Kitschkraft
Member
Mandark said:
I hope that you don't find out about CNN.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF Interim Thread of USA General Elections (DAWN OF THE VEEP)
- Thread starter Amir0x
- Start date
- Status
I hope that you don't find out about CNN.
scorcho: It means that nobody should say anything that could possibly be misused by other people against Obama. No sarcasm until November 5th.
Though I'd bet dollars to donuts that this wouldn't be nearly as big a story if the Obama campaign had said "It shows how ridiculous and unrealistic these smears are, ha ha ha!"
OF COURSE if you feign outrage something is going to make the cable news.
Though I'd bet dollars to donuts that this wouldn't be nearly as big a story if the Obama campaign had said "It shows how ridiculous and unrealistic these smears are, ha ha ha!"
OF COURSE if you feign outrage something is going to make the cable news.
Kitschkraft
Member
Tamanon said:
Seems like the more the national polls tighten, the more his electorial chances widen. I don't see how, but he still looks like a big favorite on the 50 state map.
Kitschkraft
Member
Mandark said:
Thats not what I meant at all, you don't seem to get it, and I've explained this on two separate encounters.
You implied that people didn't understand the sarcasm and satire of the New Yorker (Which is not only condescending, but a bit ridiculous, get real man), referencing Colbert, who is known for his satire. I was implying that you can't seem to understand that bad press is bad press, regardless of how it arises, and that CNN covering this shit as "Magazine Controversy" isn't a positive thing for his campaign right now.
Tamanon said:I call complete bullshit on this. Why would you admit now that the Obama camp has any ability to shape the media narrative?
I call super reverse bullshit.
You think the Obama campaign has no ability to shape the narrative at all? Seriously? Really?
PhoenixDark
Banned
reilo said:
He was up by 5 a few days ago. Why is this good news
I think this is going to get the exact same amount of play as it would if he had poo-poo'd it. The media decided that the New Yorker cover is their story. You'll notice that Obama's response and McCain's response isn't even given more than a few seconds of time. It's just another random thing that can be debated by strategists without having any actual meaningful discussion. First Read had a nice little blurb on it calling it the "Shiny Object of the Day" story.
Phoenix: The tie he is talking about is when averaging the polls, the 5-pointer was from the newest poll.
Phoenix: The tie he is talking about is when averaging the polls, the 5-pointer was from the newest poll.
Kitschkraft
Member
Mandark said:
Edit : No need for drama I suppose.
I am not for censorship.
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/07/fournier_to_rove_keep_up_the_fight.php
:lol That's certainly not going to help the perception some people have of the AP slanting its view more lately.
Oh yeah, and Rasmussen has Obama only down 4 in South Dakota of all places.
:lol That's certainly not going to help the perception some people have of the AP slanting its view more lately.
Oh yeah, and Rasmussen has Obama only down 4 in South Dakota of all places.
The Lamonster
Member
whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat the fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuckPhoenixDark said:
blasphemy
oh no
I don't...
omg
!!!!1111111
Liara: No, not for censorship. But you assume a sort of moral obligation that makes things like the NYer cover irresponsible.
Tamanon: Conflict (and good footage) is the fuel of cable news fires, and Obama's campaign was happy to supply it to them in the form of a denouncement.
Also, it's an instance of the campaign talking down to voters, which isn't something it usually does.
Tamanon: Conflict (and good footage) is the fuel of cable news fires, and Obama's campaign was happy to supply it to them in the form of a denouncement.
Also, it's an instance of the campaign talking down to voters, which isn't something it usually does.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Speaking of the NYer: great article on the media's obsession with finding non-existent flip flops to justify their narrative on Obama
http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2008/07/21/080721taco_talk_hertzberg
Hertzberg was actually on Morning Joe today discussing his new article and it was amazing how the hosts attempted to frame the discussion, prefaced on a statement along the lines of "so we know Obama has flip flopped on a multitude of issues these last 3 weeks..." Hertz objected and began to lay out his argument - basically that outside of FISA, talk of Obama flip flops are grossly exaggerated. So of course Joe tried his best to stick to the narrative no matter what, eventually just ignoring Hertz until the segment was over
http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2008/07/21/080721taco_talk_hertzberg
Hertzberg was actually on Morning Joe today discussing his new article and it was amazing how the hosts attempted to frame the discussion, prefaced on a statement along the lines of "so we know Obama has flip flopped on a multitude of issues these last 3 weeks..." Hertz objected and began to lay out his argument - basically that outside of FISA, talk of Obama flip flops are grossly exaggerated. So of course Joe tried his best to stick to the narrative no matter what, eventually just ignoring Hertz until the segment was over
We'll agree to disagree, since there is no conflict between the candidates on this issue. I certainly didn't see any talking down to voters, and definitely no real controversial or useful footage out of it, just him shrugging and saying no comment. Basically by taking the exact same position as the McCain camp, he ensured it would be a one-day story at most.
ManDudeChild
Member
PhoenixDark said:
A great article by a member of the media on the media's obsession with non-existent flip flops. Glad we're all getting somewhere.
Internet Rule 57: If you use the phrase "I call bullshit" to initiate something, you can't use the phrase "agree to disagree" to escape it.
Now please notice that the Obama campaign's reaction to the cartoon is the hook for the AP story, the Reuters story, and the Washington Post story.
By talking down, I mean that the campaign was pretending not to get the satire, and acting like they thought it was actually offensive. You seriously think Obama and his staff didn't understand the intent?
Pretending to misunderstand something so you can act all outraged is a staple of politics, but it's also a horribly condescending one (for reference, see Hillary's comments during Bittergate).
Now please notice that the Obama campaign's reaction to the cartoon is the hook for the AP story, the Reuters story, and the Washington Post story.
By talking down, I mean that the campaign was pretending not to get the satire, and acting like they thought it was actually offensive. You seriously think Obama and his staff didn't understand the intent?
Pretending to misunderstand something so you can act all outraged is a staple of politics, but it's also a horribly condescending one (for reference, see Hillary's comments during Bittergate).
I'm telling you all that you don't realize how great life is once you turn off the cable networks. I haven't watched in a good two months (except for splices put up on websites) and to say my general stress level is down would be an understatement. These pundificators have been going full speed wrong and absurd since last Summer.
And nice polls for Obama today.
And nice polls for Obama today.
There was a reason I used the word "footage". The footage that airs on the news is him shrugging and saying "no comment". Not outrage. Plus, you can get satire and still think it's tasteless.
And I'm not trying to escape anything on this, I hold an opinion that no matter what Obama did, this would be the political story of the day. That's all. I didn't say I agreed with his position or anything like that. To me, it's a non-story. But I don't write the news sadly.
And I'm not trying to escape anything on this, I hold an opinion that no matter what Obama did, this would be the political story of the day. That's all. I didn't say I agreed with his position or anything like that. To me, it's a non-story. But I don't write the news sadly.
PhoenixDark
Banned
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/07/14/mclaughlin-takes-heat-for-oreo-comment/
Should I be ashamed that I saw his pic and thought "that's the dude from Mission Impossible 1!"?
There was something else a few weeks ago that McLaughlin was in trouble for saying too. I can't remember what it is off the top of my head, but I guess the problem is that some of the older generation of pundits/newsmen really don't know how to report on this election consistently and unoffensively. To him, oreo is just a label!
soul creator
Member
Tamanon said:
Warren G. Harding was a negra' too!
worldrunover
Member
I'm upset at The New Yorker cover because it's an overt cry for attention, and not only that, a pretty lame one. It isn't creative, funny, or thought-provoking; and its only real value is the shock value; which is to say, no value at all. Not only that, now they can sit back behind their lattes with the "smartest guy in the room" shithead smirk and hide behind the "bu-bu-but satire!" guise for all those who criticize this. "Elitest attention whores" is a bit too contrived, but you get the idea.
Also, I wouldn't put much stock in state polling until after the conventions. Right now it doesn't mean too much that Obama's tied in MO, at least not yet.
Also, I wouldn't put much stock in state polling until after the conventions. Right now it doesn't mean too much that Obama's tied in MO, at least not yet.
maximum360
Member
PhoenixDark said:
Well it is Scarbs. You can't expect anything else from him (and his lame panel). The last time Joe had something good to say Obama was after the "Race" speech...and by the end of the day Joe was back to his old GOP shill self. They do the same song and dance everyday so I'm on the verge of not watching at all.
BTW, I don't think anyone has really called him on it, but any time McCain is asked a question where he knows the answer he gives won't play well with the electorate, he always falls back on "he will call on Congress to find a bipartisan solution". He did it with Social Security, he just did it with the Fiorina taxing-the-rich comment.
worldrunover
Member
Tamanon said:
Yeah he keeps touting this bi=partisanism, but the more I hear him the less it seems like he would bend on anything.
The state-by-state polling so far really favors Obama. I wonder if states like Kentucky, Alabama and West Virginia, where Obama is crushed, pull his national average down. I wonder what the composite state average polling from pollster.com would look like, weighted by population, to get a national average.AniHawk said:
WTF? Newsweeks poll:
12% think Obama swore on a Koran to enter Congress
39% believe he attended Islamic School as a child
26% think he was raised Muslim
16% think he is a Muslim still.
That might explain why the numbers suddenly switched to 3%, they got a really bad batch of people to poll.:lol
And another WTF, Maddow AGAIN on Countdown?
12% think Obama swore on a Koran to enter Congress
39% believe he attended Islamic School as a child
26% think he was raised Muslim
16% think he is a Muslim still.
That might explain why the numbers suddenly switched to 3%, they got a really bad batch of people to poll.:lol
And another WTF, Maddow AGAIN on Countdown?
Richard Clark talking about how Obama has been calling for peaceful negotiations with foreign leaders, and how it has seemingly worked thus far this year. And he talked about doing that months before this administration has decided to go that route.
Then he finishes it off, with this quote:
Clark: "And McCain, is supposed to be the foreign policy expert?"
Then he finishes it off, with this quote:
Clark: "And McCain, is supposed to be the foreign policy expert?"
Agreed, although I still don't really get where the satire is within the image itself. If it weren't for the magazine's name on it, I wouldn't see a wink at all. I have no doubt satire was the intent, but all I see is a conglomeration of smears thrown into an illustration.worldrunover said:
Lv99 Slacker
Member
Jonathan :lol
Dan said:
The exact same thing could be said of The Onion's editorial cartoons. Or "Sail Away" by Randy Newman, "Send in the Marines" by Tom Lehrer or any number of Colbert skits. Hell, some people took "A Modest Proposal" seriously, IIRC.
As far as I'm concerned, the satire's implied by the complete disconnect between the picture and reality, and people like Kevin Drum are asking for it to be dumbed down.
Are some rightwing memes and FUD tactics just as ridiculous? Yeah, but if you surf around Renew America or Adam Yoshida's site you can find stuff that surpasses any possible satire.
grandjedi6
Master of the Google Search
reilo said:
Richard Clark: So Awesome
I'm still not seeing it. I don't see what the image is poking fun at. I can see how someone can look at the image and then tangentially call the people who believes these smears idiots, but I fail to see what the image itself does to contribute to that conclusion.Mandark said:
In order for this to be good satire, or to even qualify as such, it has to do something to subvert the message it puts forth. I see nothing of that. If this image is satire, so is a Fox News anchor calling Obama's greeting a "terrorist fist jab." They're both just statements that rational sane human beings know are ridiculous.
Incognito said:
I realized that years ago. The Sunday talk shows are sufficient to sum the week's stories (and the larger number of non-stories), alongside things like Washington Week and The Journal. The only exception is CNN's The Late Edition, which amounts to Wolf Blitzer egging on his guests to yell at each other and/or incessantly interrupting them; I only watch that when the guests are of interest.
And I can't believe people here are offended at The New Yorker's cover, since it's meaning is obvious at least if you're even remotely familiar with the magazine. Then again, on second thought, I take that back: I'm not surprised.
- Status