or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › Trump is #2 in GOP Field
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Trump is #2 in GOP Field - Page 429

post #6421 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnFacconable View Post

Honestly the media is being far too fair to Trump under this false equivalency that he should be treated like a genuine option for president. By comparison the media is being quite unfair to Johnson and Stein who are more legitimate candidates for the presidency. Not that I think they are legitimate but by comparison to Trump, just about everyone is.

This is laughable, John Iadarola is that you?

I get it, you don't like Trump. I understand that, it's hard to like him for plenty of reasons that were covered here ad nauseam. But notion that media was fair to Trump majority of the election is just false, I can point to the plenty of examples that, you can't really see past your bias.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nil View Post

Trump has only been as successful as he has been thus far in this election due to the media. Do you think he'd have been able to have almost zero ad buys and zero ground game and won the Republican nomination if he had received the same amount of media coverage as other candidates? Absolutely not. He's a media whore. .

i agree with that, but that does not imply he was given as fair coverage as other candidates. Especially compare to Hillary, there are many outlets who regularly look past her 'sins' give her good press etc, only outlet on that does that for Trump is quite small Breitbart. And Hillary sins outweigh does of Trump, her positions and statements do not, but what she actually done, her and DNC is far far worse than Donald being insufferable ass and yet we hardly hear about it.

Hillary getting a free pass really manifested in primaries vs Sanders. There were several hit pieces on him wrote by big outlet and some of those were inspired by Hillary campaign. Like spreading the myth of Bernie bros of him and his voters being some closeted sexists- which is fucking absurd. I'm not even that huge fan of Sanders, but cmon.
Edited by wojt - 10/17/16 at 12:33pm
post #6422 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by suited View Post

1) Trump is receiving unprecedented scrutiny from the media. Whether it's justified or not is irrelevant in this analysis, because the key point here is that a fair media couldn't hurt him anymore than he's already been hurt. It couldn't get any worse for Trump.

2) The media is not giving the same attention to Hillary's flaws. It doesn't matter if you think her flaws are less newsworthy, key point is that she's getting favorable treatment.

There's a false narrative of "fairness" in these arguments. The media doesn't exist to give equal time to the flaws of each candidate.

Trump has received unprecedented attention because his behavior and "policy" proposals are unprecedented. The fact that this has hurt him is his own damn fault, not the media's for pointing it out. He's addicted to media attention. It got him through the primaries, but it's ruining him in the generals.

A lot of the imbalance in media attention comes from Trump's response to his own stupid statements. Look at the Khan fiasco. It would have gone away shortly if he had shut the fuck up. Instead he creates a week long running feud on Twitter and through his proxies. Same deal with his response after the first debate. You cannot blame the media for reporting on your 3:30am Tweet storm. His periods of success not coincidentally overlap with periods when he shut the fuck up. That's on him, not "the media."

Quote:
Originally Posted by suited View Post

He won the primary based on his debate performances, however terrible they were, and channeling the anger of his core supporters. Yes, Trump would have easily won the primary regardless of how the media handled him. And again, it's not how the media treats him that's causing the problem, it's how they treat Hillary.
There's not really any evidence the debates helped him directly. Trump's polling was never really affected by a debate. They did let some of his competition wipe each other out (Christie murdering Rubio).

Clinton has gotten a TON of attention. The email thing has been in the media's eye for literally two years, Benghazi was uncritically reported on for about as long. The Clinton Foundation faux-scandal 24/7 coverage of nothing was coincidentally ongoing at the height of Clinton's poll numbers and when Trump was dead in the water.
post #6423 of 8748
LEAD Technologies Inc. V1.01
post #6424 of 8748

I just skipped 200+ posts, and I see it is exactly the same argument as it was when I checked in a week ago.

post #6425 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by wojt View Post

you can't really see past your bias.
Quote:
i agree with that, but that does not imply he was given as fair coverage as other candidates. Especially compare to Hillary, there are many outlets who regularly look past her 'sins' give her good press etc, only outlet on that does that for Trump is quite small Breitbart. And Hillary sins outweigh does of Trump, her positions and statements do not, but what she actually done, her and DNC is far far worse than Donald being insufferable ass and yet we hardly hear about it.

Hillary getting a free pass really manifested in primaries vs Sanders. There were several hit pieces on him wrote by big outlet and some of those were inspired by Hillary campaign. Like spreading the myth of Bernie bros of him and his voters being some closeted sexists- which is fucking absurd. I'm not even that huge fan of Sanders, but cmon.

What people view as "fair" is basically going to come down to which team they want to win. You're on Team Alt Right, so of course you think "the media" (whatever that means) is biased.


Trump has done an awful lot to ensure this outcome. He's made a point from Day 1 of attacking every media outlet, mostly to win cheap political points but sometimes just to protect his ego. He set up a dumb feud with Fox News because....reasons. His whole worldview is outside the mainstream, so it shouldn't be terribly surprising when mainstream news thinks that's unacceptable.

It's not just "liberal media" that's going after Trump. We had a discussion last week over Glen Beck telling people not to vote for Trump. Is that "media bias", or just a guy making an argument you don't happen to agree with because it's against the guy you like?


As far as ignoring Hillary, a lot of the mainstream publications have been critical of her in their endorsements. The publications that don't typically endorse anybody but did this year (The Atlantic, Newsweek) were pretty unvarnished in saying that it's not about Hillary, it's about Trump being awful in a historically unprecedented way. You may happen to disagree with them, but they're not fundamentally in the tank for Hillary just because they think Trump's massive pile of awful behavior and out of the norm political statements are worse than Hillary's issues.
post #6426 of 8748
.
post #6427 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokencycle View Post

I just skipped 200+ posts, and I see it is exactly the same argument as it was when I checked in a week ago.

People tend to be pretty settled in who they're voting for by this point in the race, so it tends to get pretty repetitive. This year especially, there's not a whole lot of substantive policy being proposed, so people are just going to bash the candidates. Anyone who's going to engage in that sort of thing has already picked a side, so what are you really going to say?



It is kind of interesting that a apparently a larger than average fraction of voters than usual are undecided this year. I assume it's distaste towards the concept of settling for the lesser evil.
post #6428 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibonius View Post



It is kind of interesting that a apparently a larger than average fraction of voters than usual are undecided this year. I assume it's distaste towards the concept of settling for the lesser evil.

BREXIT scenario. They say I am undecided casue they embarrassed to say they are gonna vote Trump.
The morning after everyone is going to walk into TV studios with their hair like a birds-nest look loopy like Cameron and ask : What just happened?
post #6429 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibonius View Post

It's not just "liberal media" that's going after Trump. We had a discussion last week over Glen Beck telling people not to vote for Trump. Is that "media bias", or just a guy making an argument you don't happen to agree with because it's against the guy you like?

He has as much of a war with republican establishment as with liberal establishment and the fact that glen beck doesn't like him and someone reports on it i would not is a bias per say. What I would say could be parallel to Glen Beck scenario is that Glen Beck and other conservative idiot commentators suddenly gain credence in left-wing media because they are against Trump. My favorite manifestation of this was- 50 neocon idiots from G.W.Bush cabinet that engineered fiasco that is Iraq suddenly become 50 senior GOP security experts- only because you can take them and bash Trump's head with them. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/09/us/politics/national-security-gop-donald-trump.html?_r=0 Since when these people had any credence with liberal media/liberals?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibonius View Post

As far as ignoring Hillary, a lot of the mainstream publications have been critical of her in their endorsements. The publications that don't typically endorse anybody but did this year (The Atlantic, Newsweek) were pretty unvarnished in saying that it's not about Hillary, it's about Trump being awful in a historically unprecedented way. You may happen to disagree with them, but they're not fundamentally in the tank for Hillary just because they think Trump's massive pile of awful behavior and out of the norm political statements are worse than Hillary's issues.

i dont necessarily disagree with it and much of it is just what you said, there were too many of examples of game being rigged for any other person not named Hillary Clinton that i can't help too notice she has really gets away with a lot compared too others. I don't even say, Trump, Bernie or Gary Johnson do deserve scrutiny and criticism, they do ofc. I just wish same scrutiny would be directed at Hillary.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibonius View Post

What people view as "fair" is basically going to come down to which team they want to win. You're on Team Alt Right, so of course you think "the media" (whatever that means) is biased.

ymm no, I actual alt-right stands for few more things than using word cuck and shit posting, the further to the right you could call me would be some sort of Liberal Nationalist/maybe Classical Liberal, in the mold of Gert Wilders party strict on immigration and definitely liberal by USA's standards on most everything else.
post #6430 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by wojt View Post

He has as much of a war with republican establishment as with liberal establishment and the fact that glen beck doesn't like him and someone reports on it i would not is a bias per say. What I would say could be parallel to Glen Beck scenario is that Glen Beck and other conservative idiot commentators suddenly gain credence in left-wing media because they are against Trump. My favorite manifestation of this was- 50 neocon idiots from G.W.Bush cabinet that engineered fiasco that is Iraq suddenly become 50 senior GOP security experts- only because you can take them and bash Trump's head with them. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/09/us/politics/national-security-gop-donald-trump.html?_r=0 Since when these people had any credence with liberals?
Maybe this is surprising to you, but conservative media figures and former Republican Presidents not supporting the Republican Presidential nominee is actually news. Of course other news outlets are going to report on it.

The opinion columns are going to spin that however they spin it, but their role has never been to provide unbiased commentary.
Quote:
on that i necessarily disagree with it and much of it is just what you said, there were too many of examples of game being rigged for any other person not named Hillary Clinton that i can't help too notice she has really gets away with a lot compared too others. I don't even say, Trump, Bernie or Gary Johnson do deserve scrutiny and criticism, they do ofc. I just wish same scrutiny would be directed at Hillary.
You're kind of regurgitating that whole "the game is rigged" line. What does that mean, exactly? Did the media show up and vote three million times for Hillary over Bernie?

Clinton has faced an absolute fuckton of scrutiny. The media was basically hijacked by the Republican hit machine to bash Hillary over Benghazi for years. It's silly to claim that she's gotten a pass. It pretty much sounds like you're concluding the media is "biased" because they haven't spent as much time attacking the person you don't like.

Everybody knows about the concerns about Clinton. The media has done their job in informing people. The fact that fewer of them have been convinced by that than by the case against Trump doesn't equal "bias," and it's not the job of the media to bang on the anti-Clinton drum until Trump wins.
Quote:
He has as much of a war with republican establishment as with liberal establishment

Well, exactly. Why would you expect "fair" (ie, equal amount of time effort to destroying the other person) when you've deliberately set yourself in opposition to everybody? You can't expect to stand in opposition to all conventional civil norms and then expect the institutions of those same civil norms to do the job of winning the Presidency for you.
post #6431 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibonius View Post

Well, exactly. Why would you expect "fair" (ie, equal amount of time effort to destroying the other person) when you've deliberately set yourself in opposition to everybody? You can't expect to stand in opposition to all conventional civil norms and then expect the institutions of those same civil norms to do the job of winning the Presidency for you.

I don't expect fair, I'd just expect people here to recognize it is not, that the gist of what i was trying to communicate.

In fact discontent of republican establishment is actually to his credit, as terrible as Trump is his disconnect with GOP is good in terms of some of his positions like those on free trade/social security etc but really really bad in terms of electability. Like you said he shitted the bed with GOP and now it's costs him a lot.
post #6432 of 8748

Its not fair because Trumps outrageous behavior draws attention . Something he has manipulated to great advantage in the past . Now that that this has started to backfire he and his campaign are claiming conspiracy.When will people see that this man is mentally incapable of accepting responsibility for any action that does not result in praise

post #6433 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Numbernine View Post

Its not fair because Trumps outrageous behavior draws attention . Something he has manipulated to great advantage in the past . Now that that this has started to backfire he and his campaign are claiming conspiracy.When will people see that this man is mentally incapable of accepting responsibility for any action that does not result in praise

I don't see why both can't be true at the same time
post #6434 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by wojt View Post

I don't see why both can't be true at the same time
Quote:
Originally Posted by wojt View Post

you can't really see past your bias.
post #6435 of 8748

Trump:Look at me ,look at me look at what I do

Media : look at him, look at him ,look at what he does

public: yer ugly and you behave reprehensibly

Trump: the media is rigging the election

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › Trump is #2 in GOP Field