Jump to content

Media admits OBAMA Bias

Rate this topic


RegDunlop

Recommended Posts

The "media" used a lot of their credibility and good will to get Obama elected. Whether people care or not will be based on whether Obama succeeds or fails.If he succeeds then they can say they did the right thing. If the economy is still in the toilet in 3 years, the "media" will be used as a very large club to beat Obama.

Laus Deo

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lost in this alleged discourse is the misfeasance, and potential malfeasance, of what will go down in history as one of the worst three, if not the very worst, presidencies in the existence of this country.

 

I am not particularly looking forward to all the losers on the right in here taking potshots at Obama while completely looking past the circumstances that have put his presidency at such a vital point in time.

 

I would ask all of you who did not vote for him and do not like the idea of his presidency to engage in some introspection:

 

Without trashing Bush myself, please consider honestly his legacy.

 

But that might be too much to ask.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

View PostThe "media" used a lot of their credibility and good will to get Obama elected. Whether people care or not will be based on whether Obama succeeds or fails.If he succeeds then they can say they did the right thing. If the economy is still in the toilet in 3 years, the "media" will be used as a very large club to beat Obama.

 

 

Obama got elected because he faced a weaker opponent, and mustered the wherewithall to defeat them.

 

We have too many problems right now for him to seriously entertain a far left wing agenda.

 

If he is competent enough, and lucky enough, to keep this country from falling of the cliff's edge that Bush and company have left us perched on, we should all be grateful.

 

Even though I have been buying stock lately in the perhaps mistaken impression that our economic downturn has reached its nexus, I don't see too many reasons to think that we are not headed into another Great Depression. Which, like the last one, is due to insufficient regulation of greedy Republicans/capitalists.

 

I have to say that your invective rings hollow right now.

 

It is time to moderate your rhetoric and help make the new guy a success, because the alternative is odious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

View PostObama got elected because he faced a weaker opponent, and mustered the wherewithall to defeat them.

 

We have too many problems right now for him to seriously entertain a far left wing agenda.

 

If he is competent enough, and lucky enough, to keep this country from falling of the cliff's edge that Bush and company have left us perched on, we should all be grateful.

 

Even though I have been buying stock lately in the perhaps mistaken impression that our economic downturn has reached its nexus, I don't see too many reasons to think that we are not headed into another Great Depression. Which, like the last one, is due to insufficient regulation of greedy Republicans/capitalists.

 

I have to say that your invective rings hollow right now.

 

It is time to moderate your rhetoric and help make the new guy a success, because the alternative is odious.

 

Obama won for many reasons, among which were his substantial monetary advantage and a major media bias. You can cite all the other reasons you'd like and they are important to, but the topic at hand was the media bias.

 

We can debate that in any civil manner you'd like but I must insist that you use the word "invective" correctly in the future.

Laus Deo

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Bias? Charts show "negative tone of coverage".... that's probably expected when someone screws up.

 

If the media was biased against McCain, then it was biased against Gore eight years ago!

 

see 2nd last paragraph:

 

"One question likely to be posed is whether these findings provide evidence that the news media are pro-Obama. Is there some element in these numbers that reflects a rooting by journalists for Obama and against McCain, unconscious or otherwise? The data do not provide conclusive answers. They do offer a strong suggestion that winning in politics begat winning coverage, thanks in part to the relentless tendency of the press to frame its coverage of national elections as running narratives about the relative position of the candidates in the polls and internal tactical maneuvering to alter those positions. Obama's coverage was negative in tone when he was dropping in the polls, and became positive when he began to rise, and it was just so for McCain as well. Nor are these numbers different than what we have seen before. Obama's numbers are similar to what we saw for John Kerry four years ago as he began rising in the polls, and McCain's numbers are almost identical to what we saw eight years ago for Democrat Al Gore."

[sIGPIC][sIGPIC]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...