• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Anti-Trump CNN propaganda has become nauseating

Desert Storm

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 8, 2015
Messages
4,767
Reaction score
1,493
Location
Toronto & Amsterdam, Holland
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
I can't take it anymore CNN. Enough is enough!!

Can this channel not wake up to the fact they are 95% anti-Trump, masquerading as a legit news channel???!!!

At least be honest and say you dont like Trump........DUH!!
 
I can't take it anymore CNN. Enough is enough!!

Can this channel not wake up to the fact they are 95% anti-Trump, masquerading as a legit news channel???!!!

At least be honest and say you dont like Trump........DUH!!


you couldnt figure out that this would happen after the way the right wing treated Obama? you are kidding right?
 
you couldnt figure out that this would happen after the way the right wing treated Obama? you are kidding right?
I never said that.

But the Left's whining has become so much worse than what the Righties ever put out, its not even comparable!!
 
I can't take it anymore CNN. Enough is enough!!

Can this channel not wake up to the fact they are 95% anti-Trump, masquerading as a legit news channel???!!!

At least be honest and say you dont like Trump........DUH!!

CNN is rightly called fake news for exactly what you are drawing attention to.

I never said that.

But the Left's whining has become so much worse than what the Righties ever put out, its not even comparable!!

Agreed. Besides, how much main stream media which was 'right' really is there? Not much.

Just so much more political propaganda from the leftist 'news' media.
 
I never said that.

But the Left's whining has become so much worse than what the Righties ever put out, its not even comparable!!


I never said you said it it's just so freaking obvious that's all. And yes if you don't think the crap against Obama was comprable to what's being dumped on Trump now you're just aren't being honest
 
Yeah, one among the other 4 anti-Trump panel.

Come on now :mrgreen:
There is no channel control where you watch? Turn on FOX and get with the 'like minded' crowd!
 
And yes if you don't think the crap against Obama was comprable to what's being dumped on Trump now you're just aren't being honest
I never said that, and I will agree with you that some of the Obama stuff piled upon him was much, MUCH worse!!

Happy now??!!
 
I never said you said it it's just so freaking obvious that's all. And yes if you don't think the crap against Obama was comprable to what's being dumped on Trump now you're just aren't being honest

Except that CNN alone has dumped more crap on Trump since he won the election than Obama got his entire presidency. It's not even close to comparable.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Cite one article that was neutral towards Trump.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

that depends on your definition of neutrality.

If neutrality means ignoring the obvious acts committed by trump, than you want journalists to not question trump at all.
 
I can't take it anymore CNN. Enough is enough!!

Can this channel not wake up to the fact they are 95% anti-Trump, masquerading as a legit news channel???!!!

At least be honest and say you dont like Trump........DUH!!

What exactly are you referring to here? Anything specific?
 
that depends on your definition of neutrality.

If neutrality means ignoring the obvious acts committed by trump, than you want journalists to not question trump at all.

My definition of neutral is not making **** up and calling it facts.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Except that CNN alone has dumped more crap on Trump since he won the election than Obama got his entire presidency. It's not even close to comparable.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


bull pucky
 
I never said you said it it's just so freaking obvious that's all. And yes if you don't think the crap against Obama was comprable to what's being dumped on Trump now you're just aren't being honest

No, I think it is you who's being dishonest.

Have you already forgotten 'tingly up my leg' and all the rest of the softball treatment Obama received?

Compare that to the excoriation and accusations, anonymous sources (i.e. unsubstantiated) innuendo and damage Trump has received from the press.

Harvard Study: Media Coverage of Trump’s First 100 Days Sets 'New Standard' In Negativity
Lauretta Brown, Posted: May 19, 2017
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/laure...andard-compared-to-past-3-presidents-n2329249

It’s no secret that the media are not President Trump’s loudest cheering section, but a new study released Thursday by Harvard Kennedy School’s Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy lends a certain amount of credence to President Trump’s recent claim that “No politician in history” has been “treated worse or more unfairly” by the media.

The report, based on an analysis of “news reports in the print editions of The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post, the main newscasts of CBS, CNN, Fox News, and NBC, and three European news outlets (The UK’s Financial Times and BBC, and Germany’s ARD),” found that media coverage of Trump’s first 100 days “set a new standard for negativity” at 80 percent negative coverage.

Clinton received 60 percent negative coverage during his first 100 days, George W. Bush had 57 percent negative coverage, and Obama had just 41 percent negative coverage.

“Trump’s coverage was unsparing,” the report found. “In no week did the coverage drop below 70 percent negative and it reached 90 percent negative at its peak.”

The period when Trump received his most positive coverage was week 12 of his presidency, when he ordered a missile strike on a Syrian airbase in response to the Assad regime’s use of chemical weapons on civilians. He had 70 percent negative coverage in that week and 30 percent positive.
The high level of negativity comes in unison from six outlets that Trump has called out in the past for frequent attacks.

“CNN and NBC’s coverage was the most unrelenting—negative stories about Trump outpaced positive ones by 13-to-1 on the two networks,” the study found. “Trump’s coverage on CBS also exceeded the 90 percent mark. Trump’s coverage exceeded the 80 percent level in The New York Times (87 percent negative) and The Washington Post (83 percent negative). The Wall Street Journal came in below that level (70 percent negative).”

“Fox was the only outlet where Trump’s overall coverage nearly crept into positive territory—52 percent of Fox’s reports with a clear tone were negative, while 48 percent were positive. Fox’s coverage was 34 percentage points less negative than the average for the other six outlets.”

Show me where Obama received this level of hate from the media. Please.
You memory is seriously faulty.

Also interesting to note that Fox News was the most fair and balanced.
 
My definition of neutral is not making **** up and calling it facts.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The Russian investigation is based on facts.

The facts are that the DNC was hacked in 2016, by Russian hackers, in a attempt to influence the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. There are also multiple people within Trumps inner circle, who have been in contact with the Russians: general Michael Flynn was one of these people.


Why is investigating this such a sore issue ?
 
The Russian investigation is based on facts.

The facts are that the DNC was hacked in 2016, by Russian hackers, in a attempt to influence the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. There are also multiple people within Trumps inner circle, who have been in contact with the Russians: general Michael Flynn was one of these people.


Why is investigating this such a sore issue ?

It's not. I have no problem with the Russian involvement of the DNC hack being investigated. Whats the problem with the Trump administration contacting Russia? Is every contact with Russia a problem? Seems to be a new standard that got set when Trump was elected.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
It's not. I have no problem with the Russian involvement of the DNC hack being investigated. Whats the problem with the Trump administration contacting Russia? Is every contact with Russia a problem? Seems to be a new standard that got set when Trump was elected.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

If trump's contact with Russia had anything to do with the hacking at the DNC, any sort of trade off or aiding the culprit, that would be collusion with a foreign government tampering with our elections and engaging is cyber espionage.

And trumps contact with Russia was before he won the election
 
If trump's contact with Russia had anything to do with the hacking at the DNC, any sort of trade off or aiding the culprit, that would be collusion with a foreign government tampering with our elections and engaging is cyber espionage.

And trumps contact with Russia was before he won the election

Any contact = collusion? What?

I still don't see the problem. The Obama administration was monitoring the Russians. That's how Flynn was leaked. If the Obama administration had heard anything that was compromising the election the Obama administration would have said so. There was nothing and they said nothing because they knew they were going to win. No way Trump could win.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Any contact = collusion? What?

I still don't see the problem. The Obama administration was monitoring the Russians. That's how Flynn was leaked. If the Obama administration had heard anything that was compromising the election the Obama administration would have said so. There was nothing and they said nothing because they knew they were going to win. No way Trump could win.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Then why does no one in the trump administration want to reveal to the public what was the reason for contacting russia.

Why hold the meetings off the record?
 
Back
Top Bottom