Quote:
Originally posted by slw84
I just get a kick out of the fact that media is working in overtime to PR clinton who should have no problem being 30/40 points ahead of the likes of Trump had it been any other candidate with a good track record.
It's a kii for me to see how close it's gotten because both candidates are truly the pits
|
What an inane thing to say.
The media spent months on Clinton's e-mails, and the moment something relevant came up they jumped for the chance to relive that time. They are so easily goaded into going on the attack.
I think you're confusing what reporting facts really is. If it seems that Trump gets negative coverage it's because he can't go a day without saying something stupid. This focus makes Hillary look better in comparison, but it doesn't mean they're covering Hillary properly. If they were, they'd highlight the policies.
I also find it pretty ridiculous that you think any other candidate would be ahead. Trump beat 16 other Republican runners for a reason, and people still support him because modern America is incredibly partisan. If Bernie won, the excuse would be that he's a socialist Jew for example.
I also find equally laughable that you think favorables is an objective quantifier for the actual quality of the candidates themselves. It's no secret that Hillary has a lot of baggage that appears to make her look bad, but when closely examined carries absolutely nothing, except most don't bother to look into it.
