• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Role of the Media

BSF, what is your go-to news source for breaking news if something big happens?
 
I hear it works in identity politics, too.
Yeah, *white *American *Christian *gun-owner *straight *tax-payer *republican

That's a mighty big choir to preach to, a good charismatic preacher could even have the choir running up the aisles and speaking in tongues
 
ieoUCP.jpg
 
Bob, I know that you despise Hillary Clinton and think that the media isn't looking at her with the same scrutiny that they are Trump, but do you at least understand or see why that is?

Or is your hatred for her not allowing you to see that what Trump is doing is 100x worse than anything Hillary Clinton has ever done?

I fully admit that Hillary Clinton is dishonest as a person and a candidate. We both agree on that. I grant to you that she is being given a pass, primarily because Donald Trump won't stop saying and suggesting legitimately crazy things that have to be covered. The media probably could and should do a better job of exploring all of Clinton's transgressions, but they spent an obscene time covering the Benghazi scandal and the e-mails.

Can we at least come to an understanding that Trump is much worse of a candidate for the POTUS in his current iteration (whether or not he is a horrible person I have no idea about) than Hillary Clinton?
 
Bob, I know that you despise Hillary Clinton and think that the media isn't looking at her with the same scrutiny that they are Trump, but do you at least understand or see why that is?

Or is your hatred for her not allowing you to see that what Trump is doing is 100x worse than anything Hillary Clinton has ever done?

I fully admit that Hillary Clinton is dishonest as a person and a candidate. We both agree on that.

Can we at least come to an understanding that Trump is much worse of a candidate for the POTUS in his current iteration (whether or not he is a horrible person I have no idea about) than Hillary Clinton?

I prefer Trump for Immigration and Trade. I prefer Hillary for the Supreme Court. I think they'll both be a disaster but Trump will possibly be less of a disaster, he's kind of a wild card.
 
I prefer Trump for Immigration and Trade. I prefer Hillary for the Supreme Court. I think they'll both be a disaster but Trump will possibly be less of a disaster, he's kind of a wild card.

Alright, so you don't believe that what Trump has been saying for the last year is worse than what Clinton has done, and you (rephrasing your words a bit) believe that Trump will be a better POTUS than Clinton?

I admittedly cannot fathom how anybody can look at these two candidates objectively and think that, but that's your prerogative.

Nor do I see how you can look at these two and not understand WHY Donald Trump is getting covered so much more than Hillary Clinton in a negative light. At some point, when everybody sees it except for you, or a small amount of people, it's not necessarily a (LIBERAL MEDIA!!!!) bias, but it may just be that what he is saying is batshit insane and dangerous rhetoric.
 
I mean, Donald Trump joked for Second Amendment believers to use their guns to "take care" of Hillary Clinton. He then said that Obama "founded ISIS", and stood by that for two days even when asked to clarify.

You still believe a man who says things like that should be in control of the world's most powerful nation, thus making him THE, or one of the most powerful men in the world.

That is less terrifying to you than a Hillary Clinton presidency, where it will almost certainly be the "status quo", as the RNC and Donald Trump himself have kept saying?
 
Alright, so you don't believe that what Trump has been saying for the last year is worse than what Clinton has done, and you (rephrasing your words a bit) believe that Trump will be a better POTUS than Clinton?

I admittedly cannot fathom how anybody can look at these two candidates objectively and think that, but that's your prerogative.

Nor do I see how you can look at these two and not understand WHY Donald Trump is getting covered so much more than Hillary Clinton in a negative light. At some point, when everybody sees it except for you, or a small amount of people, it's not necessarily a (LIBERAL MEDIA!!!!) bias, but it may just be that what he is saying is batshit insane and dangerous rhetoric.

There's currently only a 2% difference nationally according to Zogby. There's a world beyond this board. Not everyone has the disdain for Trump that you establishment folks do.
 
Bob, I know that you despise Hillary Clinton and think that the media isn't looking at her with the same scrutiny that they are Trump, but do you at least understand or see why that is?

Or is your hatred for her not allowing you to see that what Trump is doing is 100x worse than anything Hillary Clinton has ever done?

I fully admit that Hillary Clinton is dishonest as a person and a candidate. We both agree on that. I grant to you that she is being given a pass, primarily because Donald Trump won't stop saying and suggesting legitimately crazy things that have to be covered. The media probably could and should do a better job of exploring all of Clinton's transgressions, but they spent an obscene time covering the Benghazi scandal and the e-mails.

Can we at least come to an understanding that Trump is much worse of a candidate for the POTUS in his current iteration (whether or not he is a horrible person I have no idea about) than Hillary Clinton?

Sure. They agree with Democrat leaning politics and want to see Democrats elected. Like always. Trump is a horrid candidate, but this is hardly a new development and they don't need an excuse to have a point of view. They didn't like Romney either.
 
Sure. They agree with Democrat leaning politics and want to see Democrats elected. Like always. Trump is a horrid candidate, but this is hardly a new development and they don't need an excuse to have a point of view. They didn't like Romney either.

This is a reasonable argument, and I don't disagree that there is a liberal lean to a number of stations in the Mainstream Media.
 
There's currently only a 2% difference nationally according to Zogby. There's a world beyond this board. Not everyone has the disdain for Trump that you establishment folks do.

Not sure how you will interpret this information, but Zogby is rated as a C- as a poll by 538 with a -0.8% Republican lean (not bad). It's not the most reliable of polls when it comes to accuracy.

Just because one poll says he's back in the race doesn't make it so. He's still down by 6% in the RCP aggregate (down from 9% points a week ago). He is coming back a little bit, but I'll need to see more than Zogby to tell me this race is getting close again.

Here's a link to the 538 article:

FiveThirtyEight’s pollster ratings are calculated by analyzing the historical accuracy and the methodology of each firm’s polls. Accuracy scores account for the type of election, a poll’s sample size, the performance of other polls surveying the same race and other factors. We also calculate measures of statistical bias in the polls.

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/pollster-ratings/
 
This is a reasonable argument, and I don't disagree that there is a liberal lean to a number of stations in the Mainstream Media.

I think it is fair to add "And this year, this behavior may save us all from Donald Trump being President."
 
I think it is fair to add "And this year, this behavior may save us all from Donald Trump being President."

Right, which again brings us back to the first question(s) I posed on here---what is the role of the media? To state the obvious that Trump is unfit in any capability to be President, or cover everybody fairly and give them equal treatment? It is pretty clear cut in my opinion for this election cycle, but even people like BSF (sorry Bob) are STILL complaining about the treatment he is getting over Hillary.
 
I don't need the media to tell me who to vote for. They're not that important and they should not be that powerful. JMHO.

ETA: I'll add a "for instance." For instance, it's a pretty big problem when the candidate is cheering on the moderator at a Presidential debate for opinion-checking the other candidate. Hey Candy, how 'bout you say it quieter and let me decide whose spin I should believe?
 
Last edited:
I don't need the media to tell me who to vote for. They're not that important and they should not be that powerful. JMHO.

ETA: I'll add a "for instance." For instance, it's a pretty big problem when the candidate is cheering on the moderator at a Presidential debate for opinion-checking the other candidate. Hey Candy, how 'bout you say it quieter and let me decide whose spin I should believe?

How much would you know about these candidates if they weren't being covered? The media plays a huge role in how people perceive candidates. Even minute things that are subliminal play a big role whether we know it/or like it.

It is unfortunate, but a lot of the country needs to see "Donald Trump claims Obama founds ISIS (he didn't)", because a lot would assume that Obama did because Trump said he did, or they want to believe that Obama did.

I think the media should call it like they see it, especially in this case, which is admittedly as far to one side as it can be. The problem comes in like 2012 between two legitimate candidates like Obama and Romney, if they are unfairly covering one side or the other. I wasn't paying very much attention to politics in 2012, so I don't remember how the media covered that.
 
How much would you know about these candidates if they weren't being covered? The media plays a huge role in how people perceive candidates. Even minute things that are subliminal play a big role whether we know it/or like it.

It is unfortunate, but a lot of the country needs to see "Donald Trump claims Obama founds ISIS (he didn't)", because a lot would assume that Obama did because Trump said he did, or they want to believe that Obama did.

I think the media should call it like they see it, especially in this case, which is admittedly as far to one side as it can be. The problem comes in like 2012 between two legitimate candidates like Obama and Romney, if they are unfairly covering one side or the other. I wasn't paying very much attention to politics in 2012, so I don't remember how the media covered that.

If this is their charge, they screwed the pooch during the Republican primary.
 
I was fairly happy repeating my 08 vote in 12 so I did not pay much attention to the campaign either but my recollection of Romney, in order, is

47%

He killed his dog by taping it to the roof of his car

He killed someone at Bain
 
Back
Top