Media Shocked, Shocked I Tell You, Over Trump's Awfulness

I don't disagree that it happens both ways. It seems to happen a lot less with some candidates compared to others. A story unfavorable to Trump will see far more coverage than a story unfavorable to Hillary across the media spectrum. A story favorable to Hillary will see far more coverage than a story favorable to Trump (haven't seen a lot of those). I'm not going to Google it for you, but I'm sure it's easily verified...if you believe the sources of your own searches. I often wonder who fact checks the fact checkers, and why should I believe them? The best fact checks are watching the actual words come from the lips, when possible. .
 
wjk said:
A story unfavorable to Trump will see far more coverage than a story unfavorable to Hillary across the media spectrum. A story favorable to Hillary will see far more coverage than a story favorable to Trump (haven't seen a lot of those).
More...
Trump gets more coverage, period.
 
wjk said:
I did think of that. I think the media might not have gotten all the info that hackers obtained, but they are pretty good at digging up dirt. They sure have been with republicans in the past. The media is supposed to dig up those kind of facts. The hacks contain some highly relevant info regarding Hillary's hypocrisy. Do you think for one minute that if the info in some of those were found by the mainstream media that they would have been reported? Not in our lifetime. Maybe Fox if they were privy to it. I don't condone learning it this way, but it is what it is. Who's to say the MSM didn't know some of this content already. That's how little trust I have left in them.

Additionally, why didn't the dems protect their servers? Has that been in the news? Maybe it had to do with unsecure servers. Remember that?

I have many issues with Trump, and many of them make me not want to vote for him. I agree he gets lots of coverage. Twofer for the media. They get ratings, and his mouth plays into the agenda of the left wing media, and he's too arrogant to see that. But I have many issues regarding Hillary that she's not being asked. For instant, her desire to implement a no fly over Syria. That's a big deal. And why isn't she being asked questions like, why do neo-cons support you? I could go on...
More...
I was going to respond to your post point by point, but realized that it would take up the better part of an hour to do it justice. So let's just agree to disagree. You seem to be a decent fellow, but I cannot fathom your political thinking.
 
wjk said:
Almost all unfavorable, period.
More...
There is little of which to report about Trump that is favorable. What is presently reported favorably about Trump on Fox is largely fabricated or at least embellished. He did not even want his own campaign to do opposition research on him. (Is that stupidity, hubris or fear?) Well, it's getting done now, one way or another.
 
Frederick Foresight said:
I was going to respond to your post point by point, but realized that it would take up the better part of an hour to do it justice. So let's just agree to disagree. You seem to be a decent fellow, but I cannot fathom your political thinking.
More...
I can sum it up. I have two problems this election. One: I know who Hillary is. The leaks have verified that. Two. I don't really know who Donald is. His past positions concern me greatly.

I hate my two choices. I do, however, care about who will be on the supreme court. I do not trust Republicans to block SC nominees should they hold the Senate if Hillary wins. That leaves me no choice for yet another election cycle.

My anger at the media has been growing for years, but I believe all this crap coming out now regarding trump could have come out sooner. It would have altered the GOP primary. I believe it was held intentionally to be used as an October surprise if Trump won the primary, as he did. I could be wrong, but the allegations did not occur yesterday. If true, it shows clear bias toward Hillary, even if in the collective mind of the media, the ends justify the means.
 
wjk said:
My anger at the media has been growing for years, but I believe all this crap coming out now regarding trump could have come out sooner. It would have altered the GOP primary.
More...
None of the primary candidates were thoroughly vetted by the media. Somewhat, perhaps, but not a full due diligence; that comes afterwards when the nominee is chosen.
 
Frederick Foresight said:
Tell me.
More...

I'll let you read through her voting record yourself. It won't change your mind, nor will I, though you can always brush up on Whitewater, Travelgate, Filegate, Cattle Futures trading, etc...and, of course, the hacks.

Anyway, I always enjoy sparring with you, Frederick. We'll agree to disagree, as you said.

Hey, your Canadian, right? You can probably get hooked up with an ID from the mayor of NY (according to that youtube I posted earlier). Just kidding, man...I hope;):) I am curious, though. I know you support Hillary for our prez, but aren't you troubled by some of her positions? And what's in it for a Canadian if she wins? ( I know, I can Google it). Last word's yours.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top