traderdave wrote:

Gimpy wrote:The Republican debate was a mess. They need to pare down the field because there are way too many people jockeying for time.

Agreed. About the only thing I got out of watch that train wreck last night was that the field should be four people lighter by Monday morning (Bush, Huckabee, Fiorina, Paul). Honestly, of the GOP candidates I think I like Kasich the best. If he were the nominee, I might vote for him over Hillary.

The irony in all of this is that there are plenty of legitimate reasons to denigrate the mainstream media. But none of those reasons are “they ask too many direct questions about the plainly farcical policy proposals of presidential candidates.” The real problems with the political media—its addiction to horse race journalism, unhealthy appetite for conflict at all else, its tendency to invent storylines out of thin air—are the things that voters like. The general public is ill-informed, easily bored, restless for entertainment, and does not understand economics. When CNBC’s moderators tried to ask straightforward economic questions (even going to the unforgivable extreme of citing math), the American public was well primed to hate the media and all it stands for. That is when the candidates struck.

STOCKHOLM (Reuters) - The Swedish government and center-right opposition reached a deal on Friday to tighten rules on immigration only a day after it expected a record of up to 190,000 refugees this year.

The Social Democratic government and opposition parties said on Friday a deal had been reached and that a press conference would be held later in the day, but gave no more details.

The deal includes the introduction of three-year temporary residence permits, with exceptions for some groups including families with children, unaccompanied minors, according to a source close to the negotiations.

Except for very rare cases, everyone granted asylum in Sweden is given permanent residency, a Migration Agency spokeswoman said.

Mr. Andrew Lack
Chairman, NBC News
30 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, New York 10112

Dear Mr. Lack,

I write to inform you that pending further discussion between the Republican National Committee (RNC) and our presidential campaigns, we are suspending the partnership with NBC News for the Republican primary debate at the University of Houston on February 26, 2016. The RNC’s sole role in the primary debate process is to ensure that our candidates are given a full and fair opportunity to lay out their vision for America’s future. We simply cannot continue with NBC without full consultation with our campaigns.

The CNBC network is one of your media properties, and its handling of the debate was conducted in bad faith. We understand that NBC does not exercise full editorial control over CNBC’s journalistic approach. However, the network is an arm of your organization, and we need to ensure there is not a repeat performance.

CNBC billed the debate as one that would focus on “the key issues that matter to all voters—job growth, taxes, technology, retirement and the health of our national economy.” That was not the case. Before the debate, the candidates were promised an opening question on economic or financial matters. That was not the case. Candidates were promised that speaking time would be carefully monitored to ensure fairness. That was not the case. Questions were inaccurate or downright offensive. The first question directed to one of our candidates asked if he was running a comic book version of a presidential campaign, hardly in the spirit of how the debate was billed.

While debates are meant to include tough questions and contrast candidates’ visions and policies for the future of America, CNBC’s moderators engaged in a series of “gotcha” questions, petty and mean-spirited in tone, and designed to embarrass our candidates. What took place Wednesday night was not an attempt to give the American people a greater understanding of our candidates’ policies and ideas.

I have tremendous respect for the First Amendment and freedom of the press. However, I also expect the media to host a substantive debate on consequential issues important to Americans. CNBC did not.

While we are suspending our partnership with NBC News and its properties, we still fully intend to have a debate on that day, and will ensure that National Review remains part of it.

I will be working with our candidates to discuss how to move forward and will be in touch.

Sincerely,

Reince Priebus
Chairman, Republican National Committee

SK790 wrote:i'm really at a loss as to why people on the right think that CNBC is incredibly liberal or even more liberal than CNN. i mean, it's a network for old white people who love financial hot takes(these people are not liberals normally).

SK790 wrote:i'm really at a loss as to why people on the right think that CNBC is incredibly liberal or even more liberal than CNN. i mean, it's a network for old white people who love financial hot takes(these people are not liberals normally).