Elections NYT shows no courage; endorses Warren and Klobuchar

[IGIT]

Warren is a plant for the corporate establishment. They don’t care if she wins but they don’t actually support the positions she pretends to take. That’s why they didn’t want to make it seem too much like they did.

hi and good morning Rockhapotomuss,

1) Elizabeth Warren is a "plant" for the corporate establishment.

which establishment is that, exactly? the finance sector? the big four (Google, Facebook, Apple, Amazon)? major media outfits, like Disney?

2) They don't care if she wins but they don't actually support the positions she pretends to take.

who is "they"? and are you saying that Elizabeth Warren does not support her own positions? whose positions does she then support?

could you expand on this a little more? i don't understand what you are trying to say. the conspiracy you're expounding on is eluding me.

- IGIT

 

[franklinstower]

hiya franklinstower,



lets stick the New York Times reporters, if that's alright. i'm not comfortable talking about the "media", like some posters are, with all these vast, sweeping assertions (that is what nutjobs on the right do).

i do not feel the NYT reporters were biased against Mr. Sanders. i don't see it in their reporting - and since i am not mind reader - i'm going to leave it at that.

the Biden campaign is probably tired about reading in the NYT that his campaign lacks a certain zest that the other teams have shows.

the Klochubar campaign team has been unhappy with the Times because of several stories they ran early in the primary season where they basically portrayed Mrs. Klochubar as a short tempered and impatient person - with very little additional coverage.

the Buttigeig campaign team is probably irritated that the NYT continues to opine on its op-ed pages that he's too young.

the Warren campaign team probably feels the NYT is unfairly harping on her dodging the tax question, in regards to how she's going to pay for Medicare for all. the Warren team no doubt would accuse the NYT of picking up GOP talking points.

you, as an ardent Sanders supporter, also feels the NYT has been - at times - unfair to Bernie Sanders.

i'm not seeing it, but i get that fans are probably never satisfied with the coverage their candidate receives.



i think it was a mishap. the rest of the NYT reporting on the Bernie/Warren schism has indicated that there is a disagreement between the two candidates as to what is was, precisely, that Mr. Sanders said.

actually, that is not what i think. that is what the boy in the youtube video you linked thinks, though. he believes that the NYT is part of a vast conspiracy, where they are working with THE MEDIA and THE ESTABLISHMENT to bury the Sanders campaign.

i believe that assertion is silly, of course, but i also realize that you can't win an argument with conspiracy theorists. so yeah, i admit i am just making fun of the boy in your video instead.

for some reason, you seem to believe that i am making fun of you also.

*shrugs*

- IGIT

If you are not comfortable with vast sweeping allegations then I think you should begin by not making them towards people who don't agree with you.

I don't care about our endorse the "person" in that video. If you want to talk to me then do so but I can't do much for you about "them". It is the information that he brought forth that was important. The NYT's framing was terrible and dishonest, and typical, and served to confirm a false narrative at a very pivotal moment. It was a lie.



If you have any other source for this story and stories like it -- post it.

 

[Rockapotomuss]

hi and good morning Rockhapotomuss,

1) Elizabeth Warren is a "plant" for the corporate establishment.

which establishment is that, exactly? the finance sector? the big four (Google, Facebook, Apple, Amazon)? major media outfits, like Disney?

2) They don't care if she wins but they don't actually support the positions she pretends to take.

who is "they"? and are you saying that Elizabeth Warren does not support her own positions? whose positions does she then support?

could you expand on this a little more? i don't understand what you are trying to say. the conspiracy you're expounding on is eluding me.

- IGIT

Elizabeth Warren raised big-money from the finance (Wall St.) sector during her senate campaign, which she carried into her presidential campaign, while she campaigns against big money. This has been well documented by the New York Times.

They are Wall St. investors who want to see the stock market go up. Warren, who used to be a republican, is running a counter-play against Bernie in order to make sure someone who would decimate Wall St. (Bernie) does not actually win.

 

[IGIT]

hi FT again!

If you are not comfortable with vast sweeping allegations then I think you should begin by not making them towards people who don't agree with you.

no, that won't work for me. i don't see why i'm obligated to take vast conspiracy theories seriously. to me, unless i make fun of them, i'm wasting my time.

*holds up his hand*

if you can show me some proof of an active, willful conspiracy between the NYT, the Media, and the Establishment where they are seeking to destroy Bernie Sanders' campaign, i'm all ears.

if not...then why are you even bringing this kinda stuff up? its strange.

I don't care about our endorse the "person" in that video. If you want to talk to me then do so but I can't do much for you about "them". It is the information that he brought forth that was important.

the information was fine. his analysis was hysterical, though.

The NYT's framing was terrible and dishonest, and typical, and served to confirm a false narrative at a very pivotal moment. It was a lie.

*sigh*

what a long way we've come from "mishap".

we'll probably just have to agree to disagree on this. i leave you with this opinion piece, from The Nation;

Everything that Warren says happened tracks with my own experience of how one deals with these things. Warren says she “disagreed” in real time. Remember, folks, if you think Warren is “lying,” not only do you have to believe she made up something Sanders said, whole cloth, you also have to believe that she made up her entire reaction to the event. She clearly told other people she works with, as one does. In these situations, you’re always looking for confirmation from people you trust that the bad thing that happened to you actually happened.

Then, when it came out, and Sanders straight up said that he didn’t say it: the anger. The anger is very familiar to me.

If you want to make a person go from zero to nuclear, tell them that a hurtful experience in their own life didn’t happen. Tell them something they thought about and wrestled with and made peace with and were ready to move on from didn’t actually exist in the first place—simply because you say it didn’t exist. Do it on national television with everybody they care about watching. See how that works out for you. I’m not surprised Warren didn’t shake Sanders’s hand. I’m surprised she didn’t break it off and try to hit him with it.

I believe Warren heard what she heard. But I also believe Sanders doesn’t remember saying it. Sanders isn’t lying when he said, “I didn’t say it.” Lying requires at least some minimal intent to dissemble or deceive. I believe Sanders is being forthright. He says he didn’t say it because he has no memory of saying such a thing, and it doesn’t sound to him like something he would say. From his perspective, that’s the end of the discussion. He doesn’t remember it, doesn’t agree with it, and so it didn’t happen.

I don’t need for Bernie Sanders to remember every time he—unintentionally, I believe—hurts somebody’s feelings. But I do need for Elizabeth Warren to be able to tell her truth, and what I believe is the truth, without people calling her a liar, a snake, or some hysterical witch who spends her downtime boiling up problems for men.
https://www.thenation.com/article/sanders-warren-truth/

- IGIT

 

[IGIT]

hey ho Rockapotomuss!

Elizabeth Warren raised big-money from the finance (Wall St.) sector during her senate campaign, which she carried into her presidential campaign, while she campaigns against big money. This has been well documented by the New York Times.

yes, this is pretty well known. no disagreements here.

They are Wall St. investors who want to see the stock market go up. Warren, who used to be a republican, is running a counter-play against Bernie in order to make sure someone who would decimate Wall St. (Bernie) does not actually win.

the ones who are shorting stocks probably aren't hoping it goes up, but yeah, i agree that some investors want to the market go up.

Mrs. Warren used to be a member of the GOP, yup.

so, Mrs. Warren has been "planted" as a candidate to protect Wall St from Bernie Sanders? and proof of that was the money she raised from Wall St during her campaign for the Senate, right?

here's how the New York Times sees things;

Wall Street has long tried to influence American politics and generally donated to both parties, though it traditionally has been more aligned with Republicans. But while there’s no coordinated strategy, the industry is more or less united against Ms. Warren. With just months before the first voting begins, it is unleashing a barrage of public attacks, donating money to her rivals and scrambling to counter her blistering narrative about Wall Street.

In recent weeks, Wall Street’s warning signals about Ms. Warren have begun exploding into the public, coloring analyst reports and earnings calls, and echoing from the stages of industry conferences. The billionaire money manager Leon Cooperman castigated her in an open letter released Thursday, and on Friday Goldman Sachs researchers suggested that tax hikes proposed by Ms. Warren and others could lower corporate earnings by 11 percent.

Prominent money managers have predicted a double-digit decline in the stock market if Ms. Warren wins the presidency, a claim that some skeptics find hyperbolic.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/04/us/politics/elizabeth-warren-wall-street.html

*muses*

i like your conspiracy theory; its exciting. its so devious - and to me - complicated;

the finance industry is making noises that they are scared of Elizabeth Warren. but they are really scared of Bernie Sanders. so - anticipating that Warren would one day run for POTUS - they larded her campaign chest with funds back when she was raising money for her Senate run, knowing that they could count on her as backstop to the lunacy that Bernie Sanders was proposing.

not only that, it was a kind of double fakeout (lol). these sinister powers could have just lined up their wagons of campaign money behind a moderate like Joe Biden - but they didn't do that because it would be too obvious. so they hedged their bets, split the difference, and put their money behind the lesser of two evils; Elizabeth Warren.

whew! that sure was tiring.

i think the NYT is right and your theory is...well...its unlikely.

- IGIT

 

[franklinstower]

hi FT again!



no, that won't work for me. i don't see why i'm obligated to take vast conspiracy theories seriously. to me, unless i make fun of them, i'm wasting my time.

*holds up his hand*

if you can show me some proof of an active, willful conspiracy between the NYT, the Media, and the Establishment where they are seeking to destroy Bernie Sanders' campaign, i'm all ears.

if not...then why are you even bringing this kinda stuff up? its strange.



the information was fine. his analysis was hysterical, though.



*sigh*

what a long way we've come from "mishap".

we'll probably just have to agree to disagree on this. i leave you with this opinion piece, from The Nation;

Everything that Warren says happened tracks with my own experience of how one deals with these things. Warren says she “disagreed” in real time. Remember, folks, if you think Warren is “lying,” not only do you have to believe she made up something Sanders said, whole cloth, you also have to believe that she made up her entire reaction to the event. She clearly told other people she works with, as one does. In these situations, you’re always looking for confirmation from people you trust that the bad thing that happened to you actually happened.

Then, when it came out, and Sanders straight up said that he didn’t say it: the anger. The anger is very familiar to me.

If you want to make a person go from zero to nuclear, tell them that a hurtful experience in their own life didn’t happen. Tell them something they thought about and wrestled with and made peace with and were ready to move on from didn’t actually exist in the first place—simply because you say it didn’t exist. Do it on national television with everybody they care about watching. See how that works out for you. I’m not surprised Warren didn’t shake Sanders’s hand. I’m surprised she didn’t break it off and try to hit him with it.

I believe Warren heard what she heard. But I also believe Sanders doesn’t remember saying it. Sanders isn’t lying when he said, “I didn’t say it.” Lying requires at least some minimal intent to dissemble or deceive. I believe Sanders is being forthright. He says he didn’t say it because he has no memory of saying such a thing, and it doesn’t sound to him like something he would say. From his perspective, that’s the end of the discussion. He doesn’t remember it, doesn’t agree with it, and so it didn’t happen.

I don’t need for Bernie Sanders to remember every time he—unintentionally, I believe—hurts somebody’s feelings. But I do need for Elizabeth Warren to be able to tell her truth, and what I believe is the truth, without people calling her a liar, a snake, or some hysterical witch who spends her downtime boiling up problems for men.
https://www.thenation.com/article/sanders-warren-truth/

- IGIT

IGIT

Perhaps you should speak with someone else? I can't help you with "vast conspiracies" as I dont know of any.

Let me know if you would like to discuss the topic at hand though.

 

[IGIT]

IGIT

Perhaps you should speak with someone else? I can't help you with "vast conspiracies" as I dont know of any.

hiya Franklinstower,

look my friend, if you stop posting "informative" youtube videos from children who claim to be uncovering vast conspiracies involving the NYT/Media/Establishment, i won't bring up any longer.

if you continue to post such things, i may feel the need to make fun of the content.

cool?

- IGIT

 

[franklinstower]

hiya Franklinstower,

look my friend, if you stop posting "informative" youtube videos from children who claim to be uncovering vast conspiracies involving the NYT/Media/Establishment, i won't bring up any longer.

if you continue to post such things, i may feel the need to make fun of the content.

cool?

- IGIT

No its not cool. You can either take what I say as what I mean to say or you can keep making up my position and then shooting it down. The former would be a good faith positioning and accurate and the latter would be consistent with your MO.

Im getting bored with you talking to yourself though. What you are doing is a form of lying.

 

[IGIT]

No its not cool.

heya there franklinstower,

i'm very sorry you feel that way.

- IGIT

 

[franklinstower]

heya there franklinstower,

i'm very sorry you feel that way.

- IGIT

You have misstated my position intentionally and repeatedly. That is not cool by anyone's metric. Our whole discussion started because I called the NYT's lie about Bernie and Warrens discussion a "mishap".

You have been unhinged this whole discussion.

 

[Javelina]

lol, pocahantis. a known liar

they should have called her out for wasting time and money on a DNA test. all she had to do was show us her dance moves

 

[Rockapotomuss]

hey ho Rockapotomuss!



yes, this is pretty well known. no disagreements here.



the ones who are shorting stocks probably aren't hoping it goes up, but yeah, i agree that some investors want to the market go up.

Mrs. Warren used to be a member of the GOP, yup.

so, Mrs. Warren has been "planted" as a candidate to protect Wall St from Bernie Sanders? and proof of that was the money she raised from Wall St during her campaign for the Senate, right?

here's how the New York Times sees things;

Wall Street has long tried to influence American politics and generally donated to both parties, though it traditionally has been more aligned with Republicans. But while there’s no coordinated strategy, the industry is more or less united against Ms. Warren. With just months before the first voting begins, it is unleashing a barrage of public attacks, donating money to her rivals and scrambling to counter her blistering narrative about Wall Street.

In recent weeks, Wall Street’s warning signals about Ms. Warren have begun exploding into the public, coloring analyst reports and earnings calls, and echoing from the stages of industry conferences. The billionaire money manager Leon Cooperman castigated her in an open letter released Thursday, and on Friday Goldman Sachs researchers suggested that tax hikes proposed by Ms. Warren and others could lower corporate earnings by 11 percent.

Prominent money managers have predicted a double-digit decline in the stock market if Ms. Warren wins the presidency, a claim that some skeptics find hyperbolic.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/04/us/politics/elizabeth-warren-wall-street.html

*muses*

i like your conspiracy theory; its exciting. its so devious - and to me - complicated;

the finance industry is making noises that they are scared of Elizabeth Warren. but they are really scared of Bernie Sanders. so - anticipating that Warren would one day run for POTUS - they larded her campaign chest with funds back when she was raising money for her Senate run, knowing that they could count on her as backstop to the lunacy that Bernie Sanders was proposing.

not only that, it was a kind of double fakeout (lol). these sinister powers could have just lined up their wagons of campaign money behind a moderate like Joe Biden - but they didn't do that because it would be too obvious. so they hedged their bets, split the difference, and put their money behind the lesser of two evils; Elizabeth Warren.

whew! that sure was tiring.

i think the NYT is right and your theory is...well...its unlikely.

- IGIT

The people on Wall St. are among the brightest, best educated, tenacious, and most experienced minds in the world. Why would their plans and contingencies be simple and single layered?

Further evidence of Warren's intentions are found in her history with Obama, where she was in charge of getting the bankers in line for causing the 2008 crash. It was all smoke and mirrors. Her solutions had zero teeth. It was all talk. Just like her policies are now.

 

[IGIT]

The people on Wall St. are among the brightest, best educated, tenacious, and most experienced minds in the world. Why would their plans and contingencies be simple and single layered?

Further evidence of Warren's intentions are found in her history with Obama, where she was in charge of getting the bankers in line for causing the 2008 crash. It was all smoke and mirrors. Her solutions had zero teeth. It was all talk. Just like her policies are now.

hi Rockapotomuss,

yes, lol.

and when Patrick McHenry (that insufferable ass) was attacking Mrs. Warren during the creation of the committee you're referring to, calling her a lair, it was all a set up! he was into the scheme too!

all of these separate entities working together, behind the scenes, like an insidious octopus of evilness. scheming...planning...pulling levers.

its all too much to take, sometimes.

- IGIT

 

[IGIT]

You have misstated my position intentionally and repeatedly. That is not cool by anyone's metric. Our whole discussion started because I called the NYT's lie about Bernie and Warrens discussion a "mishap".

You have been unhinged this whole discussion.

hello hello, franklinstower,

again, i am sorry you feel that way.

- IGIT

 

[franklinstower]

hello hello, franklinstower,

again, i am sorry you feel that way.

- IGIT

I'm sorry you behave this way.

 

[bobgeese]

heya there franklinstower,

i'm very sorry you feel that way.

- IGIT

You have misstated my position intentionally and repeatedly. That is not cool by anyone's metric. Our whole discussion started because I called the NYT's lie about Bernie and Warrens discussion a "mishap".

You have been unhinged this whole discussion.

This is like a slapfight between the two nicest guys on Sherdog.

I kinda want to break it up, but at the same time, I’m fascinated. Hmmm...


I allow it. Let them bang.

 

[Farmer Br0wn]

297 days until the General election and the New York Times can't even commit to a single candidate.

Tick, tock Dems, by the time you all figure out what candidate you're actually going to back, it'll be November 4th.

 

[fedoriswar37]

Who the fuck is Amy Klochubar? I haven’t been following the primary race at all but at least I had heard of Bernie, Warren, Biden, Bouttiege (however you spell it), Harris, Yang and Beto.

Never even heard of this person.

Shes actually the better of the 2 female candidates but youd never know

 

[Rockapotomuss]

hi Rockapotomuss,

yes, lol.

and when Patrick McHenry (that insufferable ass) was attacking Mrs. Warren during the creation of the committee you're referring to, calling her a lair, it was all a set up! he was into the scheme too!

all of these separate entities working together, behind the scenes, like an insidious octopus of evilness. scheming...planning...pulling levers.

its all too much to take, sometimes.

- IGIT

All of these ostriches ignoring the facts before them, believing in Warren to further a progressive agenda. Sad to see.

 

[IGIT]

297 days until the General election and the New York Times can't even commit to a single candidate.

Tick, tock Dems, by the time you all figure out what candidate you're actually going to back, it'll be November 4th.

hello Farmer Br0wn,

i resent that i felt compelled to give you a like.

such is life. what's right is right.

- IGIT