By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Thuglas on 04 November 2016
Edit Thread
Final-Fan said:

Debating and analyzing in detail the extent to which shoddy journalism is reflective of media bias (towards one political party, or against Trump specifically) is frankly not a discussion I'm prepared to go into in depth right now, considering how hard it is to separate opinion from fact and to get statistically significant evidence instead of anecdotes. 

Benghazi ... I am honestly bewildered by people who think it has been insufficiently investigated.  They're working on the eighth congressional investigation now.  It's probably gotten closer attention than 9/11 did.  (Fun fact:  according to Wikipedia, when the 9/11 commission requested additional funding, they got 9 of the 11 million they asked for.  W probably did it as a prank.) 

"Watergate x10000000"  Do I even need to say anything about this? 

About the polling:  firstly, I believe it was an internal poll for the campaign, although I could be wrong about that—it is mostly just an educated guess and the facts that I have never heard of "Atlas" and I don't believe they were on the 538 article I linked; and secondly, the "evidence" that polls were being rigged was complete nonsense, as shown by my previous post. 

Media collusion has never been this exposed before and it just mindboggling the extent to which they are trying to get Clinton elected even at the cost of angering their viewer base. I could provide plenty on wikileaks emails showing all major news corporations (except fox) colluding with Clinton in some way. Some of it is as bad as sending the Clinton campaign an unpublished article and asking if they want to make any changes or if it is acceptable to them. lolwut? leaking debate questions? yup. Long list of major journalists attending "off the record" dinners at John Podesta's house? That too. This isn't "opinion". Allowing Clinton campaign to edit articles and giving them debate questions is undeniable collusion (bias) and cheating respectively. What is opinion would be me to tell you to look at how CNN covers the wikileaks scandal. they always downplay the severity of the email scandal and wikileaks (conviniently ignoring the ones that involves them) and tries to scapegoat Russia every two seconds when it is obvious they aren't even involved. CNN videos are getting massively downvoted every time they cover these stories cause it is so painfully obvious they are biased. Here is CNN "losing" the feed of a republican congressman as soon as he mentions "wikileaks". also a montage of CNN and MSNBC cutting people off.

Yes, a black Trump supporter pleaded that people stop with the racist allegations and that we all should get along. The feed was cut and MSNBC anchor claims it is cause he was "black and not many Trump supporters are black so we cut that feed" basically. I used to trust these stations a month ago now I can't imaging regaining that trust for decades to come after this shitstorm.