Media Bias

[Steve R]

Dan Gainor, FOX News - "...the political bloc that most helped push Obama to reelection was the American media."

As it turns out, of the over 200 largest U.S. daily newspapers, 100 endorsed Obama and 105 endorsed Romney.

[PaceAdvantage]

Dan Gainor, FOX News - "...the political bloc that most helped push Obama to reelection was the American media."

As it turns out, of the over 200 largest U.S. daily newspapers, 100 endorsed Obama and 105 endorsed Romney.That fact the Obama got 100 endorsements is proof in and of itself.

[Steve R]

That fact the Obama got 100 endorsements is proof in and of itself.
I see. So Romney getting more newspaper endorsements didn't help him but Obama getting fewer endorsements did help him. Interesting bit of logic. Robert Browning would be pleased.

[FantasticDan]

I think he meant that if there wasn't a bias, Obama would have only gotten, ohh, let's say 5 or 6 endorsements, since he's been such a terrible president..

This was amusing..

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-november-7-2012/post-democalypse-2012---america-takes-a-shower---fox-news-meltdown

I think PA owns a timeshare up on Bullshit Mountain :lol:

[Tom]

Hey, most of Obama's supporters can't read anyway.
It is radio and TV that is the most biased and harmful.

His level of supporters believe anything they hear on TV.
Like that girl dating the French model in the commercial! :lol:

[PaceAdvantage]

since he's been such a terrible president..Careful there Dan. Steve definitely AGREES that Obama HAS been such a terrible president. Of course, it's not like he's a fan of Romney either...

[highnote]

Careful there Dan. Steve definitely AGREES that Obama HAS been such a terrible president. Of course, it's not like he's a fan of Romney either...


Maybe my reply should be in a new thread, but it kind of fits here. Part of the reason Obama has been terrible is because that is what the founders intended:

http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/elections-gridlock-and-foreign-policy?utm_source=freelist-f&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20121107&utm_term=gweekly&utm_content=readmore&elq=3294108e42ca4c31a944184abfe9020a

There will be a great deal of unhappiness with the second Obama administration overseas. As much as the world condemns the United States when it does something, at least part of the world is usually demanding some action. Obama will disappoint, but it is not Obama. Just as the elections will paralyze him domestically, reality will limit his foreign policy. Immobilism is something the founders would have been comfortable with, both in domestic politics and in foreign policy. The voters have given the republic a government that will give them both.

Read more: The Elections, Gridlock and Foreign Policy | Stratfor

[Steve R]

Maybe my reply should be in a new thread, but it kind of fits here. Part of the reason Obama has been terrible is because that is what the founders intended:

http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/elections-gridlock-and-foreign-policy?utm_source=freelist-f&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20121107&utm_term=gweekly&utm_content=readmore&elq=3294108e42ca4c31a944184abfe9020a
I don't think so. He's been terrible because he's a mass murdering war criminal who has done more than any president in history to eviscerate the Bill of Rights and destroy the liberties it guarantees and because he fronts a powerful unpatriotic oligarchy intent on amassing wealth at the expense of the middle and lower economic classes. In addition, he has continually lied to his constituency about virtually every policy position that garnered its support in the first place. Quite simply, he's a sociopath with no definable moral base. He has moved to U.S. closer to a police state than it has ever been.

Ask me again. I'll tell you how I really feel.

[lamboguy]

every television station in the world could be fox news or an offshoot of fox, and every newspaper from here to shang-hai could have endorsed Romney and you would have never in a million years had a different result.

[Greyfox]

every television station in the world could be fox news or an offshoot of fox, and every newspaper from here to shang-hai could have endorsed Romney and you would have never in a million years had a different result.

Advertising experts would tell you that you are completely wrong.

President Obama has been shielded by the MSM more than any other President in history.

[dartman51]

every television station in the world could be fox news or an offshoot of fox, and every newspaper from here to shang-hai could have endorsed Romney and you would have never in a million years had a different result.

Sorry Lambo, but you are wrong. If the media just did their jobs, there would have been a different outcome. When you have the LSM out there daily, finding every LITTLE thing could to bad mouth Romney, yet couldn't talk about the FAILURES of Benghazi, when they interview Romney(or any Repub), they ask real questions, and try to ask GOTCHA questions, but when they interview Obama, they toss up softball questions. That is NOT doing their job. They will NOT continue to pound on a question, even when they know that the answer is BS, or just beating around the bush. There are VERY FEW, Jake Tapper is one, that will even ask a follow up question, when they believe that the administration is not being honest. Bottom line, when the American public only sees one side, they tend to lean that way. One SIMPLE example. A big deal was made out of Obama saving the auto industry, with the bailout, but Romney wanted to let them go bankrupt. What Romney REALLY said, was that he would do a structured bankruptcy with guarantees from the government, NOT TAXPAYERS money. The end result would have been the same, without us being on the hook for the money. Oh, yeah, the union would have had to take a hit, just as the stockholders did. This whole thing was NOT about saving the auto industry, it was about payback for the unions that worked so hard to get him elected the first time. The American public doesn't know that because they only know ONE side, not both. :ThmbUp:

[Valuist]

Dan Gainor, FOX News - "...the political bloc that most helped push Obama to reelection was the American media."

As it turns out, of the over 200 largest U.S. daily newspapers, 100 endorsed Obama and 105 endorsed Romney.

Newspapers? Are they still in existance?

[Tom]

Bwwwwwaaaaaakkk!
All the news that's fit to......
Bwwwwaaaakkkkk!

[redshift1]

Dan Gainor, FOX News - "...the political bloc that most helped push Obama to reelection was the American media."

As it turns out, of the over 200 largest U.S. daily newspapers, 100 endorsed Obama and 105 endorsed Romney.

When you can't win an election against one of the more reviled (by half the plebiscite) presidents in recent memory, then It's time to re-visit your fundamental model.

.

[lamboguy]

you guys must think that everyone in this world is stupid and they believe the media.

i listened to Fox New, they had Romney winning by a landslide. listening to news media is like listening to a tout at a race track that charges you for their picks.
if their picks were so good, they would not need you to hand them money, they would be out there betting those great picks themselves. its the same with the media. fox news has it right, they report and you decide. fox news reported this election and the people decided. i am only using them because they are the #1 cable news network going, more people watch them than anyone else, and believe me, they had a bias in this past election.

[Tom]

you guys must think that everyone in this world is stupid and they believe the media.

Sadly, a quite a few do. Believe or not, we allow idiots to vote and breed, but require they get a license to fish. :bang:

[lamboguy]

then maybe you should turn back the clocks and restrict people from voting that are not landowners

[Actor]

Sadly, a quite a few do. Believe or not, we allow idiots to vote and breed, but require they get a license to fish. :bang:Hmmm? Will they accept your fishing license as ID at the polls?

[Actor]

then maybe you should turn back the clocks and restrict people from voting that are not landownersHow much land would you need to own?

http://www.ohio.com/lifestyle/history/local-history-quaker-oats-prize-creates-yukon-land-rush-in-1955-1.257639

[johnhannibalsmith]

Just make federal taxes voluntary and offer up a ballot to those that at least offer up a buck.

[Actor]

... he fronts a powerful unpatriotic oligarchy intent on amassing wealth at the expense of the middle and lower economic classes. In addition, he has continually lied to his constituency about virtually every policy position that garnered its support in the first place. Quite simply, he's a sociopath with no definable moral base.Sounds like Romney.

[Steve R]

Sounds like Romney.
Unfortunately, those are the kind of people the presidential political process in the U.S. tends to dredge up regardless of party affiliation.

How's that for alliteration? :D

[reckless]

then maybe you should turn back the clocks and restrict people from voting that are not landowners

That's not a bad idea after all, lamboguy.

As long as more and more people --it's now kissing 50%, ouch -- are on some sort of the public dole such as single welfare women with their 5 kids from 4 men; career politicians, most of whom can't earn a living in the real world; and, of course, those state gov't union workers with their fat paychecks and even fatter pensions who now have their kids and grandkids following them in the system and gaming the taxpayers.

None of these mooches would ever think of voting for a party or a politician that runs on a promise of cutting taxes and government waste. Truthfully, what idiot would vote for someone who threatens to give them a pay cut or even eliminate their job?

So my friend, lamboguy, maybe, just maybe, the abused homeowner that pulls this very heavy freight should in fact have more of a real say in the election process, do you agree?

[OntheRail]

then maybe you should turn back the clocks and restrict people from voting that are not landowners
When that vote is tied to the valuation of land and building then yes I think you should have a house or land to be taxed. When you have no horse in the race it's easy to say sure whatever.

[Hosshead]

Dan Gainor, FOX News - "...the political bloc that most helped push Obama to reelection was the American media."

As it turns out, of the over 200 largest U.S. daily newspapers, 100 endorsed Obama and 105 endorsed Romney.
There's quite a difference between the top 10 Newspapers' circulation and the 150-200 circulation.

I wonder what the number of readers total was for each side?
Let's see:
L.A. Times -- Obama
Pottery Press in Three Horse Ariz. ---- Romney

[Steve R]

There's quite a difference between the top 10 Newspapers' circulation and the 150-200 circulation.

I wonder what the number of readers total was for each side?
Let's see:
L.A. Times -- Obama
Pottery Press in Three Horse Ariz. ---- Romney
Since the election is decided by electoral votes rather than the popular vote and because people in Three Horse, Arizona probably don't read the LA Times, the latter's endorsement, regardless of its local circulation, is irrelevant to the Arizona vote.

[Mike at A+]

There is one and only one reason why 0bama won. Redistribution of wealth from people who earned it to people who lack the qualifications or work ethic to go for it.

[Tom]

There is one and only one reason why 0bama won. Redistribution of wealth from people who earned it to people who lack the qualifications or work ethic to go for it.

That is the major part of it.
The other is gross ignorance.

[JustRalph]

There is one and only one reason why 0bama won. Redistribution of wealth from people who earned it to people who lack the qualifications or work ethic to go for it.

If you look at the numbers coming out today, that and the fact that Romney lost the lady vote 18-1 is the real reason.

The fact that women fell for the war on women shit astounds me.

[NJ Stinks]

There's quite a difference between the top 10 Newspapers' circulation and the 150-200 circulation.

I wonder what the number of readers total was for each side?
Let's see:
L.A. Times -- Obama
Pottery Press in Three Horse Ariz. ---- Romney

Both the New York Daily News and the New York Post (Murdoch owned) endorsed Romney. Both papers are in the top ten in circulation in the U.S.

[reckless]

There is one and only one reason why 0bama won. Redistribution of wealth from people who earned it to people who lack the qualifications or work ethic to go for it.

You could also add a cowardly and intellectually challenged national Republican Party that ignored winnable issues, not to mention obvious Obama flaws, and foisted upon us a weak loser named Mitt Romney.

And, the GOP did it under the flawed guise that Romney is the only one who can beat Obama.

[Mike at A+]

You could also add a cowardly and intellectually challenged national Republican Party that ignored winnable issues, not to mention obvious Obama flaws, and foisted upon us a weak loser named Mitt Romney.

And, the GOP did it under the flawed guise that Romney is the only one who can beat Obama.
When the incentive to work for a living is replaced by free money, Democrats win. When there is no more free money to hand out, we all lose. If we continue down this path, America (and blue states in particular) becomes one big filthy ghetto. The demise has already begun. Layoffs are being announced at an alarming pace, people who used to make charitable contributions are either cutting back on them or totally eliminating them and many people are not spending as freely as they did before.

[lamboguy]

That's not a bad idea after all, lamboguy.

As long as more and more people --it's now kissing 50%, ouch -- are on some sort of the public dole such as single welfare women with their 5 kids from 4 men; career politicians, most of whom can't earn a living in the real world; and, of course, those state gov't union workers with their fat paychecks and even fatter pensions who now have their kids and grandkids following them in the system and gaming the taxpayers.

None of these mooches would ever think of voting for a party or a politician that runs on a promise of cutting taxes and government waste. Truthfully, what idiot would vote for someone who threatens to give them a pay cut or even eliminate their job?

So my friend, lamboguy, maybe, just maybe, the abused homeowner that pulls this very heavy freight should in fact have more of a real say in the election process, do you agree?you certainly need a better system than the one we have today that concentrates its efforts by fooling people in 8 states.

seriously when you look back at this election, the presidential candidates spent over $2 billion, the guys running for congress spent more than that. and the public got nothing.

what i really laugh about is how these commentators are saying that the middle is the reason why the vote went the way it did. i would really love to know if any of the middle class really thinks that one guy is going to screw them worse than the guy that didn't get elected?

[Mike at A+]

you certainly need a better system than the one we have today that concentrates its efforts by fooling people in 8 states.

seriously when you look back at this election, the presidential candidates spent over $2 billion, the guys running for congress spent more than that. and the public got nothing.

what i really laugh about is how these commentators are saying that the middle is the reason why the vote went the way it did. i would really love to know if any of the middle class really thinks that one guy is going to screw them worse than the guy that didn't get elected?
Let's see, the guy we elected isn't friendly to the private sector job creators. The guy who lost is.
The guy we elected squashed the Keystone Pipeline. The guy who lost would have approved it.
The guy we elected rammed through 0bamacare and insurance rates skyrocketed. The guy who lost would have repealed and replaced it with something that would decrease rates through competition.
The guy we elected told so many lies over the past four years that it's amazing this country even took him seriously.
We have become a nation or unmotivated sponges who exist only for themselves and to take whatever they can get without earning it.

Sit back and watch how the handouts continue, the rich laugh all the way to the bank and the middle class takes it up the a$$ once again.

FORWARD, BEND OVER FORWARD!

[Tom]

BEND OVER FORWARD!

I like this a lot.
I sent it the FUBO bumper sticker people.

If I could humbly suggest the official portraits for both out last presidents....

[Stillriledup]

I like this a lot.
I sent it the FUBO bumper sticker people.

If I could humbly suggest the official portraits for both out last presidents....

Mission Accomplished.