Do you know who believes that Trump's tweets were racist? Racists do. https://www.voanews.com/usa/many-white-nationalists-praise-controversial-trump-tweets This racist specifically identifies Trump's tweets as racist. When racists and minorities agree on an issue related to race it's pretty safe to say they are accurate.
I would argue that the average Trump supporter is too ignorant to understand that the midterm elections actually matter. I'll bet a lot of them just stayed home in 2018 because....well, Leader Trump wasn't on the ballot! They won't do that in 2020. That, together with the Dems once again failing to nominate a candidate capable of winning the general, spells 4 more years of this nonsense IMO.
also, when he copies the slogan of his intended target of ridicule; in this case, the squad of new women lawmakers of color who had the audacity to criticize Trump. a roundabout way of admitting that these attacks / spins "go back to the country where you'd came from" and "if you're not happy here in America, leave" did not work !
I noticed on NPR, when introducing an opinion guest, the host called the tweets racist. Given it was an opinion segment, it made some sense, but I was surprised to hear that in the intro. Does that make them not objective or not a credible news organization? I think that's more complicated. First, no organization is objective nor expected to be. They provide analysis as well as the base facts (they'd be pretty worthless if they only reported facts without analysis), so you're going to get their worldview implicit in their reporting. It's okay if you have a free and robust marketplace for political discourse, which we do. The two things you want from a news organization is that they are independent (e.g., not controlled by a political party or government agency or corporate interest) and that they are professional (e.g., collect the evidences, corroborate stories, be transparent to the reader, don't make stuff up, etc). These mainstream organizations still mostly satisfy those requirements for me, so I'd still say they are legitimate. Now, if they make the editorial choice to call the tweets racist, that's a slice of their worldview. In the political marketplace, if customers don't like their analysis they can get their news product from someone else. Or, as it works out in real life, you can hear NPR say it was racist and hear Fox say it was not and make up your own mind. For my part as an NPR listener, I would think it was a bit ridiculous to listen to them dance around the racism question and pretend like they don't know that the tweets were racist.
Why would Biden suppress voted if the passion is to get rid of Trump? Even if voters don't like Biden shouldn't they turn out to vote down ticket? This is the thinking that really scared me in 20/20. If Biden gets the nomination he has excited somebody, this sentiment of if my candidate does not get nominated I won't vote is galling.
Yes, it ruins their credibility. All human beings have opinions. Reporters and anchors should keep their opinions to themselves.
I thought about it, but goodness gracious -- not only is it easy to find....if you google this news event, it's hard to avoid finding it.
I checked out one article on it. How many articles do you expect me to go search to fact check your claim?
With a quick google search I saw one by NBC and one by CBS. Now who is expecting whom to do their research for them? And goodness gracious, media using the word "racist" is all over the place.
Dude, if you found it, why don't you post it? Are you scared I will find quotation marks around the words "racist tweet"?
Because it is. This is a great way broaden your base... White males are committing suicide faster than being replaced.
Not really realistic. Journalists make choices on which facts are important and which facts are related to other facts and strung together. Analyzing the story and explaining to the reader why it is important is central to the job of reporting. You can't keep your opinion to yourself in that job.
