CNN was really bad about this in 2016:
“Here we are outside the Trump rally due to take place in about six hours now…”
Meanwhile, Sanders blows the roof off with 30,000 people. CNN? Silence.
The joke I was telling back then was Trump couldn’t pass gas without live coverage on CNN with talking heads discussing if it were more “fruity” or “nutty”.
Trump couldn’t pass gas without live coverage on CNN
Appropriate, since “trump” is British slang for “fart”.
Meanwhile, Sanders blows the roof off with 30,000 people.
CNN: Sanders has zero chance to win. Everyone hates him, and he is a poopypants. Vote for Hillary, because Sanders is doo doo cacca.
Oh, no, they just didn’t talk about him at all.
They did once he started winning primaries. That meltdown was especially telling (and entertaining).
Suddenly every story was misrepresenting Bernies compliments… He mentioned Cuba has a good education system so to CNN that means “Bernie wants communism! Bernie loves Castro!”
MSNBC was even worse. Those chucklefucks were literally crying about Bernie being elected and executing them. (I wish)
It was so disgusting to watch…
CNN wanted Trump over Bernie, Trump gave them more views and Bernie would be an upset to the status quo.
Nail on the head. There are some who call themselves Democrats who would rather have 1000 Trumps for President than let someone who would shake up the status quo get their hands on the levers of power.
Literally no Democrats are like that.
News media, I’ll grant you. Not Democrats though.
Why not because they publicly say the right phrases to make you think we’re all on the same side and they have your back? Were you not around to witness what happened in 2016, or what nearly happened again in 2020, or what could happen now in 2024?
Have you never questioned why, out of a population of 330 million, they keep hand picking individuals to back that fully represent the status quo, individuals who are so unlikable that they have already lost once and then only defeated him in a narrow victory once? Candidates who can barely defeat a known conman and reality TV star?
“They” are not growing new leaders because that’s not their job. The DNC is national (that’s the “N”). It’s your job on the local level to find good candidates and help them run for office the first time.
This is such a naive take. It’s not us who decide to back candidate X over Y, give them all the media coverage, or millions of dollars in party donations. Biden and Clinton weren’t picked by us to enter into the race for president.
Yes, it’s your job to donate to and support good candidates at the local level. That’s how democracy works. You have to participate.
Who is running in your local city council or mayoral race? Who is your state representative? If you don’t have a preferred candidate, find one. You can literally swing those elections with a few thousand dollars and votes.
Holy fucking conspiracy Batman
Why not because they publicly say the right phrases
“Ignore everything they actually say. Trust me, I know what they really mean”.
Fuck you, crawl back to Joe Rogan.
You can tell their true beliefs by how they vote and the legislation they actually pass. It’s no conspiracy theory that it’s little more than lip service or virtue signaling when they give public statements about ‘X’ but never back it with actual legislation or if they do it’s legislation that is doomed from the start because they never had any intention of actually putting up a fight to move it forward. It all plays well in media headlines though and that’s all that matters to them.
Neolib media owners much prefer a raging fascist president to a socialist, as a fascist won’t challenge the status quo, just make it worse for the poors and minorities.
And now we’re doing it again.
It certainly doesn’t help that any criticism of Biden online, valid or not, is immediately met with “BuT tRuMp Is WoRsE!”
Like, I get it, orange man bad, but if any discussion of Biden’s failures immediately devolves in to talking about the other guy, then opportunities to talk about his accomplishments are washed away by the people who need to be focusing on them.
This isn’t just the media. The entire fucking conversation is always directed towards that dipshit.
The entire fucking conversation is always directed towards that dipshit.
Understandable right now, because he’s an existential threat to the US, and will remain so every election until he’s either elected (at which point we’re done) or he dies.
the threat is never going away, even if donald trump died after this election we still have losers like nikki haley, MTG, mike johnson, desantis (although no way he’d get elected to a meaningful position again), etc. to worry about. even if they don’t have the cult following of trump, they’re still big issues
Really? I don’t think it’s nearly as bad this time around, maybe cause he has fuckin dementia and nothing he says lands anymore.
His followers don’t care.
I was talking about the news coverage not being as bad as it was in 2016, his followers will follow him over a cliff.
You don’t have to report “both sides” of an issue if one side of that issue is blithering insanity.
News today: "Should we eat horse paste and shove UV lights up our own asses to fight Covid? Donald Trump says ‘Yes’ but honestly, WHO KNOWS? ¯_(ツ)_/¯ "
This was Hillary’s strategy for winning in 2016, believe it or not. This was revealed by WikiLeaks.
No way they could’ve predicted that backfiring, right?
Just imagine how much better the world would be right now if she fucked off and allowed Bernie to win
That’s assuming that her moderate voters wouldn’t have gravitated around another moderate Dem early in the game.
“moderate” americans are just conservatives without the nazism lol
This is our punishment for shooting the Kwanza gorilla
To be fair, the onslaught of negative Trump coverage also helped him lose the house in 2018, the general in 2020 and a shit load of easy Republican house seats in 2022.
People seem to forget that a lot of folks stayed home in 2016 because they thought it was impossible for that clown shoe to get elected. No one believes that anymore.
S’real simple, corporate news. Use the words “lie” and “liar”. Start there. Now.
True journalists may also note that “convicted fraud” “sex offender” and “high profile adulterer” are rock-solid legally and ethically. Go forth and fulfill your purpose. For once.
Lie is a tough word to use in law and journalism. To accuse someone of lying you have to prove intent to tell the lie vs being truly mistaken.
For example, if I say the Earth is flat am I lying or mistaken? If I truly believe that, then it’s not a lie, even though facts clearly say otherwise. I’m just not aware or choose to disagree with those facts.
It’s maddening. I’m with you and wish journalists would use harsher language in obvious cases, but I understand why they tend not to as a standard to ensure they’re not opening themselves up to claims of liable and defamation.
I’m sorry but no, they are not open up to liable or defamation lawsuits by calling a public figure running for office a liar. For pete sake, Tucker regularly called pretty much every popular democrat a liar over the course of his show. Pretty much every right wing mud slinger does.
Here’s an example of CNN saying trump lied
https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/16/politics/fact-check-dale-top-15-donald-trump-lies/index.html
NY Times V Sullivan and the fact that this is political speech grants a WIDE amount of latitude for the accusations you can place against politicians.
The press reported that Donald Trump said he was a serial rapist who liked to just walk up and ‘grab them by the pussy.’
The press reported that Donald Trump had gone on Howard Stern’s show and talked about how he was allowed to walk into the dressing rooms of the Miss Teen USA pageant.
The press reported that Donald Trump called American prisoners of war cowards; while comparing his tom cat days as his personal Vietnam.
Don’t blame the press, blame the voters who heard about Trump and decided they were okay with him because he hated the people they hate.
There’s a difference between reporting on the candidate and giving him free air time by broadcasting his rallies and speeches live. Most of the 24 hour networks (CNN especially) ran out of significant things to report on Trump relatively quickly, but they knew Trump stories (negative or positive) were huge for ratings, so they would cover everything he said. It’s estimated he got $2 Billion worth of free airtime this way. For every important story you mentioned, there’s days worth of mindless coverage the media companies churned out for ratings, and it absolutely helped Trump get elected.
mmm yes I suppose it also had nothing to do with the alternative candidate gg ez cheating their primary and defending said cheating after getting exposed
or I guess if you want to apply it to right now, I suppose it had nothing to do with the incumbent funding a genocide and running his campaign on “well at least I’m not the guy who’s even more evil”
Doesn’t Trump support the genocide, too, though? Or has he just kept silent about it?
No, he’s very openly said he wants to exterminate Gaza.
You just never hear about it here because THE WHOLE GENOCIDE JOE THING IS LITERALLY PROPAGANDA. YOU ARE BEING MANIPULATED WAKE THE FUCK UP.
How can it be propaganda? He is currently overseeing and speaking positively of his massive support for a genocide, happening right now. That’s as truthful as it gets.
Except he isn’t? He’s literally telling that fuck in Israel to stop and has ordered humanitarian aid to be dropped in. He even demanded a ceasefire so they could help the Palestinians and that fuck in Israel said “nah,
we want the landthey’re all terrorists.” He can’t just stop giving aid because isrealis have a ton of political pressure here on our government and they were attacked so we’d be made to look like the assholes for cutting off the aid.It’s people online that are going way overboard with the “Genocide Joe” nonsense when it should be that fuck in Israel. Fuck his name, he’s “that fuck in Israel” to me.
He can’t just stop giving aid because isrealis
So he’s continuing to oversee massive support for a genocide? As in, precisely what I said? We’re not just talking about generic ‘aid’, we’re talking bombs and guns in the billions of dollars. Biden and the dems are fully able to stop funding Israeli genocide, but choose not to.
So…he can’t cut off the aid, because the optics are bad? That seems like a very, very poor excuse for supporting genocide. Also, the optics for supporting genocide are not good, either.
It’s not purely the optics, but the fallout from it all. Major loss of support means Trump wins and the bombing continues or even gets worse, so as another user put it elsewhere “Biden is dealing with a hell of a trolly problem.” No matter whether he pulls the lever or not people will suffer :(
deleted by creator
