Stephanie is a pitbull on steroids. She makes complicated financial theories simple and understandable. This is going to be great. Can you tell I adore Stephanie?
I guess at this point Ruhle deserves the benefit of the doubt, but it's much closer to Trump being interviewed by Hannity than it is an interview with real journalist. Ruhle has been pretty outspoken in her support for Harris, and has made comments to the effect that it's not that important to understand Harris's exact positions as the priority is to stop Trump as a threat to Democracy.
Yes, she clearly leans left! She works at MSNBC. I just don't think of her as reflexively partisan. I think she is a journalist more than and advocate.
I remember Stephanie Ruhle had a great interview with Lauren Boebert. She let her talk, called her out on her bullshit, but also did it in a way that didn't just make the interview an interruption fest. It felt like a conversation and she forced her to talk policy rather than personality.
And then when what is bound to be a well-thought out economic plan, presented in a coherent manner, is compared to Trump’s “tariffs will fix everything, from the price of eggs to financing child care” concept of a plan…
I don't live in a swing state so in some ways it's almost as if the campaign isn't happening. As of now Trump garners more attention on cable news because his rallies are so quotable for his bat-crazy riffs. Nevertheless, that makes him seem more active to non-swingstaters like me. I worry that Harris is playing it a bit too close to the vest. I would like her to be out there walloping Trump on his silly tariff proposals, comparing (by analogy) to his wacko Covid response, pointing out how he thinks he a genius on everything and doesn't know what the heck he's talking about.
I dunno Chris - I wish that I was as sanguine as yourself. Three months ago - when I thought about the media at all - I would have said that with the exception of obvious propaganda outfits like Fox and Sinclair, the media does a pretty good job of reporting the news fairly and accurately.
Unfortunately, the last three months of "sane-washing" Trump by corporate media has left me totally jaded and extremely sceptical. I have no doubts that the headline for this MSNBC interview will look something like "Trump Disputes Claims Made By Opponent in Interview"................
I see and hear people using the phrase "sane washing" but would love to see an example of what that means. I see the press rightly savage Trump all the time. The NYTimes has issued eds saying he's unfit and published a warning re his second term based on the insanity of his first. The press dutifully governed the 1/6 hearings , which exposed fully his criminal efforts to subvert democracy. His guilty verdicts and the NY trials were also covered in great detail. None of it moves the needle much ,if at all. So I don't blame the media. I blame our fellow citizens. The info that leads us to condemn Trump is available to all. Some don't care to know; some know and don't care.
Yesterday at a MAGA rally in Savannah, Trump: 1) drooled on himself; 2) claimed that he was only recently informed that the Russians beat Napoleon and Hitler….
CNN’s coverage: “Trump focuses on economy at stop in battleground Georgia.”
This is a prime example of “sane washing”. The examples are endless, because literally every day Trump says something that would cause corporate media to question anyone else’s sanity… and relentlessly cover the rantings daily with above-the-fold placement and feature interviews with psychiatrists, neurologists, and other experts in congnitive decline.
Imagine the media coverage if Biden had insisted upon running, and that’s what we SHOULD be seeing daily about Trump. The fact that we’re not is prima facie evidence of “sane washing”.
Ok, thanks. I take your point. But I'm not sure what you'd like to see: "Trump is once again a raving lunatic" ? Do you think that would move the needle when the reporting and editorials I referenced didn't? The press has put forth the facts repeatedly. He's been condemned in editorials repeatedly. Did you see his insane truth social post last night re women? No reporting needed to interpret that. He puts his lunacy on display directly. And it's what about 45-48% of our fellow citizens want. So I blame them.
What would I want to see? Relentless coverage of the ridiculous things that Trump spews out, how sane people with intact cognitive abilities don’t say/do these kinds of things, expert interviews with medical professionals calling into question Trump’s mental faculties…
Corporate media could keep entire teams of reporters dissecting every Trump lie and unhinged statement - EVERY-FREAKIN-DAY. They don’t because the media at best wants the appearance of a competitive horse race, and at worst is hoping a Trump win will positively impact profits.
In other words the media should be treating Trump as the scandal that he is, rather than with indulgent “Trump being Trump” coverage. Where are the Woodward and Bernstein of today???
Woodward & Bernstein exposed a scandal that brought down a POTUS. The Times and WaPo have done investigative reporting exposing numerous Trump scandals: fraud re taxes , Trump U, Russian contacts, sexual assault, stealing government papers, financial fraud. Many don’t read or hear about any of it. Others don’t care.
I get your point. My point is not whether NYT or WaPo occassionally mention some Trump scandalous behavior or comment.
For anyone else, there would be a RELENTLESS barrage of stories - day in, day out - with no let up to force this into the national consciousness. There could be a daily feature titled “Crazy shit that Trump said in the last 24 hours”….
Image the relentless media coverage - EVERY SINGLE DAY - if Biden had insisted upon staying in the race.
After the June debate disaster, remember:
The DAILY articles on Biden’s loss of cognitive abilities?
The interviews with neurologists, psychiatrists, and gerentologists discussing age-related congnitive decline?
The articles with “insiders” and others sharing their impressions that Biden wasn’t the same person he used to be?
Remember the whiff of scandal when the media began to ask when did the Administration first realize that Biden was struggling to stay with the plot, and why was it covered up?
That’s how I expect the media to cover Trump - with the same level of “blood in the water” intensity…
I think most people understood that Harris would eventually do interviews. It's just that the stakes are high, and with such a close race, she can't afford mistakes. (Like you claim Biden made.) She had to set her campaign up in record time. So far, it's gone pretty well.
Harris doesn't have a great record doing interviews, but she's grown a lot and I'm sure she'll be fine. I think it's fine to start off with more "friendly" outlets (like MSNBC/Pod Save/probably Howard Stern) before she goes elsewhere. I don't know who the "respectable" reporter is at Fox right now, but I think it would be good and healthy if Harris talked to him or her ....
We’ll see how she does if it was strategically smart. Doing an interview is usually not dubbed the great strategic move. But we do live in strange times
OMG. Yet you’ll vote again to put a man-child back into the WH that the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of lifelong Republicans that worked with him said he was unfit and wasn’t intelligent enough to make decent decisions. I could give you a hundred examples, but I’d still be wasting my time.
And @dutchmaga’s comment just underscores precisely what you said!
I just saw a great quote on Threads: “Everything is a conspiracy theory to someone that doesn’t understand how *anything* works.” Quite apropos, don’t you think?
No credible journalist is ever going to interview Trump on his policy of tariffs as an economic plan. Which was a complete disaster the last time he was president. All Harris has to say is NOT TARIFFS and she should win the economic argument. But the media refuse to frame this election that way. This isn’t about competence. It’s about gender and race. Regardless, what no one seems to appreciate is the way states run their own economies, the deals they do with foreign nations, regardless of the dictates of the Presidency. If Trump becomes president there will be a war between the Federal Government and the states as Trunp’s bizarre behavior undermines state economies. The US media is way too dumb to understand this dynamic. It probably doesn’t sell advertising for them either lol
No matter what VP Kamala Harris says in these times her thoughts brilliant or not are spanned to what ever the journalist wants . Stephanie Ruhle is an excellent journalist no matter what her personal political beliefs are. Now Fox News no matter what Kamala does or say they will turn evil on it . Interviews with Kamala are few for a good reason same with Biden his work in the White House will go down in history as one of the best regardless what they say now only history will give them credibility.
Good news indeed and I agree with your reasoning re: Ruhle. I have, I'll admit though, had issue with many pundits complaining about Harris' lack of media interviews. She came in at the last minute, true, but most of the media seized on her and wrote/spoke/tweeted (X'd?)/whatever about whatever minor issue she spoke of. Admittedly, I watch/listen to more US news than I probably should (and I live in France), but to say that even now, some people who don't know who Kamala is or what she stands for is either not paying attention or doesn't care. She has laid out her policies at the DNC, in her campaign ads, in her snippets of campaign rallies on YouTube (and, I'm guessing most of us here watch YouTube to some extent) and even snippets on Fox and elsewhere. Harris can add some frosting to her policy cakes, but by and large we know where she stands on many issues. I mean, really, after, 8 nightmare years with Trump in the news, he can even still surprise us with some of his views on issues (when he talks of them). So, do we really ever know a candidate? Existential question, I realize. But thrilled to see Harris and Ruhle together in the same room. Should be fun!
Stephanie is a pitbull on steroids. She makes complicated financial theories simple and understandable. This is going to be great. Can you tell I adore Stephanie?
I guess at this point Ruhle deserves the benefit of the doubt, but it's much closer to Trump being interviewed by Hannity than it is an interview with real journalist. Ruhle has been pretty outspoken in her support for Harris, and has made comments to the effect that it's not that important to understand Harris's exact positions as the priority is to stop Trump as a threat to Democracy.
Yes, she clearly leans left! She works at MSNBC. I just don't think of her as reflexively partisan. I think she is a journalist more than and advocate.
Agreed 💯, Chris. Hannity is a fawning fanboy, NOT a journalist. Ruhle actually IS a serious journalist, though she clearly leans left….
Seems like a real journalist would want any and all candidates running for president to answer tough policy questions.
I remember Stephanie Ruhle had a great interview with Lauren Boebert. She let her talk, called her out on her bullshit, but also did it in a way that didn't just make the interview an interruption fest. It felt like a conversation and she forced her to talk policy rather than personality.
And then when what is bound to be a well-thought out economic plan, presented in a coherent manner, is compared to Trump’s “tariffs will fix everything, from the price of eggs to financing child care” concept of a plan…
So glad that she is going to do this ! As I have stated before, she needs to speak about her policy agenda.
If this journalist asks the hard questions and Kamala is able to answer them, so much the better!
I don't live in a swing state so in some ways it's almost as if the campaign isn't happening. As of now Trump garners more attention on cable news because his rallies are so quotable for his bat-crazy riffs. Nevertheless, that makes him seem more active to non-swingstaters like me. I worry that Harris is playing it a bit too close to the vest. I would like her to be out there walloping Trump on his silly tariff proposals, comparing (by analogy) to his wacko Covid response, pointing out how he thinks he a genius on everything and doesn't know what the heck he's talking about.
I dunno Chris - I wish that I was as sanguine as yourself. Three months ago - when I thought about the media at all - I would have said that with the exception of obvious propaganda outfits like Fox and Sinclair, the media does a pretty good job of reporting the news fairly and accurately.
Unfortunately, the last three months of "sane-washing" Trump by corporate media has left me totally jaded and extremely sceptical. I have no doubts that the headline for this MSNBC interview will look something like "Trump Disputes Claims Made By Opponent in Interview"................
I see and hear people using the phrase "sane washing" but would love to see an example of what that means. I see the press rightly savage Trump all the time. The NYTimes has issued eds saying he's unfit and published a warning re his second term based on the insanity of his first. The press dutifully governed the 1/6 hearings , which exposed fully his criminal efforts to subvert democracy. His guilty verdicts and the NY trials were also covered in great detail. None of it moves the needle much ,if at all. So I don't blame the media. I blame our fellow citizens. The info that leads us to condemn Trump is available to all. Some don't care to know; some know and don't care.
OMG really??? That’s pretty easy…
Yesterday at a MAGA rally in Savannah, Trump: 1) drooled on himself; 2) claimed that he was only recently informed that the Russians beat Napoleon and Hitler….
CNN’s coverage: “Trump focuses on economy at stop in battleground Georgia.”
https://youtu.be/LZggLv8d2So?si=_3rkxGrn6ZcVjHFR
This is a prime example of “sane washing”. The examples are endless, because literally every day Trump says something that would cause corporate media to question anyone else’s sanity… and relentlessly cover the rantings daily with above-the-fold placement and feature interviews with psychiatrists, neurologists, and other experts in congnitive decline.
Imagine the media coverage if Biden had insisted upon running, and that’s what we SHOULD be seeing daily about Trump. The fact that we’re not is prima facie evidence of “sane washing”.
Ok, thanks. I take your point. But I'm not sure what you'd like to see: "Trump is once again a raving lunatic" ? Do you think that would move the needle when the reporting and editorials I referenced didn't? The press has put forth the facts repeatedly. He's been condemned in editorials repeatedly. Did you see his insane truth social post last night re women? No reporting needed to interpret that. He puts his lunacy on display directly. And it's what about 45-48% of our fellow citizens want. So I blame them.
What would I want to see? Relentless coverage of the ridiculous things that Trump spews out, how sane people with intact cognitive abilities don’t say/do these kinds of things, expert interviews with medical professionals calling into question Trump’s mental faculties…
Corporate media could keep entire teams of reporters dissecting every Trump lie and unhinged statement - EVERY-FREAKIN-DAY. They don’t because the media at best wants the appearance of a competitive horse race, and at worst is hoping a Trump win will positively impact profits.
In other words the media should be treating Trump as the scandal that he is, rather than with indulgent “Trump being Trump” coverage. Where are the Woodward and Bernstein of today???
Woodward & Bernstein exposed a scandal that brought down a POTUS. The Times and WaPo have done investigative reporting exposing numerous Trump scandals: fraud re taxes , Trump U, Russian contacts, sexual assault, stealing government papers, financial fraud. Many don’t read or hear about any of it. Others don’t care.
I get your point. My point is not whether NYT or WaPo occassionally mention some Trump scandalous behavior or comment.
For anyone else, there would be a RELENTLESS barrage of stories - day in, day out - with no let up to force this into the national consciousness. There could be a daily feature titled “Crazy shit that Trump said in the last 24 hours”….
Image the relentless media coverage - EVERY SINGLE DAY - if Biden had insisted upon staying in the race.
After the June debate disaster, remember:
The DAILY articles on Biden’s loss of cognitive abilities?
The interviews with neurologists, psychiatrists, and gerentologists discussing age-related congnitive decline?
The articles with “insiders” and others sharing their impressions that Biden wasn’t the same person he used to be?
Remember the whiff of scandal when the media began to ask when did the Administration first realize that Biden was struggling to stay with the plot, and why was it covered up?
That’s how I expect the media to cover Trump - with the same level of “blood in the water” intensity…
Kamala has just turned the corner of serious “Democracy “!!!
@VoteForKamalaForPresident🇺🇸🌵🕊️
I think most people understood that Harris would eventually do interviews. It's just that the stakes are high, and with such a close race, she can't afford mistakes. (Like you claim Biden made.) She had to set her campaign up in record time. So far, it's gone pretty well.
Harris doesn't have a great record doing interviews, but she's grown a lot and I'm sure she'll be fine. I think it's fine to start off with more "friendly" outlets (like MSNBC/Pod Save/probably Howard Stern) before she goes elsewhere. I don't know who the "respectable" reporter is at Fox right now, but I think it would be good and healthy if Harris talked to him or her ....
We’ll see how she does if it was strategically smart. Doing an interview is usually not dubbed the great strategic move. But we do live in strange times
JB tells the view he could have beaten President Trump in this year’s election! 25th amendment is needed now! Who is running this country! Good grief!
OMG. Yet you’ll vote again to put a man-child back into the WH that the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of lifelong Republicans that worked with him said he was unfit and wasn’t intelligent enough to make decent decisions. I could give you a hundred examples, but I’d still be wasting my time.
They're in a cult. There's no reasoning with them.
And @dutchmaga’s comment just underscores precisely what you said!
I just saw a great quote on Threads: “Everything is a conspiracy theory to someone that doesn’t understand how *anything* works.” Quite apropos, don’t you think?
Convicted Felon Trump now has a new talking point attacking Harris: he claims she never worked at McDonald's.
Oh yes, your quote is spot on.
MAGA!
Start preparing yourself for what’s coming!
Given how Convicted Felon Trump's legal troubles will continue to grow after he loses, MAGA stands for: Make Attorneys Get Attorneys
I hope Harris can step up her game in this next interview. Unimpressed with the last two. I'm against eliminating the filibuster, too.
No credible journalist is ever going to interview Trump on his policy of tariffs as an economic plan. Which was a complete disaster the last time he was president. All Harris has to say is NOT TARIFFS and she should win the economic argument. But the media refuse to frame this election that way. This isn’t about competence. It’s about gender and race. Regardless, what no one seems to appreciate is the way states run their own economies, the deals they do with foreign nations, regardless of the dictates of the Presidency. If Trump becomes president there will be a war between the Federal Government and the states as Trunp’s bizarre behavior undermines state economies. The US media is way too dumb to understand this dynamic. It probably doesn’t sell advertising for them either lol
No matter what VP Kamala Harris says in these times her thoughts brilliant or not are spanned to what ever the journalist wants . Stephanie Ruhle is an excellent journalist no matter what her personal political beliefs are. Now Fox News no matter what Kamala does or say they will turn evil on it . Interviews with Kamala are few for a good reason same with Biden his work in the White House will go down in history as one of the best regardless what they say now only history will give them credibility.
Fair enough, but I like the fact that people like Pete Buttigieg and Gavin Newsome go into the lion's den and end up shredding the FOX talking heads.
Good news indeed and I agree with your reasoning re: Ruhle. I have, I'll admit though, had issue with many pundits complaining about Harris' lack of media interviews. She came in at the last minute, true, but most of the media seized on her and wrote/spoke/tweeted (X'd?)/whatever about whatever minor issue she spoke of. Admittedly, I watch/listen to more US news than I probably should (and I live in France), but to say that even now, some people who don't know who Kamala is or what she stands for is either not paying attention or doesn't care. She has laid out her policies at the DNC, in her campaign ads, in her snippets of campaign rallies on YouTube (and, I'm guessing most of us here watch YouTube to some extent) and even snippets on Fox and elsewhere. Harris can add some frosting to her policy cakes, but by and large we know where she stands on many issues. I mean, really, after, 8 nightmare years with Trump in the news, he can even still surprise us with some of his views on issues (when he talks of them). So, do we really ever know a candidate? Existential question, I realize. But thrilled to see Harris and Ruhle together in the same room. Should be fun!
Are you in a Tesla?