you’re less concerned about a hijack than an obvious double standard for reporters.
ding. doorhinge’s unwillingness to answer the question is sort of an answer right there. One might argue that he has already hijacked the thread, by repeatedly posting his opinion on the objectivity of news reporters, which is off-topic, as well, IMO.
doorhinge, if you feel that’s an unfair characterization, and are actually willing to answer the question, I’ll be happy to start a new thread on the topic.
If you did, he’d probably hijack it.
What are you? A Democrat? Do you normally require someone you believe to be in a position of authority to tell you what to do? Do you need someone to tell you to dance? Are you asking me to play a game of Hillary sez before you allow yourself to think?
Maybe you should ask yourself - WWDTD. just sayin’
Maybe I’ll just ask myself “WTF?” Tried to engage you in a question in which you clearly had a strong opinion (i.e., the impartiality of news reporters), and I get ignored, then insulted. Done with this, dude.
(For the record: I’m a liberal, not a Democrat, and I don’t like Hillary Clinton very much.)
Since you said you have an extreme aversion to hijacking the thread, may I ask what any of these comments have to do with Donald Trump or Megyn Kelly? Or does the no-hijacking policy only come into play on questions about Fox News’ impartiality?
(post shortened)
“Extreme aversion”? I said that? Really? Are you reading a different thread? If you insist on making up my part of a conversation, why do you even need to have that type of conversation in public?
Post 270. You’re the one who brought up the idea of a hijack you won’t particate in.
Post 270, dude.
[/Walter Sobchak]
Post 276. You are ze one who hav said extreme aversion, not me.
Post 276, dude.
[/Nihilist #2:]
doorhinge, it would be nice if you would just answer the question.