Posted by Uofa2 on 11/4/2020 6:36:00 AM (view original):
I can’t believe the polling was that bad. I don’t even know how you handle policy decisions and public opinions if polling is so ****** in America now.

The polling is off due to many Americans, not just Republicans, no longer feeling any obligation to be truthful with the pollsters, the MSM, due to the MSM no longer feeling any obligation of being objective journalists. They are a state media, a weaponized arm of the Democrats. They exist only to serve their masters. We have and continue to boycott them, the NFL, NBA, Hollywood elite and many of their sponsors. This country will remain polarized as long as the media does their business in this manner. Many have added Fox News to the list. They too can dry up and blow away...

Democrats have seen it too, when a far right media outlet chooses to not inform its readership/viewership of when a Republican does or says something wrong or moronic. They too show bias, eating away at objective journalism and its integrity. Informing the people needs to take center stage, not picking winners and losers. They must take their thumbs off of the scales.

Posted by DoctorKz on 11/5/2020 4:21:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Uofa2 on 11/4/2020 6:36:00 AM (view original):
I can’t believe the polling was that bad. I don’t even know how you handle policy decisions and public opinions if polling is so ****** in America now.

The polling is off due to many Americans, not just Republicans, no longer feeling any obligation to be truthful with the pollsters, the MSM, due to the MSM no longer feeling any obligation of being objective journalists. They are a state media, a weaponized arm of the Democrats. They exist only to serve their masters. We have and continue to boycott them, the NFL, NBA, Hollywood elite and many of their sponsors. This country will remain polarized as long as the media does their business in this manner. Many have added Fox News to the list. They too can dry up and blow away...

Democrats have seen it too, when a far right media outlet chooses to not inform its readership/viewership of when a Republican does or says something wrong or moronic. They too show bias, eating away at objective journalism and its integrity. Informing the people needs to take center stage, not picking winners and losers. They must take their thumbs off of the scales.

This is just paranoid ramblings. State media, serve their masters, weaponized arm, Hollywood elite, how many other buzzword slogans can we add to give me a bingo?

Media isn’t polling, for one. For two, media doesn’t have an agenda besides making money which I thought was apart of the conservative 101 class. For three, media doesn’t really make a lot of libelous claims, Fox included; well Project Veritas does but that’s a different discussion.

If the media picked winners and losers how did Trump win in 2016 oh wait was it because CNN and the Times spent an inordinate amount of time on Hillary’s emails? A practice that was barely touched on when Pompeo among several Trump cabinet members was found doing the same? I guess you have a point.

Stop equating the rest of the media to what Fox does; though Fox has dialed it back during the past week, good on them.

Either way, focusing on the media when I’m asking about polling is weird and if people are lying to pollsters that’s ******* stupid. Dumb idea, could lead to a fracking ban guys.


I think it’s more a problem with sampling and respondents, which you do kinda touch on as well.

Folks ripping on the modern era MSM have quite obviously NEVER examined a historical newspaper of the 19th century.
The current MSM, bad as it may be, is about a 1000 times BETTER at reporting the news. Some even do the job with very little (to zero sometimes) bias or manipulation.

But I'm not referring to talk radio, which is about 99% bias and BS, and about all Republican propoganda.
The MSM is corporate. They have ONE very obvious objective. PROFIT.

The ONLY news networks that are overtly biased are on the Right!

Coinkydink?

America became terribly polarized around 1996

Fox "News" started in 1996

We Report, You Decide

The polls have to adapt and get better. Simple as that. Not sure what "the media" has to do with it.

polling might be passe but big tech knows all our interests and biases

so big tech might know election outcomes before the count

Posted by laramiebob on 11/5/2020 7:36:00 AM (view original):
Folks ripping on the modern era MSM have quite obviously NEVER examined a historical newspaper of the 19th century.
The current MSM, bad as it may be, is about a 1000 times BETTER at reporting the news. Some even do the job with very little (to zero sometimes) bias or manipulation.

But I'm not referring to talk radio, which is about 99% bias and BS, and about all Republican propoganda.
The MSM is corporate. They have ONE very obvious objective. PROFIT.

The ONLY news networks that are overtly biased are on the Right!

Undoubtedly the historical component of this is true. Names like Benjamin Franklin Bache and Amos Kendall come to mind.

But the last statement is unambiguously wrong. I have seen multiple articles on CNN today that met the following criteria:
- they were not labelled as opinion
- they called the results of the election "shameful" because it wasn't a Democratic landslide

If that's not overt bias I don't know what is.

I didn't see the "remarks" so I really shouldn't respond............ but you sure it was the election they were referring to as shameful or the POTUS's behavior and frivolous legal attempts to stop votes from being counted??

Yes. I do have that level of reading comprehension.

Posted by dahsdebater on 11/5/2020 6:51:00 PM (view original):

Posted by laramiebob on 11/5/2020 7:36:00 AM (view original):
Folks ripping on the modern era MSM have quite obviously NEVER examined a historical newspaper of the 19th century.
The current MSM, bad as it may be, is about a 1000 times BETTER at reporting the news. Some even do the job with very little (to zero sometimes) bias or manipulation.

But I'm not referring to talk radio, which is about 99% bias and BS, and about all Republican propoganda.
The MSM is corporate. They have ONE very obvious objective. PROFIT.

The ONLY news networks that are overtly biased are on the Right!

Undoubtedly the historical component of this is true. Names like Benjamin Franklin Bache and Amos Kendall come to mind.

But the last statement is unambiguously wrong. I have seen multiple articles on CNN today that met the following criteria:
- they were not labelled as opinion
- they called the results of the election "shameful" because it wasn't a Democratic landslide

If that's not overt bias I don't know what is.

Honestly, in 2020, if you can’t tell the difference between opinion and news, you’re looking to be upset.

If I stumble on the Fox News website I can tell their opinion from news articles.

Anything Uofa agrees with is a News article, and anything he disagrees with is an opinion.

Posted by Uofa2 on 11/6/2020 12:33:00 AM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 11/5/2020 6:51:00 PM (view original):

Posted by laramiebob on 11/5/2020 7:36:00 AM (view original):
Folks ripping on the modern era MSM have quite obviously NEVER examined a historical newspaper of the 19th century.
The current MSM, bad as it may be, is about a 1000 times BETTER at reporting the news. Some even do the job with very little (to zero sometimes) bias or manipulation.

But I'm not referring to talk radio, which is about 99% bias and BS, and about all Republican propoganda.
The MSM is corporate. They have ONE very obvious objective. PROFIT.

The ONLY news networks that are overtly biased are on the Right!

Undoubtedly the historical component of this is true. Names like Benjamin Franklin Bache and Amos Kendall come to mind.

But the last statement is unambiguously wrong. I have seen multiple articles on CNN today that met the following criteria:
- they were not labelled as opinion
- they called the results of the election "shameful" because it wasn't a Democratic landslide

If that's not overt bias I don't know what is.

Honestly, in 2020, if you can’t tell the difference between opinion and news, you’re looking to be upset.

If I stumble on the Fox News website I can tell their opinion from news articles.

In fairness, most Americans are really, really dumb, so I can't put anything past them.

this is you thinking you're smart

not them being dumb

i god woodrow

Another interesting tidbit: after the 2016 election, for a time some Democrats were calling for states to adopt ranked-choice voting. It would have allowed Hillary to win in 2016.

If there had been ranked-choice voting in 2020 Trump would almost certainly be re-elected. He'd almost certainly be leading in PA, leading comfortably in Georgia, Arizona, and North Carolina, and he would probably have won Wisconsin.

Another way of looking at the same idea: if the Greens had been in the ballot in the battleground states again this year Trump would probably have had similar results as he did in 2016. Given the razor-thin margins it's hard to imagine that Trump wouldn't have won at least Pennsylvania, Georgia, and Arizona with a Green candidate on the ballot. This was initially an intentional decision, although Howie tried to get on the ballot in some states at the last minute.