Because the press protects Democrats and in particular their beloved Obama. If that were Newt Gingrich or Trump, it would have been wall to wall coverage for a week.
I don't really care about the erection. Obama's human and shit happens. My point is there is a serious double standard and the MSM is 1-sided and WOULD scandalize it if this were Trump.
The MSM is going to be the key cause of a civil war if they don't become more balanced.
I guess you love the MSM and do not like Trump so we're not going to change each other's minds.
It's ridiculous to say they provided free airtime to Trump. The MSM covers presidential candidates. It's what they do. And they try to do it profitably.
They covered Trump more because he has a larger than life personality and was campaigning non-stop so he provides plenty of material to cover.
Hillary was hiding out trying to run out the clock until 30 days to election time. That was her strategic blunder.
Regardless, studies have proven that 90% of the MSM votes and donates money primarily to the Dems. It is what it is.
Corporate media is corporate media. Until capitalism dies you're going to have media firms working for the highest bidder. That's common sense.
I don't like trump because he knows shit all about macro economics.
Right... Crazy how they only focused on his current political rhetoric and not his "transformation" from a mildly liberal Democrat to a conservative Republican in less than 5 years.
Or his mountains of shady business dealings.
Or his relationship with Bill Clinton.
Or his actual business record.
Her strategic blunder was assuming rural white people wouldn't vote in the numbers they did. She focused her efforts on the east and west coast... Nothing in between. That's beside the point though.
There's also multiple studies that show funding for media firms comes almost strictly from conservative corporations... What's your point?
view the rest of the comments →
pizzaequalspedo ago
Because the press protects Democrats and in particular their beloved Obama. If that were Newt Gingrich or Trump, it would have been wall to wall coverage for a week.
shizzle_mcbobblehead ago
Or because the news doesn't cover boners lmao.
Seriously... What makes you think they would?
pizzaequalspedo ago
I don't really care about the erection. Obama's human and shit happens. My point is there is a serious double standard and the MSM is 1-sided and WOULD scandalize it if this were Trump.
The MSM is going to be the key cause of a civil war if they don't become more balanced.
shizzle_mcbobblehead ago
The MSM gave Donald Trump $1 billion in free publicity.
"No publicity is bad publicity."
To suggest people who have been in the media for 30+ years didn't understand that is completely ridiculous.
pizzaequalspedo ago
I guess you love the MSM and do not like Trump so we're not going to change each other's minds.
It's ridiculous to say they provided free airtime to Trump. The MSM covers presidential candidates. It's what they do. And they try to do it profitably.
They covered Trump more because he has a larger than life personality and was campaigning non-stop so he provides plenty of material to cover.
Hillary was hiding out trying to run out the clock until 30 days to election time. That was her strategic blunder.
Regardless, studies have proven that 90% of the MSM votes and donates money primarily to the Dems. It is what it is.
shizzle_mcbobblehead ago
Corporate media is corporate media. Until capitalism dies you're going to have media firms working for the highest bidder. That's common sense.
I don't like trump because he knows shit all about macro economics.
Right... Crazy how they only focused on his current political rhetoric and not his "transformation" from a mildly liberal Democrat to a conservative Republican in less than 5 years.
Or his mountains of shady business dealings.
Or his relationship with Bill Clinton.
Or his actual business record.
Her strategic blunder was assuming rural white people wouldn't vote in the numbers they did. She focused her efforts on the east and west coast... Nothing in between. That's beside the point though.
There's also multiple studies that show funding for media firms comes almost strictly from conservative corporations... What's your point?