digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at abcnews.go.com

Over 7000 negative comments and growing on the ABC News deba

abcnews.go.com — What a Digraceful ABC Debate, let your opinions be known!

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • aussiejan, on 04/17/2008, -4/+171This was such a waste. Here was an opportunity to have the candidates talk about the issues, something that has largely been missing from this nomination process. That they spent so much time talking about Rev. Wright, Tuzla and lapel pins shows that the debate was aimed, again, at the lowest common denominator. It seems the MSM does not want to treat American adults like adults.
    • cw1242, on 04/17/2008, -5/+14Over 11,000 now.
      • Nitrodist88, on 04/17/2008, -1/+14http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/9282/75226973ql ...
        • theaceoffire, on 04/17/2008, -1/+7Over 14, 000.
          O.o I guess I should say 15000 cause we know it will keep going...
          • MacEnvy, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1It just passed 18,000 comments, and is now (by a good margin) the most commented story ever on abcnews.go.com. They're actually doing a pretty good job of deleting comments by spammers as well, while leaving intact legitimate comments by those who enjoyed the debate and thought it was appropriate (I appreciate integrity in this regard). I've got to hand it to the ABC News web team - they're certainly much more competent than the ABC News news team that we saw last night.
      • zizzy, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1You mean OVER 9000!!!!!!?
    • NoStoppingUs, on 04/17/2008, -35/+7awwww. poor obama supporters didn't get their way. he made a complete ass out of himself and stumbled around questions left and right. boo hoo hoo.
      • Gemfinder, on 04/17/2008, -3/+2Why, the very audissity.
      • Wartyboskfapped, on 04/17/2008, -2/+9heheh, you sound desperate and scared.
      • didiman, on 04/17/2008, -12/+4This is great, McCain is looking more likely to be the president every day...
        • theaceoffire, on 04/17/2008, -2/+1I think he was being sarcastic...
    • oetyman, on 04/17/2008, -0/+18ABC News obviously has lost my vote as a trusted, insightful news source. Stunning in its shallowness, amazing in its inability to surface any valuable information, this debate was a travesty. ABC news is off my list to as an information/analysis source. If I need tabloid fodder while I'm waiting at checkout, maybe I'll watch you in the future. Don't hold your breath, though.
      • WilliamDavis, on 04/17/2008, -2/+14"ABC News obviously has lost my vote as a trusted, insightful news source."

        What the ***** were you thinking in the first place?
        • skrowl, on 04/17/2008, -20/+2Come over to Fox News with the rest of the us adults.
          Or.. just parrot ThinkProgress / DailyKos talking points and stick your head in the sand when it comes to actual balanced coverage.
          Your call!
          • theaceoffire, on 04/17/2008, -0/+9Hey, If I make an account called "Fair&Ballanced", then everything I say will be fair and balanced! I can be as trustworthy as Fox!
          • Lyph5, on 04/17/2008, -1/+19The 'rest of us adults' don't get our news from only one source.
          • pintomp3, on 04/17/2008, -1/+5out of the frying pan and into the fire?
          • orangefly, on 04/17/2008, -2/+6how do you see fox as balanced....???....billy o is the king of spin and the whole network is right wing propaganda....amazing the mindless zombies that watch that network....
            i suppose you think intelligent design is a science and bush is a good president....
          • decyx, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3I'd prefer to watch the BBC news reports on PBS over Fox News any day of the week.
    • jedmed, on 04/17/2008, -2/+4This was an undisguised political ad for Hilary. Typical slews: sleaze being marketed as news.
    • didiman, on 04/17/2008, -14/+5aw you poor obamabots...go cry to your mommy and she will make you some kool-aid
    • TheSuperunknown, on 04/17/2008, -3/+0Even here on Digg you have the same problem with the LCD. Right now there are three submissions in the top ten on this issue - Good! But by tonight they will have been usurped by lolcats and old email circulations.
      • TheSuperunknown, on 04/17/2008, -0/+0Just want to point out that this has indeed happened and the three assholes who buried me can go ***** themselves.
    • andburn1, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3This debate was absolutely ridiculous. ABC propagated the same backwards politics that it's clear so many Americans are tired of, in blatant disregard of the real issues. Also, they cornered the candidates - both of them - into commitments that weren't necessary or good for either candidate. McCain will undoubtedly attack them on some of the things they were forced into saying, absolute commitments to their policies on Iraq and taxes that are ridiculous to make without knowing what will happen. That's the most disturbing part for me.
    • cmasterchoe, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1The best comment that i read was, "DO A BARREL ROLL!! (tap L or Z twice)" i love america hahahahahaa.
    • brightshadow525, on 04/17/2008, -2/+1Ah... So... When a news source finds something wrong with your god candidate, all you liberals start getting so defensive and get angry at people who uncover truth... Wonderful.
      • goomba323, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2The truth? That Obama has associated himself with people who have "radical" views. Please...if I ran for president half of my friends would become a liability. Were they really trying to have a "gotcha" moment where Obama was going to break down and admit that he hates America and is only running because he is Muslim and has an ulterior motive? Because he doesn't wear a pin, he hates America? I can't believe they actually questioned Obama's patriotism (as if there is a clear definition these days...according to Bush if you are anti-war you aren't patriotic). No wonder the educated are for Obama and Democrats in general while the uneducated/out of touch/wealthy are for Republicans.

        I kinda wish the South won the civil war so where I live (the north east) wouldn't be subjected to the south/Republicans ignorant views.
        • mcquitty, on 04/19/2008, -0/+2goomba,

          If you recall, it was the Republicans who were in the north at the time.

          I wish I could agree with you that the Republicans were ignorant and the Democrats are educated. But, it simply doesn't hold water.

          If you look at the election maps, you will see that Democrats mainly control the heavily populated areas (large cities, for example). Outside of the large population centers, you have a large Republican presence.

          Interestingly enough, it's the large population centers that seem to have problems. There was a recent report on places like LA, NYC and others having high school graduation rates of less than 50%. In the larger cities, you also see large populations of ignorant, bottom feeding, government subsidized people. This is regardless of race.

          So, remember, it isn't republican vs democrat, it is ignorant person versus educated person. Republican doesn't equal ignorant, just as Democrat doesn't mean welfare mom. For the educated, it is about have different solutions and perspectives to problems.


  • kdawg1012, on 04/17/2008, -10/+176ABC owes the public an apology!
    • aaronadms, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1i just checked their site- nothing yet
    • JonDooger, on 04/17/2008, -3/+4Yes, this was a lame debate. Yes, it wasted the potential for a real discussion about the issues that matter. Yes, they should be held accountable.
      But seriously, why is it that this can get front-paged and dugg so much faster than say, an article or blog that actually did bring up some serious issues? Similar complaints could be brought up against the digg population as are being brought up against ABC here. We are sitting on a powerful tool, capable of bringing responsible, relevant, rational discussion comparing the candidates. Instead we just laugh or scoff at what a mockery ABC did of the same exact thing. I see tons of articles about Obama and Hillary on the front page here, but they're typically just as irrelevant as these things are.
      Perhaps instead of scorning and mocking the mainstream media for dropping the ball, we should pick it up ourselves and run with it. Otherwise, we are victims to the same sensationalism that is bringing down the mainstream media.
      • rrbest, on 04/17/2008, -2/+1JonDooger: 1
        Digg: 0
      • k1down, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Yes, tis true, the internet is still in its infancy, and damn I hate that cliche.
    • brion182, on 04/17/2008, -1/+4an apology for what?
      • k1down, on 04/17/2008, -2/+2Allowing a moderator to partake who has a definite conflict of interest. See post below please
    • k1down, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1George Stephanopoulis was a senior campaign advisor for Bill Clinton and served as a commmunications director for Clinton for a time while he was in office. ABC should not have chosen him to co-moderate the debate as there was a conflict of interest or at least an appearance of impropriety. Where are your journalistic standards, ABC?
      Posted by:
      question conventional wisdom 5:03 PM

      Well said my friend well said.
    • geoffcybor, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Where are we supposed to get our news these days? I'm serious, that's not a rhetorical question.
    • brion182, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2So I guess he cant interview a Republican? Chris Matthews cant interview a Republican because he served as a senior adviser for Tip O'Neil? Russert cant interview Repulicans because he worked for Democrat Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Democrat Mario Cuomo? Everyone knows Stephanopoulis worked for Clinton this is no secret no one had a problem with it until he asked a Democrat tough questions. Republicans have been complaining about mainstream media bias for years.
  • brad3378, on 04/17/2008, -15/+18Here's an article about REAL issues.
    http://digg.com/political_opinion/Obama_s_Blueprin ...
    • ulsterwrod, on 04/17/2008, -3/+1that is not an article. It's a link to a politican's plan, with the text 'pure substance' which is extremely biased.
      • mrhuggy, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1It is the outline of Obama's view on the issues. Of course its biased - its HIS views. Its people like you that would prefer we talk about whether or not the guy is a smoker.
    • nphase, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2shameless plug
      • brad3378, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1Not at all - I don't even like Barrack Obama, but I'd rather be talking about his platform than the fluff we usually discuss here on Digg.
  • azpat, on 04/17/2008, -6/+262whether you support Clinton, Obama, McCain, Nader, Paul, or the boogie man, that debate was insulting to your intelligence. That debate right there is everything that is wrong with America.
    • Bagos1, on 04/17/2008, -1/+34Absolutely agree....it transcends all candidates and parties.
    • dagnome1984, on 04/17/2008, -13/+2Anyone have a link to a non biased review of it? I
      • Bagos1, on 04/17/2008, -6/+5You might try ABCnews.com
      • CressCrowbits, on 04/17/2008, -1/+10Biased in terms of what? Against the truth? For trivial tabloidism?
      • didiman, on 04/17/2008, -6/+11non-biased and digg do not go well together
        • Bagos1, on 04/17/2008, -1/+6Of course not....it's an opinion machine. That's what's it's here for.....but it can contain some good opinions, humor as well as links that may be of interest.
    • skrowl, on 04/17/2008, -0/+14It's everything that's wrong with the old media, not everything that's wrong with America. You CAN get intelligent news coverage in America, just not from ABC / CBS / NBC.
    • sleepysteve, on 04/17/2008, -1/+7Agreed sir. I for one support the boogie man, and even I was outraged by this travesty of a debate.
      BOOGIE MAN '08
    • Soulbow2, on 04/17/2008, -0/+7But "The Onion" said ***** was the most important issue in this political race.
      • diothar, on 04/17/2008, -0/+6"The Onion" has more usable content than was displayed last night on ABC.
    • Infidelcastr0, on 04/17/2008, -1/+3Yup.
    • DrBodyGlove, on 04/17/2008, -1/+3I was up emailing all night to every ABC network. Apperantly it worked! This is truley what is wrong with America. Its leaders who are taking the country the wrong way!
    • joeanon, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2Yea, but you KNOW the GOP will be happy it happened to dems and revel in it.

      So it's a nice statement, but one mostly in vain since we KNOW republicans have no morals about using media propaganda.

      Where is the OUTRAGE for Swift Boat Veterans ? That was a disgusting misuse of media and total slander. More dems need to make a stand.

      Right then and there Hilary or Obama could have CALLED ABC out.

      They could have made ABC the LAUGHING stock of TV with one smart comment.
      The audience would EAT IT UP. They love politicians sticking it to the media.

      Obama should have been like... I'm sorry is this the children's Presidential debate, I thought we were going to be asked serious issues facing out nation, not being lured into validating the piles of meaningless slander.

      The woman on the video clip about the American Flag pin...
      ***** YOU and your brain dead public servant kiss ass fools. WE THE PEOPLE.... OWN YOU. Do you see the public wearing flag pins everyone... no... and WE THE PEOPLE run this nation not some overpaid, under worked state employee who makes a living kissing ass and polishing their flag pin all day.

      I would happily ***** on a flag pin to get my nation out of the energy crisis. AND I'm sure millions of fools would swear I did the wrong thing, while the SUCKED DOWN cheap gas in their pickup trucks and SUV's.

      When education drops to a certain level.... democracy just doesn't work.
  • Bagos1, on 04/17/2008, -3/+59Stop watching these "news" channels. As consumers you have a say in what you watch. They make money through advertising aimed at you. If the advertisers knew you were not watching that channel, they would not pay for the time. Really, I've seen everybody whining about MSM for many months over these senseless debates, both Repubs and Dems. It's in your hands....stop supporting them....change the channel.
    • secrity, on 04/17/2008, -2/+14At one time, ABC had a news division. Things started going to ***** ***** when DISNEY bought them. The final nails were driven into the ABC news coffin with the passing of Peter Jennings.
      • Bagos1, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4All of the cable "news" networks are pure Hollywood. Look at the presenters, teeth you could use as lighthouses, voice inflections to enhance the delivery...facial expressions right from acting school. It's entertainment....not news.
        Oh yeah....and really great content/sar
    • narcofiche, on 04/17/2008, -1/+4Are they also making a ton of advertising money from thousands of people leaving negative comments on their website?
    • olbap, on 04/17/2008, -1/+4I've decided to do this. I routinely leave my T.V. on CNN even if I am not watching t.v. Either way, they still get a ratings hit and I simply won't hand that to them anymore. CNN is no longer news, just a series of news documentaries. With so much going on in the world, it is laughable that they only focus on one or two stories per day and then fill the rest of the hours with repeat shows of their star news casters and news documentaries. The other day I turned on CNN in the morning hoping to see what was going on in the word....and at 8AM they were broadcasting a news documentary. Pathetic if you ask me.
      • crimson117, on 04/17/2008, -0/+7How does leaving your TV on CNN do anything to their ratings? Unless you're a Neilsen participant, or perhaps allow Tivo to monitor your TV habits, your personal viewing habits are not measurable and have no effect on ratings.
        • goomba323, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2shhh...most people think "ratings" are relevant these days.
    • apraxia, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2Unfortunately, that will never happen. Even if MSM lost half it's viewership, it would still be around. They would just have cheaper advertisements.
    • moush, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2Everywhere with news is going to be biased, the internet is not immune from that.
    • jake07, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3Change the channel? I turned it off. Horrible. I'll never watch Stepanopoulous or Gibson ever again.
  • withincontext, on 04/17/2008, -29/+60I just donated to Obama's campaign.

    Yes, we can.
    • Taciturn, on 04/17/2008, -4/+4...< /Marvin the Paranoid Android voice. >
      • mrloco, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1you mean Fitter, Happier?
        (I KNOW this isnt a radiohead reference)
    • stealthc, on 04/17/2008, -22/+6We can? We can what?

      Obama couldn't be more of a mascot if he came dressed in a fuzzy costume and did cartwheels in his campaign speeches.
      • adventchild08, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2I disagree with you, but I still chortled based on the imagery.
    • didiman, on 04/17/2008, -10/+2silly robot
    • jbenson2, on 04/17/2008, -10/+4Yes you can, until the O-man hits the general election. Then he is toast.
      • Mejari, on 04/17/2008, -1/+4Don't make him show you his O-face!
      • Danktolker, on 04/17/2008, -2/+10You wish jbenson. Grandpa McCain doesn't stand a chance against Obama.
        • jbenson2, on 04/17/2008, -6/+2Obama doesn't stand a chance - especially after he insulted most of the Midwest and can't win the big states like Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania in his own primary.
        • vertexoflife, on 04/17/2008, -2/+2jbenson--are you a comedian by trade?
    • robbob, on 04/17/2008, -1/+8I'm broke so I dugg you up, hopefully that counts for something
      • AntBing, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1Not as much as most diggers think it counts.
  • benholmes, on 04/17/2008, -2/+112Does ANYONE have any faith left in the "news" coverage of the Mainstream Media?? As someone mentioned in the comments section of the ABC story, Jon Stewart provides more news in 5 minutes of The Daily Show (on COMEDY Central, fyi) than ABC did in 1 hour.

    Jon's appearance on Crossfire back in '04 told it like it is:
    http://www.joketribe.com/externalVids/Daily.Show.O ...
    • skrowl, on 04/17/2008, -8/+1Fox News, Blogs, Foreign News Sources. GO!
    • czeman, on 04/17/2008, -2/+2It's funny how much faith people have in the mainstream media when they bash people they don't like (Bush, McCain). It's even funnier how they lose faith in the same sources when they bash people they like (Clinton, Obama).
      • mikhial66, on 04/17/2008, -0/+7It's funny that you would put people disapproving of Bush's war and people disapproving of Obama's lapel pin in the same category.
        • laserdog, on 04/17/2008, -1/+3If the MSM had been doing it's job, and had shown even a quarter of the due diligence they had back in the 70s Bush would be in jail.

          MSM doesn't employ "reporters" anymore, just pretty faces to recite the press releases (from either side) that are handed to them.

          It used to be that people didn't argue about facts, because MSM had integrity. Now we can't even agree on those anymore.
      • czeman, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Ummm....I was talking about the lapel pin. I couldn't care less about the lapel pin. The anchors laid the cards out on the table for the candidates, and the same diggers that praise the media for doing it to the candidates they don't like think it's the greatest thing. The same diggers call foul when it's done to the candidates they like. Don't get me wrong; I hate the mainstream media. I was just making a simple observation. What's good for the goose isn't good for the gander on digg.
    • skarbreeze, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2Thanks for the link to that Crossfire clip - I hadn't seen that before. Very good to see.
    • MadEnvoy, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2Most of America isn't "enlightened" about the news media, be afraid, be very afraid...
    • IHaveIssues, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Great clip. What happened after the second commercial? Jon seemed to hold back, as it he had been threatened with something.
  • ncurses, on 04/17/2008, -91/+6diggers are complete *****
  • kemp34, on 04/17/2008, -1/+31The corporate-owned and controlled media has been trampling roughshod on the intelligence of American voters for quite some time now and the idiocy is only getting worse. Now is not the time for BS, now is the time for discussing REAL ISSUES. Boycott the ridiculous corporate media crap. BTW, how about a serious debate with Obama, Clinton, Paul and McCain (hell, maybe Gravel, Barr and Nader as well), enough of this corporate-media race horse selection. It's a joke and people need to wise up fast.
    • gttim, on 04/17/2008, -3/+1Corporate-owned and controlled is right. None of the mainstream media is owned by liberal, pinko, commie, tree hugging liberals. It is all owned by large conservative corporations. They push their world view. They express what they feel will make the country better for their continued profits, not what is good for the citizen. They do not want individual rights, they want corporate rights.
      • kemp34, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3Not conservative, corporatist-oligarchic.
    • soulkitchen, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1Currently (8:36 EST), they're trying to make up for it. On the ABCnews homepage we've got:
      1. Paris Hilton
      2. Polar Bears
      3. Panty pics
      4. Patriots QB
      5. And the granddaddy of all ***** you's -- "Gettin' inky wit it"

      Source::: http://abcnews.go.com/
  • MindyB, on 04/17/2008, -3/+27ABC news violated the trust the American public placed on them when they agreed/chose to be the host to the Philadelphia, PA Democratic Presidential Debate. It was an insult to everyone's intelligence, it was a joke! SNL couldn't have done a better parody of a debate if they tried.
    Blinking neon signs couldn't have done a better job showing the obvious and blatant disrespect and bias George and Mike exhibited during this joke of a debate. They showed a complete lack of integrity and ethics! Shame on them and shame on ABC News. ABC News owes the American public and the candidates an official apology for hosting the worst and most offensive debate yet.
    • jbetancourt, on 04/17/2008, -0/+4Out of all the questions possible, they choose to ask about the flag pin??? Yea, he should start wearing one, just like everyone else who panders or pimps marketability. By the way, according to the Flag Code, the flag should not be used as an adornment except for use on military uniforms:
      Quote:
      "(j) No part of the flag should ever be used as a costume or athletic uniform. However, a flag patch may be affixed to the uniform of military personnel, firemen, policemen, and members of patriotic organizations. The flag represents a living country and is itself considered a living thing. Therefore, the lapel flag pin being a replica, should be worn on the left lapel near the heart."
      • sodade, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1That code is as dumb as the question was. Makes me want to go burn a flag.
    • laserdog, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Also, it was boring.
  • zephyear, on 04/17/2008, -6/+2110000 now

    i hope those 2 jokes get fired
    • Butters06, on 04/17/2008, -11/+2Yep the only reason people are upset with the debate is because ABC refused to carter to the Obama Hype.
      • FelixdaaHack, on 04/17/2008, -3/+1The most honest comment made on this forum
      • goomba323, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1That's not an honest comment. It was silly tabloid questions that have been bludgeoned to death by the media (unless the Rev. Wright issue is new to you...or the flag issue...or the Bosnia sniper fire...or the Rezko fiasco). If you thought the debate was compelling and interesting you must have been living under a rock and/or think politics is like E! News. Clinton/Obama supporters should both be insulted with how poorly handled the debate was. This isn't a case of Obama supporters being upset, it's a case of journalist in general feeling ashamed that people like this are mainstream and give them a bad name.

        So no...it's not a case of Obama bitterness, but it seems to be a case that you are a retarded or didn't watch the debate.
    • momsshizzle, on 04/17/2008, -7/+1Yea, the two jokes were Clinton and Obama.
    • augustmiles, on 04/17/2008, -1/+215,000 and growing...
    • ochito, on 04/17/2008, -1/+316,000 and either we broke it or they got fed up and closed it. They won't show anymore for me
  • NyteStarNyne, on 04/17/2008, -0/+60Wow, those people sound... bitter.
    • Trauch, on 04/17/2008, -1/+0Ironic on how happy they are when the same tactics are used incessantly on conservative candidates....
  • tvfilm, on 04/17/2008, -70/+11HI , I LOVE OBAMA, IM AN IDIOT, when Hillary was raped by CNN debate, I loved that. but now that my mascot was not offered a pillow, Im offended.

    OBAMA OFFERED NOTHING IN HIS WORDS, HE IS A ***** MASCOT .

    WAKE THE ***** UP.

    --- YOU PEOPLE ARE ***** IDIOTS. I really hope you are just too young to know how to read people.
    Obama is as fake as they come from DAY ONE.

    He had NO ANSWER ON ANYTHING OR PLAN OR WAYS TO PAY FOR IT

    NOTHING AT ALL

    NOT ONE ***** THING.

    You think this was hard on Obama? wait until the fall when the MSM shows their McCain Love.

    • Joneth, on 04/17/2008, -7/+19Who ***** cares how Obama did? That debate was the most idiotic thing I've seen this entire election. If Obama sucks as much as you say, the media could at least have the goddamn sense to ask him question about relevant topics.
    • theuniversal, on 04/17/2008, -5/+8Good old tvfilm. Your comments angered me at first. Then they bored me. And now, they provide amusement and entertainment. You have truly helped me grow as a person. Thank you, sincerely. But of course this doesn't mean that I will stop digging down your comments and burying your horrible submissions as spam.
    • Nitrodist88, on 04/17/2008, -2/+6The only thing that could have made that comment better was to call everyone "sheeple", or some other asinine hype word.
    • Nitrodist88, on 04/17/2008, -6/+7Also, "He had NO ANSWER ON ANYTHING OR PLAN OR WAYS TO PAY FOR IT"

      ^what the ***** are you even talking about? Pay for what? You make no sense.
      • WilliamDavis, on 04/17/2008, -3/+1Yep. Slogans are free, easy, and don't cost a thing.
    • MadCactus, on 04/17/2008, -2/+8Obama is fake?

      Are we talking android fake, or Easter Bunny fake? Oh. I get it, he's really a hologram.

      Clever.
      • Issius, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1He's actually Ron Paul in disguise!
        I would just ignore the trolls and move on. I don't think real people can be that stupid.
    • momsshizzle, on 04/17/2008, -4/+2Dugg up.
    • FaceInTheCrowd, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1I came into this election annoyed and uninterested. Obama is the only person that has earned my attention because he actually attempts to answer real questions that face our country. I don't know what you're seeing...maybe he doesn't share your plan?
    • FelixdaaHack, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2tvfilm all of these promoted Obama stories on Digg are not from regular users, rather from new account holders whose sole purpose is to flood Digg with these pro-Obama stories much to the ire of regular users like you and myself.
    • buhbyebot, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2Ahem, the poll after the debate shows him winning by a margin so big it gives Hillary's ass a run for her money.
  • Pherdnut, on 04/17/2008, -5/+17This is awesome. I'm so looking forward to watching them implode over this.
  • netgreek, on 04/17/2008, -2/+2Reminds me of http://powerofthought.wordpress.com/2007/04/10/the ...
  • tonich03, on 04/17/2008, -6/+11I'm not american, what happened at the debate?
    • johnhummel, on 04/17/2008, -1/+4063 minutes were spent asking "Gotcha" questions, like "Why don't you wear a flag pin all the time", or "This guy who 40 years ago bombed something and was later pardoned is on a charity board you are on - why haven't you resigned?"

      The candidates were interrupted, they were insulted with "Well, we didn't really get an answer" (after the candidate explained themselves), and when it finally got down to policy, those questions had to be rushed through because they had spent so much time on the pointless crap. One of the moderators was a former Clinton staffer, so right there the objectivity was thrown out - and really, they couldn't find another stand in, whether he was partisan or not? The very hint of impropriety should have been a clue that it might look bad.
    • WilliamDavis, on 04/17/2008, -22/+6Judging solely from the reaction here, It sounds like Obama didn't do very well.
      • jedmed, on 04/17/2008, -2/+9Actually, William, it was ABC that did not do well. The inevitable backlash bodes well for Obama. In fact, were I a political strategist for the Obama campaign, I would have had to consider paying for the spot, if necessary.
      • mw113, on 04/17/2008, -2/+12He did well for what he was given. Most of the questions, etc were just aimed to incite him. Pathetic.
    • sinrtb, on 04/17/2008, -0/+8We learned that A) 250K salary is considered middle class and that B) the moderators of the debate make over 150k and less than 250k.
      • Issius, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1That makes them lower middle class. Scary to think what I'm considered...
  • theandy1, on 04/17/2008, -3/+22It's ok, everyone will forgive abc once we get the first post strike Lost episode next Thursday. However, they better not screw up the NBA playoffs... that would be the final straw.
    • wild, on 04/17/2008, -0/+5News and entertainment are separate things.

      Well, they are supposed to be anyway.
      • theandy1, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1I know what you're trying to say, but the same could easily be said about news and politics.
        • Mejari, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2not really, no.
        • GliTCH82, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Terrible analogy, because entertainment and politics shouldn't hold the same weight, importance wise, in the public's eyes. Entertainment is something that should be consumed when all is sound politically.
  • johnhummel, on 04/17/2008, -3/+27Don't forget to leave direct feedback too here:

    http://abcnews.go.com/Site/page?id=3271346&cat=ABC ...

    Might be nice if we could return to the pre-1992 days, when the League of Women's Voters ran the debates. Ever since they let a third party candidate share the stage, both Dems and Repubs have wanted media outlets to host the debates. And after last night's horrible performance, it's clear the media establishment is not up to the job.
  • ncurses, on 04/17/2008, -11/+2george stephanopoulos is good on meet the press, I hope he doesn't get fired over this
    • FaceInTheCrowd, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Wait a minute...you're the same guy calling Diggers *****! I thought you would have been convinced Georgy should get a promotion. Bang up job George! Well done! spew
      • ncurses, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1are you denying that diggers are *****?
    • buhbyebot, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1You were adopted.
  • stealthc, on 04/17/2008, -15/+38Cry me a ***** RIVER. Snuffalupagus & Co. gave the people exactly what they wanted. What has the Democratic race been this whole time except a giant steaming pile of irrelevant *****?

    When people commented on ABC about the awful treatment of Ron Paul in their debate, ABC started DELETING the comments.
  • vidorian, on 04/17/2008, -2/+16In case you missed it here is the debate. Just open with vlc.

    http://content2.abcnews.com.edgesuite.net/080416_a ... _long.flv
    http://content2.abcnews.com.edgesuite.net/080416_a ...
    http://content2.abcnews.com.edgesuite.net/080416_a ...
    http://content2.abcnews.com.edgesuite.net/080416_a ...
    http://content2.abcnews.com.edgesuite.net/080416_a ...
    http://content2.abcnews.com.edgesuite.net/080416_a ...
    http://content2.abcnews.com.edgesuite.net/080416_a ...
    http://content2.abcnews.com.edgesuite.net/080416_a ...
    http://content2.abcnews.com.edgesuite.net/080416_a ...
    http://content2.abcnews.com.edgesuite.net/080416_a ...
    http://content2.abcnews.com.edgesuite.net/080416_a ...
    http://content2.abcnews.com.edgesuite.net/080416_a ...
    http://content2.abcnews.com.edgesuite.net/080416_a ...
    • vidorian, on 04/17/2008, -1/+5Bah first link got messed up it is
      http://content2.abcnews.com.edgesuite.net/080416_a ...

      • DrBodyGlove, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2why??? It was already a waste of time once!! You want to give them more ratings?
        • vidorian, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1Well since i like some others did not have a chance to watch it, I wanted to watch it before i commented on it.
          Remember those of us on the West coast had a tape delay and were unable to watch it live. And if you had gone thru the links i posted it is the debate with out advertisements.
    • 80hd, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Holy fast server.... DUmeter says it averaged 2.6MB/sec jeeze
  • apjoseph, on 04/17/2008, -3/+13Hi, I am from the UK - can someone please explain as to what exactly ABC did to make this interview so bad ? Were they biased or simply lying ? Is there a link to the interview ? Why are they getting 7000+ negative remarks on their site ?

    Many thanks
    • WishItWerePaul, on 04/17/2008, -3/+8the american people are so fed up with ***** propaganda which people thought what this debate really was.
    • buddamus, on 04/17/2008, -3/+3I was just about to ask the same question
    • jedmed, on 04/17/2008, -2/+34Americans expect that a debate is a venue which allows the interviewers to adopt a neutral stance to ask the questions about pressing, meaningful policy issues: the Iraq war, the economy, the collapse of the financial sector, healthcare, etc.

      Instead Gibson & Stephanopolus chose to adopt a hostile attitude (Gibson) towards Obama. They concentrated their questions on relentlessly harassing and attacking the candidates (most notably Obama) about trivial news stories that had completely lost what little relevance they had to the American public.

      It was a perfect opportunity to find and elaborate the important differences in the candidates positions and explore their long-term potential consequences. Instead this debate was nothing more than a mirror of the yellow journalistic pathetic trash that these guys spend their working hours immersed in.

      That they had the temerity to foist this reheated garbage to the American public in the name of substance is an embarrassment to everyone.
    • thanakar, on 04/17/2008, -22/+7The debate made Obama look bad so all those enamoured with him are up in arms.
      • adventchild08, on 04/17/2008, -2/+1This is probably the motivating factor, but it was still an asinine display of yellow journalism.
      • ransomduke, on 04/17/2008, -2/+3You're off the mark, there.

        From the Drudge Report front page...

        {{{{DRUDGE POLL}}}}WHO WON THE DEM DEBATE IN PA?...

        HILLARY CLINTON
        43% 67,067

        BARACK OBAMA
        57% 89,415

        Total Votes: 156,482
    • kretik, on 04/17/2008, -11/+2They tried to run the debate like the BBC would, basically.
    • richmomz, on 04/17/2008, -1/+13It was full of tabloid-worthy topics (Hillary lying about snipers and Obama not wearing his lapel pin(!)) and severely lacking in substantive discussion about important issues (such as the economy, war, etc.) In other words, it was a gigantic waste of everyone's time.
    • Trauch, on 04/17/2008, -2/+2They got 7000 bad comments from liberal Stalinists who are accustomed to MSM debate moderators giving their liberal politicians a free ride for decades on end. They have no problem with this debate style when it trashes a conservative candidate. Sour grapes from the left yet again.
  • Karmavs, on 04/17/2008, -1/+16I'm not from the US, and I don't actively try to learn about your candidates. I should be_below_the lowest common denominator. I wondered what was so bad about the debate, so I check it out on youtube. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eb6P4JJbe9k
    It was insult to even my knowledge. Both of them seemed to be getting a free ride. (Though, from the debate, I'd support barrack obama.)
  • wright3279, on 04/17/2008, -26/+8ABC wasn't pro-Obama enough. That's the basis for the criticism.
    • skrowl, on 04/17/2008, -12/+3Didn't you know? You can't ever be pro-Obama enough for Digg.
    • FaceInTheCrowd, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2Spot on Wright!!!! Who needs to know about useless dribble like the state of the economy, the rising body count in Iraq, and global warming? It wasn't because the drones completely avoided anything relevant that we are pissed, its because they didn't tell Obama that he's super!
  • buddamus, on 04/17/2008, -3/+19Why does America have such little choice. Why do you only have 2 parties to vote for.
    • fani, on 04/17/2008, -7/+3You can run as independent too. But having a bi-party system has its benefits as it leaves a clear majority winner.
      Contrast this to another democracy - say India where there are like 10 major parties. A ballot is the size of a newspaper and contains over 20 choices sometimes. Needless to say, no single party scores majority so a constant coalition is formed. The finicky group that owns very little votes but crucial swing votes consistently harasses others in coalition to give it what it wants. Its a mess. Its like too many people driving a bus.
      Bi-party system works much better and avoids headache. Its simple now - you're either for or against. Easy.
      • thanakar, on 04/17/2008, -2/+5Our Bi-party system hasn't worked in decades. Every time something important comes up to vote in the Senate or House it is constant gridlock. The only stuff that gets passed are issues that are nothing but photo ops or look good on the ballot.
      • bigsteve, on 04/17/2008, -2/+5Did you just say the two party system leaves a clear majority winner? Like how Georgie got 50.5% of the popular vote in 04?

        Mathematically, of course it's clear, but..
      • citekare, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1The framers of our nation didn't want parties to exist in politics. I believe that George Washington implored people in his farewell speech as president to not embrace a party system as they don't work.
      • soulkitchen, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2You know what would work even better than a two party system?? A ONE party system. We only need one bus driver right buddy? I mean what if driver one wants to go right and driver two wants to go left, we can only go straight then, OH MY! All aboard to despotville.
        I would rather my politics be representative than "easy". Perhaps you'd like to have it really easy in a banana republic somewhere.
    • marillion, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3In Westminster style parliaments, if the leading party fails for get a majority, they form a coalition with a "compatible" party or two or three until they have 50%+1 seats. A voter can support the minor parties and still feel his vote is meaningful.
      The US legislative branch isn't really that different, but the established parties want you to think so. Consider Joe Lieberman, an incumbent senator from New Jersey. He lost the Democratic primary (the process where the parties select candidates for the general election) and ran as an independent. He then won the general election and announced he would caucus with the Democrats to give them 50%+1.
      There are many parties other than the two main ones. There is a Green party, a Socialist party, and others I can't begin to remember. That said, the two main parties in the US have a near lock on the mindset that voting for any minor party is "throwing your vote away." This more than anything keeps them in power.
    • richmomz, on 04/17/2008, -0/+6It's easier to maintain the illusion of democracy when you only have to control two parties.
    • laserdog, on 04/17/2008, -0/+3So that it remains affordable to purchase the next leader.
    • chrgrose, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2We have trouble with fractions, so we like to keep things 1 to 1 here.
    • rdoger6424, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2because our voting system breeds 2-party politics.
  • jimb0, on 04/17/2008, -2/+7I'm glad to see people are as outraged as I was about the questions on the debates.
    • coffeebaby, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1i was rolling my eyes at every question. i''m glad i wasn't the only one.
  • mrmack00, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1the party politics in this country disgust me. not only do you have to choose between democrats or republicans, but now you have divisions within the party due to candidates vying for a nomination. it has been stated before but bears repeating again, any gains made by the democrats are offset by dissension among the party. i'd say i'm more of an independent because i share views with the republicans and the democrats, but what chance does an independent have against the the well "oiled" and well financed democrats/republicans?
  • govsucks, on 04/17/2008, -18/+1Awwww, common, The clintons deserve a easy road and you guys should all Move On.
  • nycmac247, on 04/17/2008, -4/+10This is a plan to help McCain and Romney to have a fighting chance ... a fighting chance to BOMB IRAN
  • wassim2k, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2ABC fails because of "Philly Fight Night", "veepstakes", and "brotherly love"
  • UNC81, on 04/17/2008, -3/+6Obama looked exhausted...
    • wild, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1And yet still didn't "misspeak."
    • Raoulduke212, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2well, let's see how alert you are when YOUR phone rings at 3 am
      • Mejari, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2"uh, hello? who is this? What? How the hell can there be a housing crisis at 3 in the ***** morning? Bill, did you hear about this? Bill? Bill? Now where did he get off to?"
  • sassip, on 04/17/2008, -2/+4The HIGH ROAD... Tim Robins at National Association of Broadcasters. Why does the "Main Steam" media continue to Pander to prurient and "Jerry Springer" interests of Tabloid Journalism. We're better than that!
    http://adage.com/brightcove/single.php?title=15065 ...
  • BrendanSheehan, on 04/17/2008, -3/+4Soon to be 12,000 truthful comments on this atrocity.
  • thedrizzle21, on 04/17/2008, -11/+1People still care about this election?
  • sayyid215, on 04/17/2008, -3/+4ABC needs a flag pin in the you know what for that poor excuse for a debate!
  • Midtowner, on 04/17/2008, -10/+4I found many of the questions to be important... okay, the flag one, not so much, but who Obama associates with? Absolutely. Character should matter in this election Hillary has shown an utter lack of it while Obama has been evasive at best. None of these policies will make it through Congress. The last President who could make his policies reality was Reagan and before him, FDR.
    • gobbleplex, on 04/17/2008, -0/+6Actually yes, who people associate with is important, and I say that the fact that Obama 'associates with' people who he doesn't agree with on all issues is exactly in keeping with everything he's been saying for months. How can he be expected to shut out of his life people who do good things just because they sometimes say things he doesn't agree with? How can he be expected to negotiate with Cuba or Iran if he's also expected to sever all ties with Wright?

      Instead of seeing the all-bad picture of Wright that the media spoonfeeds you, think about why a man like Wright, who passed up a deferrment to fight in Vietnam on behalf of his country, at a time when his counrty still actively discriminated against him, might be so disillusioned and inflamatory as he can be. When he says "God damn america as long as america acts like she is God," after talking about how the hammer of God falls on empires throughout history, does that mean "I hate my country" or does it mean "My country is going to hell in a handbasket through its own hubris?"
  • kacole2, on 04/17/2008, -15/+4i really wish all you Obama supporters would quit flooding digg with this political garbage. It's like a ***** band wagon. I'm still undecided between the two. I just knew after watching the debate last night that some people would start bashing ABC bc Hillary straight up beat Obama. Give me a ***** break diggers. One thing goes wrong with Obama and you blame it on ABC. JFC!
    • dinot, on 04/17/2008, -3/+6I find it funny that the people who complain and say Obama has "no substance", and that "he's all talk" and doesn't mention specific policies, are the very same people who think it was fine to spend three quarters of the debate asking if his pastor is more patriotic or less, how he thinks people are "bitter", and the flag pin. Equally stupid was the Bosnia question to Hillary.

      The time when we actually NEED policy talk to compare the candidates, and ABC turns into the National Enquirer.

      .. and what the ***** kind of question is "someone more patriotic than you"??? It's not a ***** rating. You're either patriotic or not.
      • momsshizzle, on 04/17/2008, -4/+2Yea, we saw his policies alright. Every time he would say, "Well, I'll just have to look into it."
  • Raidendesu, on 04/17/2008, -4/+9Worst. Debate. Ever.

    Shame on you ABC.
    • brion182, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1Highest debate ratings of the season. ABC had the courage to ask Obama tough questions and not be bullied by leftist, and people tuned in!
      • Trauch, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Worst debate ever since it was basically two Stalinists vying for the U.S. Presidency....
  • WebWizard, on 04/17/2008, -4/+11Pathetic. I've decided to boycott ABC. They've sunk to the level of Fox. And to think that I used to prefer ABC news, back in the Peter Jennings days.
    • MysticSavage, on 04/17/2008, -0/+0Peter Jennings is probably spinning in his grave after last night.
  • jontalisman, on 04/17/2008, -15/+5I think we all saw a preview of Obama's Presidency last night. Every scandal that comes up, he'll simply claim to have no idea that kind of stuff was going on and Obama maniacs will swallow the ***** hook, line, and sinker.
  • DroogInPhoenix, on 04/17/2008, -13/+37I saw this crap with Ron Paul... Now that it's your candidate do you start to bitch.
    • sugarazor, on 04/17/2008, -5/+12Yeah but the difference is Obama could actually win.
      • doronster195, on 04/17/2008, -2/+2So could Ron if his policies were as crappy as Obama's. (Especially regarding the economy/neo-socialism).
      • donnie_dark0, on 04/17/2008, -1/+3Ron Paul had a great chance to win as well, but the media spoon-fed the country with "the question of his electability", "long shot maverick", "the guy doesn't have a chance", "you're not going to win"...etc etc... The media didn't touch Obama's electability card because that would've been a blatant racial slur.
    • azpat, on 04/17/2008, -1/+8hey, I bitched when it was Ron Paul.
    • aeoo, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1I bitched when it was Ron Paul and I bitched when it was Kucinich and I bitched when it was Gravel. I bitch on behalf of any semi-sane candidate. By the way, Ron Paul sucks ass. The only reason I gave him any support at all is because he's the best Republican and the only Republican I can tolerate. Ron Paul is better than McCain, but that's about it.
  • DEIx15x8, on 04/17/2008, -14/+4So Hilary won a debate and you people can't handle it. Anyone surprised, I'm not. How's the kool-aid?
    • dinot, on 04/17/2008, -0/+11The only person that won that debate was John McCain.
    • bjs3171, on 04/17/2008, -1/+4not bad. too much sugar, though. and my wall has a big hole in it.
    • gobbleplex, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1There was a debate? Where were the questions about the military being stretched so thin that a draft will be inevitable in a few years? Where were the questions about how to balance a foreclosure crisis with the fact that house pirces are unreasonably high and need a correction? Where were the questions about FISA? Where was the substance?

      Where was the *debate?*
      • DEIx15x8, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1Where were the Digg articles that showed people cared about those subjects? They didn't exist so they weren't talked about!
  • oboredone, on 04/17/2008, -2/+3How is ABC acting any different than any of the other "news" organizations? Its ALL crap.
  • sleepless, on 04/17/2008, -6/+5One thing I learned from the debate was that Barack Obama is a horrible candidate as our Fashion-in-Chief as we move the country forward. But I am still a firm believer that he will make a great Commander-in-Chief as he sets a clear and concise mission for our military.
  • Butters06, on 04/17/2008, -15/+4Yep the only reason people are upset with the debate is because ABC refused to cater to the Obama hype. I remember Digg before the presidential elections. I actually read interesting new stories, when I came onto Digg. Now Digg is all about the Obama Bandwagon and repeat blog stories from three years ago. I wish Digg would split into two different sites, one just for the political bull/crappy old news stories and another for actual informative stories. BTW, I am still undecided about the democratic presidential nominee.
    • dinot, on 04/17/2008, -4/+8Are you ***** kidding me? They spent 3/4 of that debate asking celebrity gossip questions to BOTH candidates. Do you see any posts here being anti-Hillary or anti-McCain? People are complaining about how the debate was moderated, and this travesty should be called out by ALL parties.
      • funmerlin, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2The great thing about being a troll is that you don't even have to know anything about the topic you're trolling around in.
    • Butters06, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1Sorry, I'm not a troll. Had I not spoken ill of Obama, no one would have even look twice at my comment. I am proud not jumping on the Obama bandwagon.
  • nonrate, on 04/17/2008, -18/+4To everyone disgracing ABC for their performance on the debate, you sound foolish. If you really cared about the issues of this country, you would have supported Ron Paul all along. But you didn't. I didn't watch the debate last night, but in ABC's defense, with the quality of the candidates left, how could they possibly take a serious approach to it? How can you possibly be complaining they didn't focus on "real issues" when Ron Paul has been the one discussing them from the beginning? Obama and Hillary do a great job of talking about the economy. Ron Paul explained it, showed he understood it, and demonstrated he could fix it. The others? They'll keep talking. I guess you should keep pretending you're all concerned and trendy, and keep believeing O'clinton will solve the problems, you obviously don't understand why we have them in the first place.

    There's still time, vote Ron Paul anyway.
    • bjs3171, on 04/17/2008, -2/+2i care about the issues. that's why i didn't vote for someone who is conservative on pretty much every single issue except "reviving the constitution". Ron Paul is a Libertarian. I've never supported a Libertarian in the past, and I don't plan to now. If you want to vote for someone who will ***** this economy up even more, go ahead.
      • nonrate, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2Og my god... you just don't have a clue... the fact you can vote scares me
  • DexterHarvey, on 04/17/2008, -1/+2Watch Full Debate Here
    Clinton, Obama Face Off in Philadelphia
    http://abcnews.go.com/video/playerIndex?id=4669713
  • momsshizzle, on 04/17/2008, -12/+3Oh come on now. You would change the title to something positive if Obama won. Just because Hillary pwnd him last night.....
  • bjs3171, on 04/17/2008, -8/+25so when the ***** did Fox acquire ABC?
    • artvandal, on 04/17/2008, -3/+3News flash: they're all the same. Didn't you get the memo?
      • brion182, on 04/17/2008, -2/+1Yea! I thought ABC was in lock step with CNN and NBC with the hands off Obama policy. I guess THEY did not get the memo.
    • Trauch, on 04/17/2008, -0/+0About 4 years Soros aquired ABC, NBC, CBS, and CNN for the purposes of Bush-Bashing.
  • DexterHarvey, on 04/17/2008, -7/+2Those two moderators need they as beat!
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 110 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.