conserveguy877
Gold Member
- Nov 25, 2015
- 6,130
- 2,148
- 290
Who still buys USA today newspapers?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
that the polls find are based on massive lying by the Left.
A real discussion of the issue might let the Truth on the issues get out.
USA Today's editorial board is unfit for providing news.
This isn't news. It's an editorial. By the editorial board. In the editorial section of the paper.
What the editorial board of a newspaper prints as opinion will pretty much tell you what their bias is going to be with the news as well. Just saying...
USA Today is a conservative newspaper with a huge circulation
They have never before endorsed a candidate for President. This time, they thought he danger so severe, they had to declare Trump unqualified
Who still buys USA today newspapers?
We have five living presidents, 3 Democrats and 2 Republicans and they are all going to vote for Hillary. Trump supporters may dismissed this because these people are the establishment. However, the other side of the coin is they spent 28 years in the Oval Office. They know better than anyone just how difficult the job is and the kind skills, temperament, and character needed and they are all saying no to Trump. Now this is only 5 presidents, but IMHO, none of last 10 presidents would vote for Trump.blackhawk, post: 15417719Should I show you one from the same years when McCain and Romney got dozens of the newspaper endorsements the ones you guys suddenly find so relevant now but didn't then and how those elections turned out?
Big difference now. It's Conservative newspapers declaring the Republican nominee unfit and dangerous. Retired Republican Senator from Virginia John Warner endorsed Clinton at a campaign rally with Kaine. That's huge. Not one endorsement is one nail in the coffin for Trump, but lots of conservative nails are really adding up.
And yet they still endorse Hilliary...
There was no endorsement of Clinton.
It was an editorial outlining why they believe Trump is unfit to be president.
And yet they still endorse Hilliary...
There was no endorsement of Clinton.
It was an editorial outlining why they believe Trump is unfit to be president.
I shit you not, I could have sworn I typed "And yet they still didn't endorse Hilliary." That's fucking embarrassing because that stood out to me when I read the article...
A political endorsement is nothing more than a statement of support. It's value depends on what that support might be. Sometimes it is nothing but a statement. In other cases, that support will take the form of campaign contributions, phone banks, and active campaigning. Newspapers usually run their recommendations the week before the election which serves as a guide for the voters who have little interest in the race but want to vote. Also the endorsement of a newspaper will often result in editorials favorable to the candidate.And yet they still endorse Hilliary...
There was no endorsement of Clinton.
It was an editorial outlining why they believe Trump is unfit to be president.
I shit you not, I could have sworn I typed "And yet they still didn't endorse Hilliary." That's fucking embarrassing because that stood out to me when I read the article...
What is an endorsement?
Is stating that one candidate is way more awful than the other an endorsement of the other?
Is saying as an elected official that they'll vote for him but not officially endorse him still an endorsement?
They didn't extol the virtues of Clinton or implore people to give her their vote.
They have been running anti-Trump editorials because Trump has been acting erratically for over a year. That is not favoritism, that is realityUSA Today's editorial board is unfit for providing news.
This isn't news. It's an editorial. By the editorial board. In the editorial section of the paper.
Editorial boards traditionally pick one candidate over the other
But to declare a major candidate for president "unfit for office" is unprecidented
USA Today has been running anti Trump editorials for the better part of a year. This latest one simply demonstrates that they are getting frantic because nobody seems to paying any attention to them.
Of those two options, the latter would be easier.I honestly don't know how to respond here. I realize there is nothing I can say. You see absolutes, I don't. You see one candidate as defensible and the other as tearing the nation apart, I don't care for either candidate. This is an asymmetrical conversation. Maybe you should be having this conversation with a left wing partisan ideologue who will respond with their own attacks and absolutes.I see the difference within the context of your point, I just don't agree.Okie dokie!
.
Do you see the difference between targeting players and targeting the population?
.
How so?
.
You are aware of why I believe one candidate is tearing this nation apart.
You could explain why you disagree with my analysis on that, OR what about Trump there is that balances out that negative of Hillary's.
They stuck with their policy of not endorsing Hillary but felt Trumps character and experience was bad enough to encourage voters NOT to vote for himUSA Today is a conservative newspaper with a huge circulation
They have never before endorsed a candidate for President. This time, they thought he danger so severe, they had to declare Trump unqualified
USA Today is NOT a conservative newspaper. And, as far as I know, they did NOT endorse Hillary.
Very trueAs bad and embarrassing as Trump's persona is, there is far more to it than that me.
Trump has a crude, even vulgar public persona.
That is hardly crazy.
Hillary is seriously running on painting half the nation as crazy Nazis.
That is crazy.
If you give a damn about this nation.
I think he lacks the temperament, intellectual elasticity and overall capacity for the position.
Hillary? Yeah, that's one truly lousy candidate right there. And even though I lean a bit to the left, I would most likely have voted for a sane, intelligent, rational GOP ticket like Kasich/Rubio.
But I'm told my vote is needed.
.
The funny part is that Hillary was eminently beatable in 2016. Everything was in the Republicans favor.....then they selected Trump
Well before Trump was selected you started a thread claiming that the Next Republican candidate has not been born.
You made a strong case.
Now you are saying it is Trump's fault.
Do you even realize that that proves you are lying?
And the slim window Republicans had to win the Presidency in 2016 was blown when they selected Trump
Trumps destruction of the women's vote, Hispanics and minorities will blow Republican chances to take back the White House for decades