Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
New York Post is not New York Daily News. NY Post is owned by a man worth $10 billion while New York Daily News is owned by a man worth $3 billion. They are different plutocratic rags.
Okay, I guess it's time to sign off for the night. Sorry, I read the post incorrectly. I'll live with it instead of deleting my comment.
In any case, the media does not promote Hillary any more than Bernie. If you feel this is a "rag" then why does it matter? As the links I posted prove, both candidates are attacked by a variety of columnists and bloggers. All they're trying to do is increase circulation. In fact, there are many more negative articles in the New York Post against Hillary. Does it matter which rag it is?
Okay, so I haven't signed off yet. I just took a break. I thought of something I heard on TV a couple of days ago. In response to all the complaints about Bernie getting negative press in New York, a few days before the Wisconsin primary, the largest newspaper in Wisconsin told people not to vote for Hillary Clinton in [URL="http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/clintons-absymal-record-on-open-government-b99696012z1-374014501.html"]an editorial[/URL]. Don't tell me that had no effect on the margin tonight.
I guess it's a waste of time arguing about this, since Hillary Clinton has gotten so much negative press, but I only hear complaints about unfairness when an article isn't kind to Bernie Sanders.
Well, my oven just beeped, so it's time to bake some muffins.
Okay, so I haven't signed off yet. I just took a break. I thought of something I heard on TV a couple of days ago. In response to all the complaints about Bernie getting negative press in New York, a few days before the Wisconsin primary, the largest newspaper in Wisconsin told people not to vote for Hillary Clinton in an editorial. Don't tell me that had no effect on the margin tonight.
I guess it's a waste of time arguing about this, since Hillary Clinton has gotten so much negative press, but I only hear complaints about unfairness when an article isn't kind to Bernie Sanders.
Well, my oven just beeped, so it's time to bake some muffins.
Get out of here with that garbage. Hillary has been declared the winner before the primaries even began........ BTW tonight just before Sanders' victory speech they were slamming him on MSNBC and included showing the super delegates in the totals despite the DNC "recommending" the super delegates (bribed delegates BTW) should not be added to the count. Still after all that Sanders has taken the 7 out of the last 8. The revolution will not televised!!!!!!
Now my muffins are cooling off, so I'll post again. I must be have been watching an entirely different MSNBC. All I heard about was how exceptional Bernie's campaign has been. Just because FACTS are shown (i.e., the real numbers) doesn't mean they were "slamming" Bernie. I heard them say this could be an interesting race right up until June.
I also saw Tad Devine explain on MSNBC the other night that Bernie is the winner in reality, but they didn't really try to win hard enough and that, had Bernie attacked Hillary more last year, he'd be far ahead in the race. In fact, he said the states in which Clinton was victorious were all states in which Sanders didn't compete. (I guess spending more time in a state and twice the money doesn't count as competitive!) Those are almost his exact words. I can post a link if you wish.
What was that about "garbage?"
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I just took a break. I thought of something I heard on TV a couple of days ago. In response to all the complaints about Bernie getting negative press in New York, a few days before the Wisconsin primary, the largest newspaper in Wisconsin told people not to vote for Hillary Clinton in [URL="http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/clintons-absymal-record-on-open-government-b99696012z1-374014501.html"]an editorial[/URL]. Don't tell me that had no effect on the margin tonight.
I must be have been watching an entirely different MSNBC. All I heard about was how exceptional Bernie's campaign has been. Just because FACTS are shown (i.e., the real numbers) doesn't mean they were "slamming" Bernie. I heard them say this could be an interesting race right up until June. 
