Fantastic debate between Tucker and Cenk on immigration and money in politics.
I admit to being bias toward Tucker, and this debate made me like him even more.
And even though I dislike Cenk, he made some good points and was polite unlike some other times.
I wanted to focus on the second half of the debate (though the first half was great as well) which was about money in politics.
Tucker agrees there is a problem with money in politics, but worries that we may take away speech rights in an effort to curb it. He also believes
that our freedoms are more endangered by private companies like google at this point than our government, so we should be focused on that more. (I
agree with both of these points)
You het the feeling from tuckers point that this is a very complicated issue, which I agree with.
Cenk on the other hand just says to get all money out of politics.
He then discusses how hillary got tons of corporate money (fair enough). however, he says that the only reason that Trump was able to overcome that
was that the media gave him 5 billion dollars of free airtime.
Thus Cenk proves himself a hypocrite.
By defining media coverage as a financial contribution of sorts, Cenk admits that it too would need to be regulated to truly get money out of
politics. And seeing that Cenk has a media company that regularly gives air time to candidates it favors, he is hypocritical demanding others keep
their money out of politics, while giving finaicial contributions in the form of airtime himself.
A regular pattern with the very progressive; demanding others follow laws that shouldnt apply to themselves. Like the climate change portestor flying
in a jet, or the gun grabber with an armed guard.
Whether it is out of ignorance, or a desire to magnify his voice by demanding other companies be silenced while his is not, Cenk is being a
But this goes beyond Cenk.
If we just overturn Citizens united, how will that stop the MSM which is 90% establishment democrat from still using the massive power to influence
Or how will that stop google playing with their algorithm to push candidates and policies that benefit them?
The truth is that money in politics is a very difficult problem, and often times the ones proposing solutions are proposing solutions that merely
allow themselves to have more power.
When it comes to Cenk, the Young Turks, Wolf Pac, and Justice Democrats you have to understand they all want money out of politics. Super Pacs, dark
money, money equaling free speech, and Corporations legally becoming a person. This is the core of corruption, and let's not forget lobbyist. All
these things combined have ruined our gov't and things are only getting worse.
He's right when he says Trump got billions of dollar of free media time, he did. CNN, MSNBC, Fox News all showed for like an hour Trump's empty podium
waiting for his rally to start. Meanwhile, plenty of other candidates were well on their way with their rallies but were ignored, mostly. So Clinton
raised more money than Trump but he still raised a helluva lot because he had his hats and billionaire donors, like the Mercer family, increasing his
war chest. BUT, he got more AIR TIME than all the other candidates, I think even combined.
Anyway, look into their Wolf Pac and how they are gonna try to use the corrupt system against itself to get candidates elected who are AGAINST big
donors, dark money, and Super Pacs. They've gotten Justice Democrats in office already, you may be familiar with one of them,
edit on 14-11-2018 by Swills because: (no reason given)
Again, you should probably head over to their sites to understand what their plan is instead of judging them from your computer chair without having
all the facts and information in order.
Your argument is null and void once you see where they're coming from.
And Cortez is great but Right Wingers hate her because Leftist, I get it, well all get it, but did you know she stood with protesters outside of
Pelosi's office on her first day in DC? NANCY PELOSI! Cortez is not some new blood looking to gain favor from corporate shill Democrats. On her first
day, wet behind the ears, she joined in a protest against NANCY PELOSI!
At the very least, you should recognize that she doesn't want to play the corporate politician shill game.
edit on 14-11-2018 by Swills
because: (no reason given)
a reply to: Grambler
ohhh I obviously have not watched it yet, but no damn well this should be a good one. Tomorrow when there is more time. I cannot wait. Thank you for
the highlights as well. I will still watch it tomorrow, I love a good debate.
edit on 11-14-2018 by worldstarcountry because: (no reason
And a good friend of mine on my youtube video raised a similar point as you.
Here was how I responded to him.
Cenk admits that the reason trump was able to be successful is that he was given a financial contribution in the form of media coverage.
Lets say that we follow Cenks "plan" which is vaguely outlined and no specific details are laid out.
Ok so amazon and goldman sachs or coca cola or no other corporation is allowed to give money. However, the media, of which Cenk is a part of, in
unencumbered and still able to provide financial support in the form of air time to whoever they wish.
Cenk has admitted that the media giving airtime is so powerful that it is even able to overcome millions upon millions of dollars given by lobbyists.
So now the media has even more control over who gets elected, because they maintain their incredible power to give air time to who they want, and they
dont even have to compete with lobbyists.
It does nothing to solve the real problem, and I think its more than just a coincidence that Cenk, being part of the media, is advocating a reform
that will benefit him and his company even more.
In addition, lets not forget that most media companies are owned by the very same type of corporations that Cenk is saying needs to have their
influence taken out of politics. And what would be to stop Goldman sachs or a similar company from instead of giving money directly to a candidate to
instead give it to The New York Times or CNN or Fox or The Young Turks in exchange for promoting a candidate they favor?
The problem is Cenks suggestion is hypocritical as it still allows him to use his power to influence elections, and would not be effectual at solving
the problem. Yes we need to work to get financial influence out of politics, by that doesnt mean we should not be critical to people being
hypocritical and not practical in their suggestions for accomplishing that.
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.