- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Graph shows who REALLY tried to influence the election
Posted on 12/30/16 at 7:28 am to Frank Black
Posted on 12/30/16 at 7:28 am to Frank Black
I would like to see the percentages regarding Hillary's coverage to be able to see whether this is really proof of bias. I'm not saying it doesn't exist, but without some context this doesn't really prove much.
Is that in the story referenced by the OP?
In other words, post-election all of a sudden we saw editorials about what a crappy candidate she was. Were there stories we somehow missed that told us how crappy she was? If not, then you have your bias proven when compared to coverage of Trump.
No candidate is all bad and no candidate is all good, though Romney was close. That guy was like a damned Eagle Scout, yet he was stilled skewered in the press.
Is that in the story referenced by the OP?
In other words, post-election all of a sudden we saw editorials about what a crappy candidate she was. Were there stories we somehow missed that told us how crappy she was? If not, then you have your bias proven when compared to coverage of Trump.
No candidate is all bad and no candidate is all good, though Romney was close. That guy was like a damned Eagle Scout, yet he was stilled skewered in the press.
0
Page 1 of 1
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News