The biased Media vs Trump!

Billy86

Overheal wrote: »

So did most people. That's why they either placed troll ballots or didn't vote.

Most people mustn't have been reading the polls then - they had 'leave' winning up until the Tommy Mair terrorist incident.

The polls also had Trump winning the primaries easily (as in about 99% from January onwards said he would).

And those same polls have Trump getting hammered worse and worse, day on day, when it comes to the upcoming election itself.

m1ck007

Overheal wrote: »

m1ck007 wrote: »

Ok we will see. Suppose it will be like when you thought britain would vote to remain

So did most people. That's why they either placed troll ballots or didn't vote.

Ok 16million voted to remain and there was a 70% turnout but according to you they didnt vote.

Overheal

m1ck007 wrote: »

Ok 16million voted to remain and there was a 70% turnout but according to you they didnt vote.

Sure.

Oh look: the thread topic changed.

Billy86

Overheal wrote: »

Sure.

Oh look: the thread topic changed.

I'm guessing he just doesn't want to talk about how the polls were accurate for Brexit until the terrorist attack, were accurate for the Republican primaries the whole way through from January, and currently show Clinton trouncing Trump.

Deflect, deflect, deflect!

Overheal

Billy86 wrote: »

I'm guessing he just doesn't want to talk about how the polls were accurate for Brexit until the terrorist attack, were accurate for the Republican primaries the whole way through from January, and currently show Clinton trouncing Trump.

Deflect, deflect, deflect!

If I wanted to talk in depth about Brexit I'd do it in the Brexit thread.

If you wish to talk about polls I don't see any issue with the polls in the US

This was a thread about media bias against trump

Billy86

Overheal wrote: »

If I wanted to talk in depth about Brexit I'd do it in the Brexit thread.

If you wish to talk about polls I don't see any issue with the polls in the US

This was a thread about media bias against trump

I completely agree, hence my point about the constant attempts to shift the goalposts and deflect attention from media bias or lack thereof.

Water John

I think any journalist is entitled to be biased against a gob****e.
Originally saw the docu on the golf course saga in Scotland. Yes that was biased, but it was the words of Trump himself that was most shocking on that. No simple respect for other human beings. A coarse man.

glued

It's still amazing that people consider this a race at all at this point. Clinton just needs to stay out of trouble as the media and American public either don't realise her appalling foreign policy record or the see Trump being a worse president. Two appalling candidates for, apparently, 'the greatest country on earth'.

Aineoil

I don't think the media is biased towards Donald Trump. Trump is doing a great job of showing what he's like all by himself.

Now excuse me while I get my popcorn for tonight's debate. It looks like it could be very interesting.

Mr.Micro

There is a different dynamic at play here, IMO. It's simply him or her? Nothing either says matters. The leaked video of him in 2005 making lewd remarks about women will make no difference. He has offended everyone and he is still there and Clinton is only about 4% ahead in the polls, no matter what he says.

glued

American polling accuracy has diminished massively over the past decade. Does anyone remember 2012? Or Mitch McConell?

Water John

Americans are quite adverse to coarseness. Republican candidates bailing out and away from Trump tells you enough how this is playing out. They don't want to be contaminated.

Billy86

glued wrote: »

American polling accuracy has diminished massively over the past decade. Does anyone remember 2012? Or Mitch McConell?

Well they got the Democratic primaries right - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_Democratic_Party_2016_presidential_primaries

And the Republican primaries - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_Republican_Party_2016_presidential_primaries#Polls_conducted_in_2016

They seemed to have 2012 correct too, now that you mention it - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2012

Just as they had on the 2012 Republican primaries - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_Republican_Party_2012_presidential_primaries

And the 2008 election - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2008

As well as the incredibly tight 2008 Democratic primaries - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_2008

And in the 2008 Republican primaries, they predicted a landslide. McCain won in a landslide - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_Republican_Party_2008_presidential_primaries

Trent Houseboat

Billy86 wrote: »

Well they got the Democratic primaries right - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_Democratic_Party_2016_presidential_primaries

And the Republican primaries - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_Republican_Party_2016_presidential_primaries#Polls_conducted_in_2016

They seemed to have 2012 correct too, now that you mention it - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2012

Just as they had on the 2012 Republican primaries - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_Republican_Party_2012_presidential_primaries

And the 2008 election - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_United_States_presidential_election,_2008

As well as the incredibly tight 2008 Democratic primaries - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_2008

And in the 2008 Republican primaries, they predicted a landslide. McCain won in a landslide - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_Republican_Party_2008_presidential_primaries

Yeah, but what about Brexit?

LiamoSail

m1ck007 wrote: »

I hope trump wins, i am sick of the political correctness in the world now and on this thread. I also voted leave and i am glad of it.

I'd say there's a fairly sizeable intersect on a venn diagram between those that vote for Trump, or for the UK to leave the EU, and those who fail to understand the correct use of capital letters.

wonderfullife

Any "accuracy of polls" argument is slightly ridiculous. A poll showing a candidate ahead in October means they were likely ahead in October. A lot can change in a month. Mind you, with this particular election it would need an actual video of Trump murdering somebody while wearing a t-shirt saying "I did it" for his support to change.

"The biased media vs Trump" is in itself the funniest thing in this thread. It actually implies that Fox, the channel of Bill O' Reilly and Sean Hannity, is impartial and fair and non-biased.

Funny.

Overheal

glued wrote: »

American polling accuracy has diminished massively over the past decade. Does anyone remember 2012? Or Mitch McConell?

depends on the polling data? RCP polls were split between Romney and Obama in October; McConnel never faced any challenges from Grimes. You may be thinking of the Romney camp that ignored most traditional polling and paid for its own polling data which proved to be misleading.

Godge

Trent Houseboat wrote: »

Yeah, but what about Brexit?

Did American polling companies get the number of Americans voting for Brexit wrong? Can't remember any polls they did myself.

Have you a link to these suspect polls on Brexit conducted by American polling companies on American voters?

swimming in a sea

I think Trump still has a chance, as I have a good few cousins in America all lefty types normally demarcate but all saying they'll probably vote Green party. One cousin is a campaigner for the green party in Alaska but I don't think that was ever going to be a Clinton state.

If I was american I'd probably go independent to, as the bias by the media in favour of Clinton is so blatant.

alastair

swimming in a sea wrote: »

If I was american I'd probably go independent to, as the bias by the media in favour of Clinton is so blatant.

Bit of a strange rationale for voting Green/Libertarian. Does the quality of the candidate to fulfil the job not enter into the equation?

Amerika

So with the new batch of emails from WikiLeaks, we find out NYTimes/CNBC journalist AND DEBATE MODERATOR John Harwood advises the Clinton campaign, and gloats about provoking Trump at the debate.

Certainly no media bias here, eh? :rolleyes:

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/4303

Brian?

Amerika wrote: »

So with the new batch of emails from WikiLeaks, we find out NYTimes/CNBC journalist AND DEBATE MODERATOR John Harwood advises the Clinton campaign, and gloats about provoking Trump at the debate.

Certainly no media bias here, eh? :rolleyes:

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/4303

I thought we all agreed the media was biased against Trump because he's a horrible human being. Honestly, I'd swear we did

Overheal

Amerika wrote: »

So with the new batch of emails from WikiLeaks, we find out NYTimes/CNBC journalist AND DEBATE MODERATOR John Harwood advises the Clinton campaign, and gloats about provoking Trump at the debate.

Certainly no media bias here, eh? :rolleyes:

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/4303

Locker room talk. Meh.

Overheal

Here's the email...

From:John.Harwood@nbcuni.com To: john.podesta@gmail.com Date: 2015-12-08 19:20 Subject: I imagine...

...that Obama feels some (sad) vindication at this demonstration of his years-long point about the opposition party veering off the rails I certainly am feeling that way with respect to how I questioned Trump at our debate John Harwood CNBC/NYT 202 669 0751

Color me skeptical but where is the gloating? I'm not getting a Jabba-the-chuckling-Hutt vibe from it. It's email. It's tone neutral, it could be oozingly snarky, it could be bewilderment at how Trump answers questions in the form of wildly tangential answers. But sure, spin it quick lads, it's *obviously* gloating about provocation?

Amerika

Overheal wrote: »

Here's the email...

From:John.Harwood@nbcuni.com To: john.podesta@gmail.com Date: 2015-12-08 19:20 Subject: I imagine...

...that Obama feels some (sad) vindication at this demonstration of his years-long point about the opposition party veering off the rails I certainly am feeling that way with respect to how I questioned Trump at our debate John Harwood CNBC/NYT 202 669 0751

Color me skeptical but where is the gloating? I'm not getting a Jabba-the-chuckling-Hutt vibe from it. It's email. It's tone neutral, it could be oozingly snarky, it could be bewilderment at how Trump answers questions in the form of wildly tangential answers. But sure, spin it quick lads, it's *obviously* gloating about provocation?

Try taking those liberal rose colored classes off.

K-9

Overheal wrote: »

Here's the email...

From:John.Harwood@nbcuni.com To: john.podesta@gmail.com Date: 2015-12-08 19:20 Subject: I imagine...

...that Obama feels some (sad) vindication at this demonstration of his years-long point about the opposition party veering off the rails I certainly am feeling that way with respect to how I questioned Trump at our debate John Harwood CNBC/NYT 202 669 0751

Color me skeptical but where is the gloating? I'm not getting a Jabba-the-chuckling-Hutt vibe from it. It's email. It's tone neutral, it could be oozingly snarky, it could be bewilderment at how Trump answers questions in the form of wildly tangential answers. But sure, spin it quick lads, it's *obviously* gloating about provocation?

That could be from Jeb Bush or McCain and I wouldn't be surprised. It's fair comment.

Water John

Trump supporters scratching around at this point. Republican Party has thrown their hands at the Presidency. Saving their seats in the Senate and Congress.
What is infuriating them totally, is that they could have easily won it with a reasonable candidate.

Igotadose

Overheal wrote: »

Here's the email...

From:John.Harwood@nbcuni.com To: john.podesta@gmail.com Date: 2015-12-08 19:20 Subject: I imagine...

...that Obama feels some (sad) vindication at this demonstration of his years-long point about the opposition party veering off the rails I certainly am feeling that way with respect to how I questioned Trump at our debate John Harwood CNBC/NYT 202 669 0751

Color me skeptical but where is the gloating? I'm not getting a Jabba-the-chuckling-Hutt vibe from it. It's email. It's tone neutral, it could be oozingly snarky, it could be bewilderment at how Trump answers questions in the form of wildly tangential answers. But sure, spin it quick lads, it's *obviously* gloating about provocation?

Uhh, Harwood moderates a GOP debate (did they have them? Wasn't there something about fingers?) where he asked Hair Furor a difficult question and he went full loony tunes about it, then, what, 6 or 8 months later he sends an e-mail to John Podesta?

And, uhh, this is him advising the HRC campaign? I guess I follow..

Amerika

Wow. With the WikiLeaks emails, examples of media bias are rolling off the presses faster than green grass through a goose.

http://www.theamericanmirror.com/email-cnn-jake-tapper-congratulated-podesta-wh-appointment/
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/300332-univision-chief-urged-clinton-camp-to-hit-trump
http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/new-york-times-gave-hillary-veto/
http://dailycaller.com/2016/10/11/revealed-donna-brazile-shared-cnn-town-hall-questions-with-clinton-camp/

Our mainstream media should all just wear standard light blue blazers marked “I’m With Her.”

johnnyskeleton

Amerika wrote: »

Try taking those liberal rose colored classes off.

Mod note:

Youve been repeatedly warned about this below standard uncivil trolling. Please take three days off and reflect on your posting style.