• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Lentic

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,835
Your claim was that I didn't think minority voices don't deserve to be heard in the debates, and I gave you a big example of that not being true. Don't move goal posts, as though other minority candidates didn't have good opportunities. Castro skyrocketed from the first debate and Booker got some hits in, as well.
People dismissing him with "no one cares" is pretty racist with the context that he was the only Asian man on stage. Just because he has low support, that's no justification to mute his mic. If only popular candidates are allowed to speak, how is he supposed to take the opportunity to build support to begin with?

To be clear, I don't even support Yang.
 

Volimar

volunteer forum janitor
Member
Oct 25, 2017
38,290
People dismissing him with "no one cares" is pretty racist with the context that he was the only Asian man on stage. Just because he has low support, that's no justification to mute his mic. If only popular candidates are allowed to speak, how is he supposed to take the opportunity to build support to begin with?

To be clear, I don't even support Yang.


You're still assuming they muted his mic though I still haven't heard any motive they would have for doing so. If there were technical issues, then yeah they should have been addressed if they were aware of them, but this narrative that his mic was purposely muted doesn't really pass muster unless there's a credible reason they'd do so.
 

Ichthyosaurus

Banned
Dec 26, 2018
9,375
People dismissing him with "no one cares" is pretty racist with the context that he was the only Asian man on stage. Just because he has low support, that's no justification to mute his mic. If only popular candidates are allowed to speak, how is he supposed to take the opportunity to build support to begin with?

To be clear, I don't even support Yang.

Except he was given opportunities to speak. It's absurd how you're erasing the other minority candidates who didn't have this to win an argument. Castro, Booker, Kamala, what are your opinions on them in the debate?

Could have fooled me.
 

Lentic

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,835
You're still assuming they muted his mic though I still haven't heard any motive they would have for doing so. If there were technical issues, then yeah they should have been addressed if they were aware of them, but this narrative that his mic was purposely muted doesn't really pass muster unless there's a credible reason they'd do so.

Despite this, they denied that his mic was muted.
Except he was given opportunities to speak.

Could have fooled me.
Only when he was allowed to speak. He was clearly trying to interject first and they ignored him while Gillibrand got through later. That's pretty fucked.
 

brochiller

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
2,191
The point of these debates is to give lesser known candidates a chance to show what they have to offer to the American people. Muting the little known candidates mic's defeats the whole purpose.
 
OP
OP
mutantmagnet

mutantmagnet

Member
Oct 28, 2017
12,401
Except he was given opportunities to speak. It's absurd how you're erasing the other minority candidates who didn't have this to win an argument. Castro, Booker, Kamala, what are your opinions on them in the debate?

Could have fooled me.
Of course he had opportunities to speak but it was glaring that not only he had the lowest speaking time it was glaring why his speaking time was significantly less than all the other 4 lowest time speakers because he lost the ability to interrupt for 2 hours straight. Amid 4 commercial breaks this mic issue wouldn't get fixed?
 

odiin

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,721
Of course he had opportunities to speak but it was glaring that not only he had the lowest speaking time it was glaring why his speaking time was significantly less than all the other 4 lowest time speakers because he lost the ability to interrupt for 2 hours straight. Amid 4 commercial breaks this mic issue wouldn't get fixed?

A reasonable person would bring the issue up during one of the breaks and if it had not been solved call the issue out when he did get the opportunity to speak.
 

Christian

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,636
I just saw an "Andrew Yang for President" sign in someone's yard, and I don't think they put it there ironically.
 

JDSN

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
5,129
He should have stopped shit until they fixed his mic, Warren full stop complained about sound issues.

If you gonna turn this into some conspiracy shit then it also must be considered that Yang did not report it for his gain.
 

lacer

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,693
i'm pretty sure when you're an audio engineer mixing twelve people at the same time, you're bringing mics up as people speak, not leaving them all open and muting people individually when you don't like them
 

Lentic

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,835
They should hand out badges that say "prominent candidate" on them and raise their stands ever-so-slightly higher than the rest.
 

Sayre

The Fallen
Oct 27, 2017
727
Yang claims his mic was muted. Williamson confirms that her mic was muted at certain points. MSNBC denied they muted the mics.

And that's the problem. Don't know why MSNBC just own up to it or at least claim technical issues because their denial makes people cry conspiracy.

Let the candidates speak and die on their words. Yang is not going to win. Everyone knows that. Let him get his message out and let the American people make that decision.
 
OP
OP
mutantmagnet

mutantmagnet

Member
Oct 28, 2017
12,401
Gillabrand has a higher profile nationally, IMO.
She technically does but her exposure in the news cycle doesn't reflect that. I saw way more public moves that clearly reflected DeBlasio looked like he was positioning himself to run that his late announcement didn't come out of nowhere while Gillibrand made 2 noteworthy appearances and ghosted potential primary voters since then.

As bad as her national attention was in running for the primary looked relatively to DeBlasio as a senator she did cosign some bills that gained some national attention.

She is firmly low tier like Deblasio. Unless you want to argue DeBlasio is also mid tier since he's the mayor of the biggest city.
 

Deleted member 41502

User requested account closure
Banned
Mar 28, 2018
1,177
I doubt there's some sort of plot against yang, but I wouldn't be surprised if MSNBC was muting the mics of (especially lower tier) candidates to avoid the debate turning into a cacophony of interuptions at times. Does that make me crazy?
 

McScroggz

The Fallen
Jan 11, 2018
5,971
People dismissing him with "no one cares" is pretty racist with the context that he was the only Asian man on stage. Just because he has low support, that's no justification to mute his mic. If only popular candidates are allowed to speak, how is he supposed to take the opportunity to build support to begin with?

To be clear, I don't even support Yang.

I didn't watch the debates, but it's pretty weak to jump straight to the racist card. Andrew Yang is a candidate many don't know, who isn't a politician and from what I've heard is basically a single issue candidate. It's reasonable for people to just not really care about him or any of the 1% runners with little political name recognition.

You are better than this. Be better.
 
OP
OP
mutantmagnet

mutantmagnet

Member
Oct 28, 2017
12,401
i'm pretty sure when you're an audio engineer mixing twelve people at the same time, you're bringing mics up as people speak, not leaving them all open and muting people individually when you don't like them

He should have stopped shit until they fixed his mic, Warren full stop complained about sound issues.

If you gonna turn this into some conspiracy shit then it also must be considered that Yang did not report it for his gain.
Which is perfectly fine.

What is not fine is that MSNBC (Telemundo still haven't responded) said they never muted anyone which now makes the question who is being truthful. MSNBC is clearly lying due to their own mistakes visibly seen live but they refuse to admit to for some reason. They could have given an answer that people could accept but decided not to.
 

Finale Fireworker

Love each other or die trying.
Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,710
United States
Presently, there does not seem to be enough information to support the idea of a deliberate interference and much of the concern comes from conjecture. Previous debates have also had complaints about microphones being deliberately modified that did not prove to be accurate. Unless more information comes out that confirms there is anything to this concern beyond regular technical shortcomings, we don't want a thread dominated by this discussion about muted microphones.

However, if someone would like to make a thread about the disparity of coverage time between candidates, please feel free to do so.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.