Do you think the CNN You-Tube Republican Debate was biased?

Question

I've read some Q & A suggesting that the CNN debate had a bias one way or another.

Please read this blog and then tell me what you think. It is NOT long.

http://michellemalkin.com/

Thank you very much.

3 answers so far and I don't think anyone read the blog on the link! It really is short!

Forget about CNN being biased! Just look to the YA responders for bias. Thanks for giving it a second try Caldude1010101

And thanks to Losersrdems-RFLMAO at your nickname!

KIZIAH-nice b.s. are you a polly sci major?

Answer 1

Well, look how evenhanded CNN is behaving with these ‘debates’.

For the Democratic ‘debate’ they had Democratic activists planted in the audience posing as ‘undecided voters’

For the Republican ‘debate’ they had Democratic activists planted in the audience posing as ‘undecided voters’

Is that equal treatment, or what?

To Steve C - how very typical of a liberal you are. You have no interest in hearing other viewpoints. You've already made up your mind, don't bother you with facts.

Answer 2

I think there is certainly bias there. It could also be a bit of laziness too. Journalists really have gone downhill in their willingness to vet their sources. I understand they got something like 35,000 submissions, so it's "possible" they just didn't screen these folks as well as they said they did. But bias is definitely a possibility.

It's especially ironic considering the way the Dems were criticizing FOX and refused to go on the network saying they wouldn't be treated fairly...and then CNN pulls this crap.

Answer 3

Giving a Hillary staffer at least 5 minutes of air time during a Republican debate does tend to indicate bias yes.

(If it hadn't been for Bennett pointing out this fact post debate...on air...CNN would never have acknowledged it).

If they honestly didn't know someone needs to be fired for incompetence (or for simply aiding and abetting the sleezy witch and putting CNN's small amount of remaining good will on the cutting floor). ;)

Answer 4

If CNN honestly didn't background check Brigadier General Kerr being a Hillary plant, then someone needs to lose their job this morning.

It seems to me though, that Anderson (et. al.) knew exactly whom he was.

Not that it matters. I personally think Kerr did a good job of showing that someone who is gay can serve in the military and reach the rank of Brigadier General without it being a big deal.

edit: I can't stand to listen/read Malkin, but I'll give it a shot.

2nd edit: Looks like Cooper and CNN did a very poor job of screening the questions. But I wonder if the dumb "gun owner" question from the redneck was typical of the questions being asked by potential GOP voters and Cooper/CNN didn't have a lot to work with for a full 2 hours, so it left them little choice.

Answer 5

I dont think the debate was bias but I do think CNN (not Anderson Cooper) is full of it when they say they did not know the General was a hillary planter.....I cant stand her..

Answer 6

I do now!

Let us look at it this way.....these questions were planted to make our guys look bad. It failed miserably.

Also, I must say i felt like the retired military gentelmen's question was way out of left field before they revealed that it was a plant. I mean, is that really a pressing issue??

Answer 7

Thanks for the link one thing, two I believe it was a staged event by CNN. Along with the ones pointed out by your link. I believe the one that asked the question about the Bible (who referred to it as "this book" only. And the question for "Supposed Christian conservatives", along with the WWJD question I knew that the questions were stacked by democrats.

Despite the obvious biased by CNN and the people they chose to ask questions, the republican candidates answered the questions very well and showed themselves capable of answering the questions that democrats fear to ask their own candidates.

Answer 8

I think kelsette really hit it on the head -there is really not much of a debate when only 2 candidates are monopolizing the majority of time and questions given to some candidates are not given to others to answer

Answer 9

It is always biased as they always direct the majority of the questions to Romney, McCain, and Giuliani.

Funny how the candidate with the MOST to say is Ron Paul and they barely ask him anything, regardless of his soaring popularity and grassroots foundation.

No wonder a lot of American's haven't heard of Ron Paul, Tancredo, etc... It's because the media doesn't want America to think outside the box. The media has already chosen who they want to win, and so of course that's who they're going to give the most airtime.

Edit : Thanks, Rooster! :]

Answer 10

The political preferences of the questioner really don't matter. The questions they asked were fair and more of the same. If a man is running for President, whether he is a Democrat or Republican, he should be able to answer any question honestly and to the best of his knowledge. The questions were designed to reveal who the candidates really are. If they elicited flaws, they were good questions. I think all of them should be asked some surprising and sober questions.