The Media's Portrayal of Trump and His Presidency

[B-Man]

My goodness this photo is going to trigger some people straight the hell to death.

 

 

 

 

President Trump is speaking aboard aircraft carrier USS Gerald R. Ford

 

 

Stephen Miller‏Verified account @redsteeze 8h8 hours ago

More

Stephen Miller Retweeted The Boston Globe

He should dress this way every day. Only missing a pipe.

 

Edited March 3, 2017 by B-Man

[keepthefaith]

 

Used to be, decades ago, that the State of the Union wasn't a joint address to Congress, but just a letter sent to them from the President. I actually hope that, next year, Trump just up and says "Fine, if you're going to boycott it, there's no sense in going through the whole circus. I'll just send you a report." Just to watch the left melt down over "He's not addressing Congress! It's unconstitutional! The president's required to address the joint session of Congress we're boycotting!"

 

Of course, it could also be that Waters, et al., are boycotting in hopes that someone blows up the Capitol, and they're the only ones left in government.

I'm hoping for something different. I hope he prepares a powerpoint presentation with lots of numbers, graphs and charts and presents the facts on the issues he plans to address and how. I hope that he solicits help from cabinet level members of his administration to participate in the presentation and that collectively they deliver a true state of the union presentation. And if that takes 3 hours, so be it.

[Keukasmallies]

I'm hoping for something different. I hope he prepares a powerpoint presentation with lots of numbers, graphs and charts and presents the facts on the issues he plans to address and how. I hope that he solicits help from cabinet level members of his administration to participate in the presentation and that collectively they deliver a true state of the union presentation. And if that takes 3 hours, so be it.

 

So, Congress would have to read it to know what's in it?

[B-Man]

Do the Democrats see their only hope as getting an investigation going and somehow reliving Watergate?

Prof. Ann Althouse

It's so sad, and so negative. So backward-looking and devoid of promise. But perhaps that is all they've got.

And then there's the media. The NYT and the Washington Post have a motivation to ally with the Democratic Party in its last-ditch effort to Watergatize Trump after Trump's endless criticisms of them. And this anti-Trump approach may get them a spike in readership, even as it repels some readers like me.

I'm missing the sense that I'm getting the normal news. It seems unfair and shoddy not to cover the President the way you'd cover any President. What looks like an effort to stigmatize Trump as not normal has — to my eyes — made the media abnormal.

I know some journalists argued that the normal approach shouldn't apply to covering Trump, because Trump is not normal, but that's not my idea of professionalism. Even if they were to regard professionalism in those terms — if the object of the news goes low, journalism should go low — they'd still be on the hook to continually maintain the perception that their antagonist really is low, and if they use their pages to strain to portray him as low to justify their continual debased presentation of the news, they're self-dealing and double counting.

The more seemingly normal Trump becomes — as with his speech to Congress the other day — the more the anti-Trump approach of the news media feels like a hackish alliance with the Democratic Party in its sad, negative, backward-looking effort to disrupt the President the people elected.

I would prefer for the Democratic Party to find something strong and positive to offer us in the next election and for the national media to play it straight on solid journalistic principles. Maybe they could take Trump's "great again" slogan seriously and personally. Meanwhile, we elected a President, and we deserve to see him have the opportunity to do his job. We all deserve that, whether we are in the segment of America that voted for him or not.

[B-Man]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Prickly Pete]

I just love this, and seeing Wolf made me want to share, again.

 

[richstadiumowner]

The "game changing" videos from 2016 was Hiliary's "deplorables" rant and an NRA ad that, regardless of the viewer's opinion of the Second Amendment, re-enforced the image of Hiliary as an out of touch Insider

 

Fake .

Hillary can't do stairs...

[B-Man]

Would journalists support congressional investigation of Obama surveillance of … journalists?

 

by William A. Jacobson Sunday, March 5, 2017

A good test for media bias, since Obama administration actions against journalists proven.

 

Edited March 5, 2017 by B-Man

[B-Man]

Democratic senator says they could shut down the government if Republicans stonewall on Russia investigation.

 

Let's see...............how would the media portray that shutdown..............hmmmm ?

 

[B-Man]

Huh? NPR Blames ‘White Nostalgia’ for Trump on Classic Rock

 

 

Did you know your tax dollars support articles that all but label President Donald Trump racist?

 

The writer then shares classic song lyrics from Tom Petty, Bruce Springsteen and Billy Joel that hearken back to a simpler age. In each case, it’s about nostalgia for the past, or at least the past that shares less wrinkles than the present.

 

Not to the NPR writer. It’s always about race, and equal rights and elements of the past we’ve (rightly) left behind. To liberal scribes, we cannot look back at the past with any fondness because of the cultural inequities of the era.

 

To do so makes one a racist. It’s that absurd.

 

 

 

 

 

CBS Bizarrely Claims Obama ‘Never Criticized’ Republicans ‘Personally’

 

[Prickly Pete]

Watch her face just before he is cut off. How are even the anti-Trump people not disturbed by these kind of interruptions?

 

http://<blockquote class="twitter-video" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">CNN cuts guest's feed after he mentions terror link to refugees. <br><br>JUST A COINCIDENCE. <a href="https://t.co/RyaJODi6Jj">pic.twitter.com/RyaJODi6Jj</a></p>— Paul Joseph Watson (@PrisonPlanet) <a href="

">March 7, 2017</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> Edited March 7, 2017 by HoF Watkins

[Prickly Pete]

Wow, only a complete idiot would compare slaves to immigrants.

 

 

 

Here is Obama in 2015:

Certainly, it wasn’t easy for those of African heritage who had not come here voluntarily and yet in their own way were immigrants themselves. There was discrimination and hardship and poverty. But, like you, they no doubt found inspiration in all those who had come before them. And they were able to muster faith that, here in America, they might build a better life and give their children something more.

Here is Carson:

That’s what America is about, a land of dreams and opportunity. There were other immigrants who came here in the bottom of slave ships, worked even longer, even harder for less. But they too had a dream that one day their sons, daughters, grandsons, granddaughters, great-grandsons, great-granddaughters, might pursue prosperity and happiness in this land.

[B-Man]

[boyst]

So many of the articles out have Mr Trump. That bothers me. He is President. It's as silly as using Obama's middle name when constantly discussing him. Except the media seldom did that.

[B-Man]

JAKE TAPPER AT: TRUMP REQUIRES MORE FACT CHECKING THAN OBAMA DID.

Translation into plain English: Now that there’s a Republican in the White House, we don’t have someone to act as a blocking back for, and invite kids on air to sing his praises and ask for socialized medicine.

[Logic]

 

JAKE TAPPER AT: TRUMP REQUIRES MORE FACT CHECKING THAN OBAMA DID.

Translation into plain English: Now that there’s a Republican in the White House, we don’t have someone to act as a blocking back for, and invite kids on air to sing his praises and ask for socialized medicine.

 

 

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/

 

According to Pulitzer Prize winning Politifact, which fact checks statements made by presidents...Donald Trump lies 50% of the time ("False" and "Pants on fire" statementst). If you throw in "mostly false" statements, Trump jumps to a whopping 70%. 70% of his statements are lies !!!

 

For comparison's sake, Barack Obama lies 14% of the time, or 26% if you throw in "mostly false" statements.

 

There's a stark difference there. So Tapper sounds just exactly correct: Trump requires a lot more fact checking, because he lies at a much greater rate than Obama. Not opinion, statistical fact.

 

 

[boyst]

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/

 

According to Pulitzer Prize winning Politifact, which fact checks statements made by presidents...Donald Trump lies 50% of the time ("False" and "Pants on fire" statementst). If you throw in "mostly false" statements, Trump jumps to a whopping 70%. 70% of his statements are lies !!!

 

For comparison's sake, Barack Obama lies 14% of the time, or 26% if you throw in "mostly false" statements.

 

There's a stark difference there. So Tapper sounds just exactly correct: Trump requires a lot more fact checking, because he lies at a much greater rate than Obama. Not opinion, statistical fact.

 

 

so when you simply check the facts you're more likely to find they're false. simple as that.

[Logic]

so when you simply check the facts you're more likely to find they're false. simple as that.

Is that really what you took from that?

 

70% vs 26%. My point in posting it was to suggest that yes, Tapper has a point. You have to fact check Trump more because he (demonstrably, statistically) lies more often. Simple as that.

[Rob's House]

Jake Tapeworm's just lucky the Obama administration ended before he choked on Obama's rooster.

Edited March 12, 2017 by Rob's House

[boyst]

Is that really what you took from that?

 

70% vs 26%. My point in posting it was to suggest that yes, Tapper has a point. You have to fact check Trump more because he (demonstrably, statistically) lies more often. Simple as that.

I read 62% of your post then read 33% of mein Kampf. Then read 67.1% of statistics are not right.

[grinreaper]

Is that really what you took from that?

 

70% vs 26%. My point in posting it was to suggest that yes, Tapper has a point. You have to fact check Trump more because he (demonstrably, statistically) lies more often. Simple as that.

So, Obama was fact checked less?

[DC Tom]

So, Obama was fact checked less?

 

You know who else was fact-checked less than Trump?

[Keukasmallies]

Has the MSM gotten over the fact that it fully backed Hill'ry for two contentious years, ordered the gowns and fireworks, then got face planted on Election Day? I think not, and for that we'll all pay dearly in terms of ever more bias and slanted approaches to the happenings in our country and the rest of the world. Thus bolstering the concept that revenge can be a true B word.

[ALF]

The over the top free coverage of Trump by MSM helped to get him elected imo

[B-Man]

NATE SILVER: You Know, There Really Was A Liberal Media Bubble.

 

FTA:

 

So did journalists in Washington and London make the apocryphal Pauline Kael mistake, refusing to believe that Trump or Brexit could win because nobody they knew was voting for them? That’s not quite what Trende was arguing.

 

Instead, it’s that political experts4 aren’t a very diverse group and tend to place a lot of faith in the opinions of other experts and other members of the political establishment.

 

Once a consensus view is established, it tends to reinforce itself until and unless there’s very compelling evidence for the contrary position. Social media, especially Twitter, can amplify the groupthink further. It can be an echo chamber.

 

 

Can be, and is.

 

 

ADDED:

 

L.A. TIMES WONDERS: Why Don’t Voters Hate Trump As Much As We Do?

 

Edited March 12, 2017 by B-Man

[Nanker]

It's the same with the Progressive's religion - Climate Fraud. They're actually a lot like ISIS. Non believers either convert or they will be slaughtered.

[DC Tom]

 

ADDED:

 

L.A. TIMES WONDERS: Why Don’t Voters Hate Trump As Much As We Do?

 

 

For once, the hacks at PJMedia understates the screwiness of an article they're bitching about. The article does a decent job sketching the decline of the LA region since 1969, then concludes that the problem of voter turnout can only be solved by reminding LA county voters that Trump is president. But someday, relatively soon, Trump won't be president. And LA will have the same structural problems. What then?

[Beef Jerky]

So, Obama was fact checked less?

I doubt Obama was fact checked less, I just think less people gave a ****.

Edited March 12, 2017 by Beef Jerky

[/dev/null]

Has the MSM gotten over the fact that it fully backed Hill'ry for two contentious years, ordered the gowns and fireworks, then got face planted on Election Day? I think not, and for that we'll all pay dearly in terms of ever more bias and slanted approaches to the happenings in our country and the rest of the world. Thus bolstering the concept that revenge can be a true B word.

I recall on Election night a few members of the MSM had that same weren't we supposed to win look on their face that Randy Moss had at the end of Super Bowl XLII.

[PastaJoe]

I doubt Obama was fact checked less, I just think less people gave a ****.

True, he didn't destroy his credibility every week by making crazy tweets that required push back with facts.

[Meathead]

Watch her face just before he is cut off. How are even the anti-Trump people not disturbed by these kind of interruptions?

 

http://<blockquote class="twitter-video" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">CNN cuts guest's feed after he mentions terror link to refugees. <br><br>JUST A COINCIDENCE. <a href="https://t.co/RyaJODi6Jj">pic.twitter.com/RyaJODi6Jj</a></p>— Paul Joseph Watson (@PrisonPlanet) <a href="

">March 7, 2017</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

i was looking forward to this but the link is bad

 

ive hated the way cable media debates for a long time. fox news made shouting matches popular and that went on for a long time. now we appear to be trying the lets take turns talking approach, but we do have far too many ppl just being cut off bc the host assumes they know when to let someone finish or not

 

weve surrender to the click media where truth and real debate doesnt matter anymore. its all about the clicks

[IDBillzFan]

True, he didn't destroy his credibility every week by making crazy tweets that required push back with facts.

 

That might be because you could fit all of Obama's credibility in a thimble.

[Nanker]

Here's a little chestnut from the previous campaign on how Mitt was portrayed by the MSM.

[B-Man]

ANDREW MALCOLM: Trump is doing what Obama didn’t do.

 

 

Trump has been meeting all along with congressional leaders. Now, he’s had, of all people, Sen. Lindsay Graham of South Carolina over for lunch. Then, Mr. and Mrs. Marco Rubio and Mr. and Mrs. Ted Cruz came for separate social dinners. Social is what Washington calls meal-time lobbying, and what no one expected last year during the primary campaign when Trump mocked those men.

 

The other evening the Trump White House had key committee members in for drinks and social bowling. The president will be working that Oval Office phone to Capitol Hill, as he has to many foreign leaders since Jan. 20.

 

Trump prefers that personal touch, as he did in his real-estate dealing days, the opposite of aloof. Both he and Mike Pence are holding a series of “listening sessions” with leaders from education, small business, big business, community banks and so forth.

 

Somehow, recent encouraging economic news and the administration’s legislative agenda always come up, starting with Obamacare’s repeal and replacement, then tax reform. And most sessions end with POTUS inviting attendees into the Oval Office for a once-rare, much-coveted photo in that fabled place.

 

Such focused attention by a president tends to increase support and mute disagreement, while fueling positive word of mouth about him and his plans, almost like an investment in a long-term real estate deal.

 

 

 

 

Anybody who’s been in business for almost any length of time understands that they don’t know everything — or they don’t stay in business.

 

That aside, you might be having some difficulty reconciling this report of Trump reaching out and listening to the people’s elected representatives — and even to elected foreign leaders — with all that talk about Trump being a Putin-loving autocrat.

[grinreaper]

I doubt Obama was fact checked less, I just think less people gave a ****.

Try Post#96 of this thread:

 

Posted 11 March 2017 - 09:01 PM

B-Man, on 11 Mar 2017 - 8:40 PM, said:

 

JAKE TAPPER AT: TRUMP REQUIRES MORE FACT CHECKING THAN OBAMA DID.

Translation into plain English: Now that there’s a Republican in the White House, we don’t have someone to act as a blocking back for, and invite kids on air to sing his praises and ask for socialized medicine.

 

http://www.politifac...s/donald-trump/

 

According to Pulitzer Prize winning Politifact, which fact checks statements made by presidents...Donald Trump lies 50% of the time ("False" and "Pants on fire" statementst). If you throw in "mostly false" statements, Trump jumps to a whopping 70%. 70% of his statements are lies !!!

 

For comparison's sake, Barack Obama lies 14% of the time, or 26% if you throw in "mostly false" statements.

 

There's a stark difference there. So Tapper sounds just exactly correct: Trump requires a lot more fact checking, because he lies at a much greater rate than Obama. Not opinion, statistical fact.

[Hank II]

Try Post#96 of this thread:

 

Posted 11 March 2017 - 09:01 PM

 

B-Man, on 11 Mar 2017 - 8:40 PM, said:

 

http://www.politifac...s/donald-trump/

According to Pulitzer Prize winning Politifact, which fact checks statements made by presidents...Donald Trump lies 50% of the time ("False" and "Pants on fire" statementst). If you throw in "mostly false" statements, Trump jumps to a whopping 70%. 70% of his statements are lies !!!

For comparison's sake, Barack Obama lies 14% of the time, or 26% if you throw in "mostly false" statements.

There's a stark difference there. So Tapper sounds just exactly correct: Trump requires a lot more fact checking, because he lies at a much greater rate than Obama. Not opinion, statistical fact.

 

So?

[IDBillzFan]

Pulitzer Prize-winning Politifact sounds an awful lot like saying Nobel Peace Prize recipient Barack Obama.

[grinreaper]

So?

It was in response to Beef Jerkys post #108 in this thread and my post #101 where I quoted "logic". "logic" said "Trump requires a lot more fact checking, because he lies at a much greater rate than Obama. Not opinion, statistical fact."

[Deranged Rhino]

This cracked me up:

The Daily White House briefing - http://i.imgur.com/ssVVWy1.gifv

 

Reference: http://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2017/03/10/interview-interrupted-children-newday.cnn

[meazza]

This cracked me up:

The Daily White House briefing - http://i.imgur.com/ssVVWy1.gifv

 

Reference: http://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2017/03/10/interview-interrupted-children-newday.cnn