Why Obama may win...

[healthmyths]

Google searches prove the MSM Fawns and favors Obama...

"poor economy under Bush" had 4,830 citations.
"poor economy under Obama" had 3,110 citations.
Yet Bush worse unemployment was 6% in 2003,
Versus Obama Unemployment highest rate 10.1%

"Obama's economic policy is better" 1,010
"Bush's economic policy is better" 3

"Obama's foreign policy better" 3,440
"Bush's foreign policy better" 1,520

Media favors democrats.. 7,620
Poll 2 to voters say Media favors Democrats

Harvard study found:
Just like so many reports before it, a joint survey by the Project for Excellence in Journalism and Harvard's Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy — hardly a bastion of conservative orthodoxy — found that in covering the current presidential race,
the media are sympathetic to Democrats and hostile to Republicans.
Democrats are not only favored in the tone of the coverage.
They get more coverage period.
This is particularly evident on morning news shows,
which "produced almost twice as many stories (51% to 27%) focused on Democratic candidates than on Republicans."
The most flagrant bias, however, was found in newspapers. In reviewing front-page coverage in 11 newspapers, the study found the tone positive in nearly six times as many stories about Democrats as it was negative.

Media favors democrats according to Harvard study | Clipmarks

But for SHEAR lavishing loving gushes.. who can forget the
EDITOR of NewsWeek Evan Thomas when asked:

" Well, our job is to bash the president, that's what we do." --
Evan Thomas responding to a question on whether the media's unfair to Bush on the TV talk show Inside Washington, February 2, 2007.
Newsweek's Evan Thomas: 'Our Job Is To Bash the President' | NewsBusters.org

BUT when it comes to HIS MAN..his God???...
to his gushingly, tingle up leg statement from same
NewsWeek Editor Evan Thomas..
" I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country,
above – above the world, he’s sort of God." –

 

[healthmyths]

One further point..
Those of you that voted for Obama because he was the first black President.. consider how your vote is based on your opinions that are FORMED by information you receive.
Where that information comes from is SLANTED by the majority of sources favoring Obama!
But consider the facts.
1) Worst economy in years.. 2) Iran ..3) Russia all lining up against the USA.
and Obama seemingly intent on class warfare and destruction of our economy.
BUT do you hear that from the MSM???

 

[occupied]

You can't have a positive tone to a news story about republicans if they are always negative. When is the last time you heard a republican with a positive outlook? No they are almost uniformly predicting dire consequences and acting as if the sky is falling. The debt is crushing us, the Mexicans are crushing us, taxes are crushing us, everything I don't like is crushing us, you get the picture.

 

[Truthmatters]

You guys screwed the pooch while you had power.
Its your fault the economy is so bad.

EVERYONE knows it

 

[Jackson]

Google searches prove the MSM Fawns and favors Obama...

"poor economy under Bush" had 4,830 citations.
"poor economy under Obama" had 3,110 citations.
Yet Bush worse unemployment was 6% in 2003,
Versus Obama Unemployment highest rate 10.1%

"Obama's economic policy is better" 1,010
"Bush's economic policy is better" 3

"Obama's foreign policy better" 3,440
"Bush's foreign policy better" 1,520

Media favors democrats.. 7,620
Poll 2 to voters say Media favors Democrats

Harvard study found:
Just like so many reports before it, a joint survey by the Project for Excellence in Journalism and Harvard's Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy — hardly a bastion of conservative orthodoxy — found that in covering the current presidential race,
the media are sympathetic to Democrats and hostile to Republicans.
Democrats are not only favored in the tone of the coverage.
They get more coverage period.
This is particularly evident on morning news shows,
which "produced almost twice as many stories (51% to 27%) focused on Democratic candidates than on Republicans."
The most flagrant bias, however, was found in newspapers. In reviewing front-page coverage in 11 newspapers, the study found the tone positive in nearly six times as many stories about Democrats as it was negative.

Media favors democrats according to Harvard study | Clipmarks

But for SHEAR lavishing loving gushes.. who can forget the
EDITOR of NewsWeek Evan Thomas when asked:

" Well, our job is to bash the president, that's what we do." --
Evan Thomas responding to a question on whether the media's unfair to Bush on the TV talk show Inside Washington, February 2, 2007.
Newsweek's Evan Thomas: 'Our Job Is To Bash the President' | NewsBusters.org

BUT when it comes to HIS MAN..his God???...
to his gushingly, tingle up leg statement from same
NewsWeek Editor Evan Thomas..
" I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country,
above – above the world, he’s sort of God." –

But Obama won't be running against Bush. Keep an eye on the accomplishments of the two probable candidates..Obama vs. Newt.

 

[Truthmatters]

Newt is as much a vote whore as Romeny.

He will say ANYTHING to win and you will all fall for it.

The national elections voters wont

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Those of you that voted for Obama because he was the first black President.. consider how your vote is based on your opinions that are FORMED by information you receive.

Many on the right seem to forget that in 2008 the choice was Obama or McCain.

Where that information comes from is SLANTED by the majority of sources favoring Obama!

Evidence?

The media follow the money, nothing else – Obama would have been elected regardless ‘the media.' Remember: he was running against McCain, not Reagan or Truman.

But consider the facts.
Worst economy in years..

A consequence of failed republican fiscal policy.

Iran

A consequence of failed republican foreign policy, and Obama’s doing what little any American president might be able to do, he or McCain.

Russia all lining up against the USA

Even if true, what would you have Obama do? Attack Russia?

Obama seemingly intent on class warfare

There is no such thing as ‘class warfare,’ it’s a rightist contrivance.

and destruction of our economy.

One can’t destroyed something already destroyed.

BUT do you hear that from the MSM???

No, because it’s idiocy.

You and others on the right whine and complain like a child but offer no solutions, which is galling considering the failure that was the GWB presidency and many of the problems you pillory Obama over are a consequence of that failure, such as the economy and Iran.

 

[healthmyths]

You can't have a positive tone to a news story about republicans if they are always negative. When is the last time you heard a republican with a positive outlook? No they are almost uniformly predicting dire consequences and acting as if the sky is falling. The debt is crushing us, the Mexicans are crushing us, taxes are crushing us, everything I don't like is crushing us, you get the picture.

NEGATIVITY???
A) Obama said:
Our military air-raiding villages killing civilians"
B) So, if somebody wants to build a coal[electric utility] plant, they can it’s just that it will bankrupt them,!"
Obama: We’ll bankrupt any new coal plants « Hot Air

C) America has been "a little bit lazy" in pursuing foreign investment over the last couple decades."
Now the biased MSM excused Obama GOP accused Obama of calling "Americans lazy" MSM said he didn't call Americans lazy...
DUH!!! America is NOT a live entity but Comprised of PEOPLE called Americans therefore he called Americans Lazy!
NEGATIVE enough for you???
D) Obama:"So it’s not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them"

I can go on and on and on giving examples of how Negativity is Obama/supporters/Democrats purview!

So go on share with me the GOP negativity!
Maybe it is about life styles...Oh did you know Cheney's daughter was gay?
Maybe it's about abortion ... maybe Bachmann's foster children should reply?
Maybe it's how ALL GOP want the ordinary worker to be able to accumulate $300,000 via the forced SS payments.. While Dems accuse GOP of pushing grandma over a cliff???
Please tell me how much more negative GOPers are when the record for donations to charities are compared.. for example between Obama and Bush?

Obama 2010 tax return donated $245,000 or 14% of his income!
Bush.. 2007 returns donated 23% of his income which was 1/3 Obama's!

Again... give me specific examples of NEGATIVITY!!!



.

 

[ladyliberal]

Google searches are a truly awful way to try to evaluate media reporting, much less media bias. You aren't weighting by viewership, you aren't dividing through by the time they spent in office, and you aren't comparing it in a quantitative way to their actual economic performance. If you are going to try to probe the MSM via google searches you probably don't want to be using phrases like "Obama's foreign policy better" (with quotes) which seems to appear in about zero MSM sources, which tend to grammatical.

The academic articles you cite have nonrepresentative conclusions and limited application.

You fail to link your analysis, such as it is, of media bias to Obama's prospects for reelection.

Most egregiously, you cite as evidence of bias the non-reporting of the Obama's apparent intent to destroy the economy. If you have proof of this genuinely absurd characterization in the public record by all means supply it, otherwise don't expect news stories to report it.

 

[Steelplate]

You know... I find it humorous that the OP used a Harvard Study to make his assertions. There was another Havard Study that conservatives felt was "left wing propaganda" during the Health Care Debate.

The one that said 45k preventable deaths per year happen because of lack of Health Insurance.

So now... when Harvard says something THEY like... it's acceptable. But when it was something they DIDN'T like... it was commie propaganda.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

*

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmcqDBT37SQ]World Reacts to Obama Victory - YouTube[/ame]​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Stay tuned for.....

2016!!!!

 

[JoeB131]

You guys screwed the pooch while you had power.
Its your fault the economy is so bad.

EVERYONE knows it

Obama has to pull up his big-boy pants and stop blaming Bush for his shortcomings.

Bush left the building 3 years ago....

 

[EriktheRed]

Google searches prove the MSM Fawns and favors Obama...

"poor economy under Bush" had 4,830 citations.
"poor economy under Obama" had 3,110 citations.
Yet Bush worse unemployment was 6% in 2003,
Versus Obama Unemployment highest rate 10.1%

"Obama's economic policy is better" 1,010
"Bush's economic policy is better" 3

"Obama's foreign policy better" 3,440
"Bush's foreign policy better" 1,520

Media favors democrats.. 7,620
Poll 2 to voters say Media favors Democrats

Harvard study found:
Just like so many reports before it, a joint survey by the Project for Excellence in Journalism and Harvard's Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy — hardly a bastion of conservative orthodoxy — found that in covering the current presidential race,
the media are sympathetic to Democrats and hostile to Republicans.
Democrats are not only favored in the tone of the coverage.
They get more coverage period.
This is particularly evident on morning news shows,
which "produced almost twice as many stories (51% to 27%) focused on Democratic candidates than on Republicans."
The most flagrant bias, however, was found in newspapers. In reviewing front-page coverage in 11 newspapers, the study found the tone positive in nearly six times as many stories about Democrats as it was negative.

Media favors democrats according to Harvard study | Clipmarks

But for SHEAR lavishing loving gushes.. who can forget the
EDITOR of NewsWeek Evan Thomas when asked:

" Well, our job is to bash the president, that's what we do." --
Evan Thomas responding to a question on whether the media's unfair to Bush on the TV talk show Inside Washington, February 2, 2007.
Newsweek's Evan Thomas: 'Our Job Is To Bash the President' | NewsBusters.org

BUT when it comes to HIS MAN..his God???...
to his gushingly, tingle up leg statement from same
NewsWeek Editor Evan Thomas..
" I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country,
above – above the world, he’s sort of God." –

You titled this thread, "Why Obama may win...". Your first post could have been shorter and more accurate if you had just posted a picture of all of the current GOP candidates.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Google searches prove the MSM Fawns and favors Obama...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmcqDBT37SQ&feature=related]World Reacts to Obama Victory - YouTube[/ame]​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

You guys screwed the pooch while you had power.
Its your fault the economy is so bad.

EVERYONE knows it

Obama has to pull up his big-boy pants and stop blaming Bush for his shortcomings.

You mean.....like.......

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmtPBTybQ9k]The Hunt For Bin Laden - YouTube[/ame]

*

*

"President Bush may like to be seen as a swaggering tough guy with a penchant for manly outdoor pursuits, but in a new book one of his closest allies has said he is afraid of horses."

Cowboy Georgie!!!​

.

.

.

 

[jillian]

But Obama won't be running against Bush. Keep an eye on the accomplishments of the two probable candidates..Obama vs. Newt.

that isn't your problem... your problem is that they're extremists and the only thing "the base" wants is someone they think can verbally abuse the president... they don't care if he/she is smart. they don't care if he/she is a flip flooper.... they don't care if the person took millions to shill for the very organization that rightwingnuts claim ruined the economy.. they don't care that it's THEIR economic policies and obstructionism that are keeping the economy from recovering as quickly as it might otherwise..

the "base" is irrational and thinks loons like coutergeist and the tweeting twit speak for them.

THAT is why this president may have another term.

 

[EriktheRed]

But Obama won't be running against Bush. Keep an eye on the accomplishments of the two probable candidates..Obama vs. Newt.

that isn't your problem... your problem is that they're extremists and the only thing "the base" wants is someone they think can verbally abuse the president... they don't care if he/she is smart. they don't care if he/she is a flip flooper.... they don't care if the person took millions to shill for the very organization that rightwingnuts claim ruined the economy.. they don't care that it's THEIR economic policies and obstructionism that are keeping the economy from recovering as quickly as it might otherwise..

the "base" is irrational and thinks loons like coutergeist and the tweeting twit speak for them.

THAT is why this president may have another term.

To be fair, the "Coultergeist" doesn't seem to be all that influential anymore and even SHE has come out against the Newtster.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

You guys screwed the pooch while you had power.
Its your fault the economy is so bad.

EVERYONE knows it

Obama has to pull up his big-boy pants and stop blaming Bush for his shortcomings.

Hell.....cleaning-up, after ANOTHER Bush, sure-as-Hell hasn't gotten....

.....any EASIER!!!!!

 

[healthmyths]

You know... I find it humorous that the OP used a Harvard Study to make his assertions. There was another Havard Study that conservatives felt was "left wing propaganda" during the Health Care Debate.

Who in the HELL are you to question these studies and comments??I mean how much more CLEAR is it then hacks voting with their cash?


"MSNBC.com identified 144 journalists who made political contributions from 2004 through the start of the 2008 campaign, according to the public records of the Federal Election Commission. Most of the newsroom checkbooks leaned to the left:
125 journalists gave to Democrats and liberal causes.
Only 17 gave to Republicans. Two gave to both parties."
Journalists give campaign cash - politics - msnbc.com

This is the SAME NewsWeek editor who said:
"There is a liberal bias. It's demonstrable. You look at some statistics.
About 85 percent of the reporters who cover the White House vote Democratic, they have for a long time.
There is a, particularly at the networks, at the lower levels, among the editors and the so-called infrastructure, there is a liberal bias.-
Newsweek Washington Bureau Chief Evan Thomas (Hardly a right wing publication!)

Whether you agree or not there is a media bias as this UCLA study indicates of the 20 major media outlets studied,
18 scored left of center, with CBS' "Evening News," The New York Times and the Los Angeles Times ranking second, third and fourth most biased. http://www.polisci.ucla.edu/faculty/groseclose/Media.Bias.8.htm

AND YOU WANT studies??? How about this one you dummy!


Dr. Tim Groseclose, a professor of political science and economics at UCLA, has spent years constructing precise, quantitative measures of the slants of media outlets.
Among his conclusions are (i) all mainstream media outlets have a liberal bias, and (ii) while some supposedly conservative outlets—such as the Washington Times or Fox News Special Report—do lean right, their conservative bias is less than the liberal bias of most mainstream outlets.

About the Book | Tim Groseclose

NOW if you have the GUTS to find out HOW totally biased YOU are..
use this site:Get your PQ | Tim Groseclose,


BUT none of this will mean anything to irrational, illogical, hysterical people like you!