CNN's "Town Hall" Meeting Deteriorates Into Infantile, One-sided Event

[Joe Wong]

@TuckerCarlson BTFO!!!

@fonzob1 BTFO!

 

[Jopious Extronimous]

Based on what I've read, I owe CNN an apology. I gave them zero benefit of the doubt.

Hey look, it's a real man.

Honestly, I think CNN owes an apology for that one-sided shitshow they called a "town hall meeting."

And, it really doesn't surprise me that @Overpressure, who chimed in late, is a proponent of that behavior.

Hey look, it's a child.


You had to edit the fucking title of your thread just to avoid manning up and simply saying "I was wrong". Enjoy your new status as "cartoonishly stupid and beholden to party" around here fonzo. You sure earned it in this thread.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

Based on what I've read, I owe CNN an apology. I gave them zero benefit of the doubt.

So.... someone lies to you repeatedly and unapologetically, and they finally tell you the truth on one thing because its in their best interests.... and you feel like you should apologise for not believing them.

Gotchya.

Reguardless of the accusations of questions being planted, that 'town hall' was pure propaganda.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

So.... someone lies to you repeatedly and unapologetically, and they finally tell you the truth on one thing because its in their best interests.... and you feel like you should apologise for not believing them.

Well, it's not liking I'm calling up their office and telling them all about this thread. I'm simply acknowledging that I was dead wrong in this instance.

 

[Andy Capp]

So.... someone lies to you repeatedly and unapologetically, and they finally tell you the truth on one thing because its in their best interests.... and you feel like you should apologise for not believing them.

Gotchya.

Reguardless of the accusations of questions being planted, that 'town hall' was pure propaganda.

I ask again, as I did earlier in this thread, show me these lies (or the hoaxes they were also accused of) and again, be sure to distinguish between lies and partisan bias. I'm genuinely interested.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

Well, it's not liking I'm calling up their office and telling them all about this thread. I'm simply acknowledging that I was dead wrong in this instance.

Respectable.

Its doubtful CNN's credibility would have been hit, if it was true. People that trust CNN, trust CNN, reguardless of their past breaches of credibility.

 

[Jopious Extronimous]

So.... someone lies to you repeatedly and unapologetically, and they finally tell you the truth on one thing because its in their best interests.... and you feel like you should apologise for not believing them.

Gotchya.

Reguardless of the accusations of questions being planted, that 'town hall' was pure propaganda.

They've also told the truth a number of times.

The kid, you knew nothing about at all. He could've been the biggest liar in his class for all you know.


So why were you willing to believe one at face value but not the other? Don't you think that's a sign you're operating with some unjustified bias? News organization who does report news but with a slant you often disagree with vs complete stranger in every sense of the word. How does CNN's reputation give a complete stranger credibility with you? Don't you think that's just setting you up to be misinformed? If the only requirement you have for truth is "they disagree with CNN", doesn't that make you pretty gullible?

 

[GearSolidMetal]

I ask again, as I did earlier in this thread, show me these lies (or the hoaxes they were also accused of) and again, be sure to distinguish between lies and partisan bias. I'm genuinely interested.

About every CNN clip in this video.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

 

[GearSolidMetal]

They've also told the truth a number of times.

The kid, you knew nothing about at all. He could've been the biggest liar in his class for all you know.


So why were you willing to believe one at face value but not the other? Don't you think that's a sign you're operating with some unjustified bias? News organization who does report news but with a slant you often disagree with vs complete stranger in every sense of the word. How does CNN's reputation give a complete stranger credibility with you? Don't you think that's just setting you up to be misinformed? If the only requirement you have for truth is "they disagree with CNN", doesn't that make you pretty gullible?

Watch the video posted above, and tell me they're a trustworthy news source.

And, its not like they haven't leaked the questions of a CNN 'Town Hall' before.

http://freebeacon.com/politics/dnc-chair-leaked-town-hall-question-clinton-campaign/

 

[AgonyandIrony]

Lmao

fucking lulz at "I hear you"

 

[Jopious Extronimous]

Watch the video posted above, and tell me they're a trustworthy news source.

And, its not like they haven't leaked the questions of a CNN 'Town Hall' before.

http://freebeacon.com/politics/dnc-chair-leaked-town-hall-question-clinton-campaign/

I don't watch CNN but I've got a few questions....

How many stories is that, and how many have they reported on in their history? Go take the first 10 articles on the site right now and point out which ones are lies.

Let's say you hit the jackpot, and it's 2,000 bullshit stories in CNN's history, and they've got 3 total lies on their front page, right now! That'd still be hundreds of thousands of factual stories historically and 7 factual stories on their site right now. So at best, give them a 75% honesty rate. We can agree on a figure like that right?

What's the kid's same numbers, and why would you trust him over CNN? Why would you not require the person making the accusation to provide proof of it before reaching a conclusion on it's legitimacy? Are you pretty much telling me CNN has influenced your thinking to the point where you'll believe complete strangers without any proof? Because that's kinda scary if you think about it. You know if they were aware of that, they could very easily use it to their advantage....

 

[GearSolidMetal]

I don't watch CNN but I've got a few questions....

How many stories is that, and how many have they reported on in their history? Go take the first 10 articles on the site right now and point out which ones are lies.

Let's say you hit the jackpot, and it's 2,000 bullshit stories in CNN's history, and they've got 3 total lies on their front page, right now! That'd still be hundreds of thousands of factual stories historically and 7 factual stories on their site right now. So at best, give them a 75% honesty rate. We can agree on a figure like that right?

What's the kid's same numbers, and why would you trust him over CNN? Why would you not require the person making the accusation to provide proof of it before reaching a conclusion on it's legitimacy? Are you pretty much telling me CNN has influenced your thinking to the point where you'll believe complete strangers without any proof? Because that's kinda scary if you think about it. You know if they were aware of that, they could very easily use it to their advantage....

Did you watch the video?

 

[silicavaginitis]

@fonzob1 BTFO!

CNN BTFO!

 

[HereticBD]

I don't watch CNN

but you feel the need to defend them anyways...

 

[Jopious Extronimous]

Did you watch the video?

Yeah, your answers to my questions weren't in there.

but you feel the need to defend them anyways...

Quote a post of me "defending" them so I can laugh at you.

Asking people why they trust a complete stranger without evidence isn't defending anything. It's asking a question. I'm just wondering why I can't get anyone to answer it....

 

[HereticBD]

Quote a post of me "defending" them so I can laugh at you.

I don't watch CNN but I've got a few questions....

How many stories is that, and how many have they reported on in their history? Go take the first 10 articles on the site right now and point out which ones are lies.

Let's say you hit the jackpot, and it's 2,000 bullshit stories in CNN's history, and they've got 3 total lies on their front page, right now! That'd still be hundreds of thousands of factual stories historically and 7 factual stories on their site right now. So at best, give them a 75% honesty rate. We can agree on a figure like that right?

You gonna give FOX News those rather generous parameters as well?

75% real news = real news, right? ROFL!

 

[Jopious Extronimous]

You gonna give FOX News those rather generous parameters as well?

75% real news = real news, right? ROFL!

You never disappoint. I don't watch Fox, but I'd give them the benefit of the doubt and say at least 90%. Just like I'd say of any major news organization when it comes to reporting factual information. The 75% in my post was a "let's say for the sake of my question" number, implying they were comically terrible.

How long do you think a news organization would last if 3 out every 10 stories they published were factually incorrect? I know you live for our American garbage news, but try using what's left of the brain before posting. Just once.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

Yeah, your answers to my questions weren't in there.

Let's agree on your premise of 75% accuracy rating for CNN.

That is pathetic.

Especially when you keep in mind it'd be 75% of what they do cover, ignoring whatever else isn't in their agenda, and that doesn't include lying by omission of essential details of stories.

Oh, and lets not forget this brilliant piece of journalistic integrity.

Its safe to say that CNN likes North Korea's leadership more than America's.

That says ALOT about their biases and values.

 

[Jopious Extronimous]

Let's agree on your premise of 75% accuracy rating for CNN.

That is pathetic.

Especially when you keep in mind it'd be 75% of what they do cover, ignoring whatever else isn't in their agenda, and that doesn't include lying by omission of essential details of stories.

Oh, and lets not forget this brilliant piece of journalistic integrity.

Its safe to say that CNN likes North Korea's leadership more than America's.

That says ALOT about their biases and values.

You got it! Totally agree, they're terrible!


So now are you actually gonna answer my post?