They lumped positive and neutral together.
The 40% figure you mention is only 40% of Personal qualities and Issues & Ideology, which is only 18% of the total coverage:
That’s what I was talking about - how his stances are portrayed…
Right, that’s only 18% of the coverage.
Edit:
They’re printing positive voter feedback, how does that not count?
Dude, we’re here having an issues/ideology discussion here and I just wrote up a long post displaying how they misrepresent what he says especially his positions…
Sure it counts, but it’s it’s interesting how it’s not members of the MSM saying positive stuff about him.
Really? I thought we were discussing this:
This has now been proven false.
Also, they don’t misrepresent his positions. They generally appear to be portraying his positions negatively except when directly quoting supporters.
Those are two different things.
The study says, “Moreover, not everything that was said about Trump’s personal characteristics and issue positions was negative in tone. Over 40 percent of it was positive in tone, often in the form of statements by voters who agreed with his policy positions or liked his personal style.”
It does not say the entire 40% comes from statements by voters. It simply says often.
What exactly are you arguing, that the MSM coverage should be positive?
Look how positive Bush’s coverage was:
Clinton was treated way worse:
<img src=“//cdck-file-uploads-global.s3.dualstack.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/tnation/uploads/default/original/3X/3/a/3a55280abe0a9455af67123d3bcaaa99f80aa152.png” width=“563” height=“500”
I’m not really sure what you expect here?
Yes, but members of the media are 70% democrat so what do you expect? A slant against GoP nominees or politicians isn’t new by any stretch. Trump is just the latest in line.
[quote=“anon50325502, post:3195, topic:212571, full:true”]
Also, they don’t misrepresent his positions. They generally appear to be portraying his positions negatively except when directly quoting supporters.
Those are two different things. [/quote]
They don’t misrepresent his positions? Did you read what I wrote above about how practically all major news outlets completely lied about his statements on illegal Mexicans?? His plan to build a wall and deport illegals is the cornerstone of his campaign! There are more examples of this.
[quote=“anon50325502, post:3195, topic:212571, full:true”]
It does not say the entire 40% comes from statements by voters. It simply says often. [/quote]
It doesn’t have to be every single circumstance for my statements to be true. Stop it. Often and also 60% negative statements usually said by members of the MSM.
It goes back to my original point that anything written or reported about Trump should be seen with great skepticism as there’s a realistic chance it’s been misreported.
No, they didn’t misrepresent his statements on Mexicans. He branded them rapists - and his mushy qualifier doesn’t rescue him.
No reader of Trump’s statements or the media pieces talking about them believe that Trump literally meant 100% of all Mexicans were rapists, no exceptions. The media pieces assume the reader to be reasonable here, and They accurately reported what Trump said.
This fatuous argument Trumpkins are trying with this - “he didn’t say all!!!” - is just excuse making smokescreen for the nation’s worst candidate of the modern era.
Trump is a national embarrassment not fit for the office - just own it.
1 Like
Every GOP nominee gets dragged through shit by the MSM, and no, it’s not different or worse this time. If Scott Walker had won the nomination there would be protests, riots, and shit flinging at his events too. The media would spin everything and it’s not new.
Instead of trying to combat this, which we all knew would only get worse after the primary, Trump bitches. For all that tough guy stuff he talks all the man does is whine.
1 Like
Jesus, don’t make me defend Trump. But this statement, in this day and age? Really?
Like for reals??
You know you’re winning the argument when the other side is vehemently defending corrupt organizations like the MSM and gets offended when you insult crooked Hillary.
Dude, you really need to kinda stop at this point. You are bringing a stick to a gunfight with USMCCDS. You are not “winning” any argument on this thread…the vast majority of your statements were immediately debunked.
For real, seriously.
Then can we agree that things reported on about Trump by the MSM especially when it comes to his positions will often be misrepresented just as previous GOP candidates?
Yeah, for reals. When the media writes “Trump said this about Mexicans,” the media assumes the reader is smart enough to realize the exacting qualifier of “to be clear, Trump doesn’t actually believe that every Mexican everywhere is a rapist and didn’t say that” isn’t necessary - what Trump said and the point he was trying to make was accurately reported.
That assumption is fair, was fine, and everyone understands that except Trumpkins, who are trying to change the subject in an effort to play defense on his idiotic comments.
Omar Mateen’s wife has vanished.
There’s something going on…
For example, if I said “New Yorkers are stupid idiots…some are ok”, does any reasonable human think I actually mean that it’s a small subset of New Yorkers are stupid idiots, and that the vast majority are fine?
Of course not.
And there’s nothing partisan or “liberal” to hold people to the words they actually use.
Since he was talking about illegals, this example is dumb.
New York criminals are stupid idiots…some are ok
No, it isn’t, because his generalization of that group is just as stupid and inaccurate.
By the way, having been refuted so much and so often (USMC here, your claim in the other thread about Ryan doing nothing against Obama but failing to recognize the House sued the President) - does it dawn on you to maybe realize you don’t know half of what you pretend to and therefore should observe the first rule of holes?
Or is it full steam ahead?
1 Like
[quote=“thunderbolt23, post:3209, topic:212571, full:true”]
No, it isn’t, because his generalization of that group is just as stupid and inaccurate.[/quote]
There was an article posted earlier in this thread where it was reported that 80% of women crossing illegally into America are raped along the way. Who do you think is raping them?
Furthermore the border guards endorsed Trump, the first political candidate they’ve ever addressed in their history. They are in agreement with Trumps statements on illegals.
I’m on a board where practically every regular poster is anti-Trump.
Take your posts to a pro-Trump board, I’m sure you’ll come off sparkling.