What exactly is a liberal to you.  You seem to throw the term around a lot but I wonder exactly what does it actually mean in your eyes.  What exactly define a liberal in your eyes.

It’s absolutely not the same, you can make an argument for MSNBC and other MSM having a liberal lean but it’s nowhere close to Fox which is right wing propaganda.

So does being harsh on Trump make a news organization liberal? Have you ever stopped to think why they are “harsher” on him than Harris? Could it possibly be because everything he says is a lie, stupid or hateful?

Reporting on the bullshit he says and does is not media bias, it’s them doing their job and I think there is an argument to be made that they actually go soft on Trump.

Trump’s mental capacity is absolutely trash, does he speak louder, clearer and more confidently than Biden? Yes. Do the things he says have any substance or coherency? Not usually. The guy is known for just ranting about any random bullshit that pops in his head and has the vocabulary and temperament of an 8 year old.

When did I say it was unreasonable for the media to fixate on the Springfield comment? I don't have a personal stake in the race, I don't care what they talk about. (All I remember from that debate was when Trump said Tim Walz gave the "okay" for "executing babies post-birth" (lmao) and how the Haitian migrants were eating the dogs and cats. Trump' rhetoric is utterly unhinged, I don't blame the media for covering it.) All I'm saying is that it is objectively embarassing how the dems will complain about how the MSM holds this "double-standard" against Trump b/c they aren't wearing the softest punching gloves known-to-man when interviewing Harris, or b/c they aren't overly focused on Trump's blunders 24/7. Aren't y'all the party that's fighting for "democracy"?

When it comes to Trump v Biden cognative states, it's not a matter of how informed you percieve them to be: Biden and Trump have focus-tested lines which they are to memorize and regurgitate. So, your perception of "informed" is truthfully just a matter of "Who had the best lines memorized" and "Who delivered the lines best?". When I'm talking about the cognitative state I observe from them, I'm thinking back to every public appearence from Biden between late-June and mid-July 2024 where he would literally be so focused on trying to construct a coherent sentence that he would be lifting his arms in a manner which reminds me of when I would learn a new piano piece lol (and most of the time, he would sound like an old dude speaking in the lowest possible tone, getting easily agitated, and stumbling over all his words). Trump, on the other hand, is not anywhere near this level of mental decline. He is still able to get up on his rally stage and deliver his talking points in such a manner so as to greatly energize his base. He's not as sharp as he was eight years ago, but it's no question whether his or Biden's cognative state is more acceptable.

Its very interesting that you believe that Trump isn't no where close to Biden when it comes to cognitive abilities.  While Biden has a speech impediment, there is such problem with Trump.  The main issue with Trump is that he has absolutely no clue what he is doing on any issue.  What particular issue has he talked about that gave you the believe he actually understand even an inkling about the subject.  Its been years for him to develop a coherent plan for when he comes into office and the best we can get from him is "I have an inkling of a plan".  Cognitive abilities is also the ability to understand which if you truly have looked at his public appearances from interviews to rallies you can give a detailed response on what exactly you believe is his plan for any of the major issues currently Americans are interested in.

The term "liberal" has two meanings in American politics. On the one hand, liberal may be used in reference to those who aren't looking for radical change but still seek progress (Conservatives : Reactionaries, Liberals : Radicals). On the other hand, however, liberal can be used in reference to ppl who support neoliberalism, which would include both conversatives and liberals. These would be the ppl who don't desire extreme change, but rather favor incremental measures.

In this context, when I say the MSM is "filled with liberals", both definitions fit though my intention was mostly using the former definition. For quick reference of why I say this, please see this list giving the top 50 most viewed news websites. You will notice that there exist very few conservative outlets, several non-partisan, but majority liberal (or democratic). But how am I classifying whether an outlet is conservative, non-partisan, or liberal? In many instances, the outlet will publically endorse a candidate. I believe WSJ has publically announced their support for Kamala Harris, for instance. In instances where this doesn't occur, you can very easily use common-sense analytical skills to determine whether it's conservative, non-partisan, or liberal.

"What particular issue has he talked about that gave you the believe he actually understand even an inkling about the subject." Since when do politicians know what their talking about? Lol. Kamala talking about "price gauging" (it's called "price gouging") and Walz literally hesistating before naming a country in all his foreign affair comments ("We sympathize with those in....Gaza" bro doesn't even know what a "Gaza" is lol). If you wanna punch at Trump, I've got some ammunition: My favorite is when he talks about foreign nations "unloading their insane asylums" in the US. Bunch a politicians, and all they say are empty lines with little truth attached.

The reason there isn't many conservative outlets because most Americans are not conservative.  Instead most Americans are moderates which means they sit right in the middle.  That would also include Dems and Republicans.  Basically what usually happens is that in order to keep people divided you need division.  So painting every Republican as conservative and every Dem as liberal satisfy this agenda but when you ask each group what they think on multiple issues but do not define an issue as being conservative or liberal, you find they pretty much fall in to the same category.  Some did a study like this not to long ago which was funny because they mark certain points as being conservative or liberal and people would decide that they were for or against based on the label and not the actual subject.

This is why I ask what do YOU consider a liberal or conservative because usually by todays marking its just a way to paint extremes for one side or another.  Meaning that most Republicans are really not conservatives, they are moderates but they would paint every Dem as liberal.  In this way they can feel good that there is a big difference between their belief and the so called other side.  Their viewpoint of what is liberal would be the far left which doesn't make up a huge part of Dem base as they would like to believe.  Same with Dems, they would love to paint all republicans as the far right but in reality neither party members are composed largely of either extremes. For the people in power, well they need that separation because then people would not vote along party lines as much but instead look more closely at each candidate.

lol you can’t be serious. “only MSNBC seems to be worth watching” is literally the exact same as a Repub saying “only Fox seems worth watching”. The entire MSM is filled with liberals. They aren’t (seemingly) as harsh on Trump this election cycle b/c Trump is choosing to stay out of the spotlight. (Same thing Biden did in 2020.) Whenever Trump does come out, however, the media is quick to bite: An immediate example is the Harris-Trump debate with the fixation on his Springfield, OH comment.

“the much younger and more eloquent Harris” lol I love my politicians when they’re more eloquent. Yes, they are both old, but it’s not a double-standard: Biden is senile, Trump is not. The argument isn’t just Biden’s age, it’s his mental capacity. And libs can say all they want abt Trump’s mental capacity, he is leaps and bounds better than Biden was even in 2020.

"My point here is that dems have no leg to stand on for complaining about how "unfair" the media has been toward Harris b/c they aren't crushing Trump this cycle. Do you disagree with this point? If not, then there was no point in you responding in the first place.

Uncommitted, the national group of Arab Americans, Muslim Americans and Palestinian rights activists that emerged from primary-season voters protesting President Biden’s Middle East policy, took a big step Tuesday toward encouraging supporters to vote for Vice President Kamala Harris.

In a video detailing the plans and suggestions of Trump advisers to expel or displace Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza, Lexi Zeidan, a Dearborn, Mich., resident and co-founder of the group, stopped short of endorsing Ms. Harris. But she concluded, “We have to orient less toward who is the better candidate and more toward what is the better antiwar approach in building our collective power.”

But in the video, Ms. Zeidan, a Palestinian American, bluntly said a second term for former President Donald J. Trump would be worse than a Harris victory. She detailed how Mr. Trump tilted U.S. foreign policy strongly toward the Israeli government in his first term and floated plans that “effectively dismantled any pathway to Palestinian self-determination.”

The video takes particular aim at Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation blueprint for a Republican presidency that was crafted in part by allies of Mr. Trump, who has tried to distance itself from its proposals, which include eliminating humanitarian aid to Gaza and the West Bank while stifling pro-Palestinian protests at home.

The video includes clips of David Friedman, Mr. Trump’s former ambassador to Israel, and Jared Kushner, his son-in-law, who have proposed expulsions from Gaza and annexation of the occupied territories by Israel. It also shows a top Trump donor, Miriam Adelson, promising that the former president would pursue the Israeli far right’s policy aims without regard to world opinion.

It's clear Netanyahu will be doing everything in his power to get Trump elected,” Ms. Zeidan concluded, referring to Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister. “And we have to do everything in our power to stop him.”

Pro-Palestinian ‘Uncommitted’ Group Comes Out Firmly Against Trump - The New York Times

A group of imams endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris in an open letter shared first with NBC News on Sunday, a critical boost as she steps up her efforts to win back disaffected Muslim voters amid the Israel-Hamas war.

The 25 Islamic religious leaders who signed the letter, which comes a year after the Oct. 7 terrorist attack that sparked the war, argue that Muslim voters have a duty to think logically about their voting decisions and that backing Harris “far outweighs the harms of the other options."

“She is a committed ceasefire candidate too and is the best option for ending the bloodshed in Gaza and now Lebanon,” they wrote.

The imams argued that former President Donald Trump is a threat to their community.

“Knowingly enabling someone like Donald Trump to return to office, whether by voting directly for him or for a third-party candidate, is both a moral and a strategic failure. Particularly in swing states, a vote for a third party could enable Trump to win that state and therefore the elections,” they wrote. 

“Given [Trump’s] well-documented history of harming our communities and country, as well as what he has promised he will do to Muslims and Palestinians should he return, it is incumbent upon us not to allow our high emotions to dictate our actions to our detriment,” the letter reads.

The letter argues that the leaders have “a responsibility, an Amana, not to place our community in harm’s way."

Mohamed Elsanousi, a Muslim community leader who helped organize the pro-Harris letter, noted that most of the 25 signers are permanent imams with sizable congregations, including some from swing states like Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia and North Carolina.

He said he hopes the support from religious leaders will make conflicted Muslim voters feel more comfortable voting for Harris, despite some prominent Muslim voices’ intense opposition to her. 

“I am really hopeful that with this letter a lot of people will change their minds,” Elsanousi said. “The momentum [for Harris] in the community is growing.”

Muslim Faith Leaders Endorse Kamala Harris