It's official, Hillary Clinton gets by far the most negative press and the least positive.

[rdean]

A newly released media analysis found that the “biggest news outlets have published more negative stories about Hillary Clinton than any other presidential candidate — including Donald Trump — since January 2015.” The study, conducted by social media software analytics company Crimson Hexagon, also found that “the media also wrote the smallest proportion of positive stories about her.”

As Media Matters has noted throughout the primary campaign, the coverage of Hillary Clinton has tended to focus on fake scandals such as her use of a private email server while her Republican counterparts have enjoyed more positive characterizations. This criticism has been backed up by a former New York Times editor who agreed that the publication has given the Clinton’s “an unfair ‘level of scrutiny.’”

Crimson Hexagon’s analysis, reported by Vox’s Jeff Stein, “shows that the media has battered Clinton more than any other candidate, perhaps because of the ongoing controversy over her emails.” Accusations of “the media being in the tank for Clinton,” Stein notes, simply “may not square with reality.” Crimson Hexagon’s analysis -- which examined reporting from The Washington Post, Politico, Fox News, the Huffington Post, and CNN -- ultimately found that more “negative stories” were published about Clinton than any other presidential candidate, and that Clinton herself received “the smallest proportion of positive stories.”

------------------------------------------------------------

I know I'm repeating myself, but where's the beef? Hillary Clinton received official emails on a personal account. Jeb Bush did the same thing. So did Colin Powell. So did a bunch of folks in the Bush White House (using RNC servers). Some of the emails Hillary received may have contained information that's now deemed classified, but it's quite clear that government officials routinely send classified reports over email. Maybe they shouldn't, but they do. It's neither new nor unusual nor really a very big deal.

As for the personal emails, they're a complete red herring. No one ever turns over personal emails, and officials have always decided for themselves which ones are personal. No one cares whether those emails were on a private server.

So we're left with one thing: Hillary received official emails on her personal account. That's it. It's fair game for Republicans to attack her bad judgment in doing that, but there's just nothing more to learn about it. She did it. She's admitted it. It's part of her record as secretary of state. It's done.

But every new tidbit turns into a front-page story. Every release of emails turns into another set of front-page stories. (Gefilte fish!) And every front-page story leads to a poll decline, which then turns into another front-page story.

-----------------------------------------------------

I thought she had the media in her back pocket. Guess not.

But you have to admit, she is fighting Bernie Sanders, the entire Republican Party and the so called liberal press ----------------------------> and is still winning.

-----------------------------------------------------

Study: Hillary Clinton, not Donald Trump, gets the most negative media coverage

It's official: Hillary Clinton is just being hammered by the press

Media Analysis: Hillary Clinton Received Most Negative Stories, Least Positive Stories Of All Presidential Candidates

 

[Correll]

 

[hadit]

IOW, even they can't manufacture positive spin.

 

[WheelieAddict]

Rdean dude I lean left and you are one of the biggest partisan douche bags I have ever seen.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

It's official, Hillary Clinton gets by far the most negative press and the least positive.


There is a valid reason for that

 

[WheelieAddict]

Fuck off rdean:

 

[mdk]

It boggles the mind...

 

[IlarMeilyr]

If she gets a lot of negative commentary and coverage, rderp is not able to wrap his diminutive little mind around the prospect that maybe she gets what she's actually earned.

 

[rdean]

If she gets a lot of negative commentary and coverage, rderp is not able to wrap his diminutive little mind around the prospect that maybe she gets what she's actually earned.

30 years of GOP smears. Never in the history of the United States has one political party spent so much tax payer money and so many party resources to bring down one woman. Is there anything they haven't done?

CIA Catches Republicans Red-Handed Altering Hillary's Emails to Smear Her

 

[IlarMeilyr]

If she gets a lot of negative commentary and coverage, rderp is not able to wrap his diminutive little mind around the prospect that maybe she gets what she's actually earned.

30 years of GOP smears. Never in the history of the United States has one political party spent so much tax payer money and so many party resources to bring down one woman. Is there anything they haven't done?

CIA Catches Republicans Red-Handed Altering Hillary's Emails to Smear Her

And STILL rderp cannot wrap his little pinhead mind around the fact that Shrillary DESERVES every criticism she gets.

Well almost.

Admittedly, some criticisms are kinda stupid. She may be an asshole, but those who call her a "racist" are pretty silly.

But she is a lowlife. She is an nonredeemable liar. And she has ZERO fucking accomplishments no matter how much idiots like rderp wish to suck the shit out of her massive ass.

 

[Oldstyle]

A newly released media analysis found that the “biggest news outlets have published more negative stories about Hillary Clinton than any other presidential candidate — including Donald Trump — since January 2015.” The study, conducted by social media software analytics company Crimson Hexagon, also found that “the media also wrote the smallest proportion of positive stories about her.”

As Media Matters has noted throughout the primary campaign, the coverage of Hillary Clinton has tended to focus on fake scandals such as her use of a private email server while her Republican counterparts have enjoyed more positive characterizations. This criticism has been backed up by a former New York Times editor who agreed that the publication has given the Clinton’s “an unfair ‘level of scrutiny.’”

Crimson Hexagon’s analysis, reported by Vox’s Jeff Stein, “shows that the media has battered Clinton more than any other candidate, perhaps because of the ongoing controversy over her emails.” Accusations of “the media being in the tank for Clinton,” Stein notes, simply “may not square with reality.” Crimson Hexagon’s analysis -- which examined reporting from The Washington Post, Politico, Fox News, the Huffington Post, and CNN -- ultimately found that more “negative stories” were published about Clinton than any other presidential candidate, and that Clinton herself received “the smallest proportion of positive stories.”

------------------------------------------------------------

I know I'm repeating myself, but where's the beef? Hillary Clinton received official emails on a personal account. Jeb Bush did the same thing. So did Colin Powell. So did a bunch of folks in the Bush White House (using RNC servers). Some of the emails Hillary received may have contained information that's now deemed classified, but it's quite clear that government officials routinely send classified reports over email. Maybe they shouldn't, but they do. It's neither new nor unusual nor really a very big deal.

As for the personal emails, they're a complete red herring. No one ever turns over personal emails, and officials have always decided for themselves which ones are personal. No one cares whether those emails were on a private server.

So we're left with one thing: Hillary received official emails on her personal account. That's it. It's fair game for Republicans to attack her bad judgment in doing that, but there's just nothing more to learn about it. She did it. She's admitted it. It's part of her record as secretary of state. It's done.

But every new tidbit turns into a front-page story. Every release of emails turns into another set of front-page stories. (Gefilte fish!) And every front-page story leads to a poll decline, which then turns into another front-page story.

-----------------------------------------------------

I thought she had the media in her back pocket. Guess not.

But you have to admit, she is fighting Bernie Sanders, the entire Republican Party and the so called liberal press ----------------------------> and is still winning.

-----------------------------------------------------

Study: Hillary Clinton, not Donald Trump, gets the most negative media coverage

It's official: Hillary Clinton is just being hammered by the press

Media Analysis: Hillary Clinton Received Most Negative Stories, Least Positive Stories Of All Presidential Candidates

Gee, you've got a career politician who would throw her own mother under a bus to get elected...who's prone to telling bald faced lies...and has taken millions in "speaking fees" from Wall Street fat cats. Now why on earth would ANYONE write negative things about such a wonderful person! (eye roll)

 

[rdean]

If she gets a lot of negative commentary and coverage, rderp is not able to wrap his diminutive little mind around the prospect that maybe she gets what she's actually earned.

30 years of GOP smears. Never in the history of the United States has one political party spent so much tax payer money and so many party resources to bring down one woman. Is there anything they haven't done?

CIA Catches Republicans Red-Handed Altering Hillary's Emails to Smear Her

And STILL rderp cannot wrap his little pinhead mind around the fact that Shrillary DESERVES every criticism she gets.

Well almost.

Admittedly, some criticisms are kinda stupid. She may be an asshole, but those who call her a "racist" are pretty silly.

But she is a lowlife. She is an nonredeemable liar. And she has ZERO fucking accomplishments no matter how much idiots like rderp wish to suck the shit out of her massive ass.

Some? How many are some? Who gets to choose? Your kind?

 

[Votto]

Rdean dude I lean left and you are one of the biggest partisan douche bags I have ever seen.

Yes, but does he have more negatives than Hillary, that is the question.

If so, he could be the next President of the United States.

 

[rdean]

A newly released media analysis found that the “biggest news outlets have published more negative stories about Hillary Clinton than any other presidential candidate — including Donald Trump — since January 2015.” The study, conducted by social media software analytics company Crimson Hexagon, also found that “the media also wrote the smallest proportion of positive stories about her.”

As Media Matters has noted throughout the primary campaign, the coverage of Hillary Clinton has tended to focus on fake scandals such as her use of a private email server while her Republican counterparts have enjoyed more positive characterizations. This criticism has been backed up by a former New York Times editor who agreed that the publication has given the Clinton’s “an unfair ‘level of scrutiny.’”

Crimson Hexagon’s analysis, reported by Vox’s Jeff Stein, “shows that the media has battered Clinton more than any other candidate, perhaps because of the ongoing controversy over her emails.” Accusations of “the media being in the tank for Clinton,” Stein notes, simply “may not square with reality.” Crimson Hexagon’s analysis -- which examined reporting from The Washington Post, Politico, Fox News, the Huffington Post, and CNN -- ultimately found that more “negative stories” were published about Clinton than any other presidential candidate, and that Clinton herself received “the smallest proportion of positive stories.”

------------------------------------------------------------

I know I'm repeating myself, but where's the beef? Hillary Clinton received official emails on a personal account. Jeb Bush did the same thing. So did Colin Powell. So did a bunch of folks in the Bush White House (using RNC servers). Some of the emails Hillary received may have contained information that's now deemed classified, but it's quite clear that government officials routinely send classified reports over email. Maybe they shouldn't, but they do. It's neither new nor unusual nor really a very big deal.

As for the personal emails, they're a complete red herring. No one ever turns over personal emails, and officials have always decided for themselves which ones are personal. No one cares whether those emails were on a private server.

So we're left with one thing: Hillary received official emails on her personal account. That's it. It's fair game for Republicans to attack her bad judgment in doing that, but there's just nothing more to learn about it. She did it. She's admitted it. It's part of her record as secretary of state. It's done.

But every new tidbit turns into a front-page story. Every release of emails turns into another set of front-page stories. (Gefilte fish!) And every front-page story leads to a poll decline, which then turns into another front-page story.

-----------------------------------------------------

I thought she had the media in her back pocket. Guess not.

But you have to admit, she is fighting Bernie Sanders, the entire Republican Party and the so called liberal press ----------------------------> and is still winning.

-----------------------------------------------------

Study: Hillary Clinton, not Donald Trump, gets the most negative media coverage

It's official: Hillary Clinton is just being hammered by the press

Media Analysis: Hillary Clinton Received Most Negative Stories, Least Positive Stories Of All Presidential Candidates

Gee, you've got a career politician who would throw her own mother under a bus to get elected...who's prone to telling bald faced lies...and has taken millions in "speaking fees" from Wall Street fat cats. Now why on earth would ANYONE write negative things about such a wonderful person! (eye roll)

What is wrong with being paid to speak to companies years after you left government service? I wish they would pay me.

 

[rdean]

Rdean dude I lean left and you are one of the biggest partisan douche bags I have ever seen.

Yes, but does he have more negatives than Hillary, that is the question.

If so, he could be the next President of the United States.

I wouldn't want to be. I don't have the experience of being Secretary of State, US Senator or previously living in the White House. Or of being a public defender. Or starting world wide organizations that help women in dangerous countries. I've never done those things. Know anyone who has?

 

[Votto]

Rdean dude I lean left and you are one of the biggest partisan douche bags I have ever seen.

Yes, but does he have more negatives than Hillary, that is the question.

If so, he could be the next President of the United States.

I wouldn't want to be. I don't have the experience of being Secretary of State, US Senator or previously living in the White House. Or of being a public defender. Or starting world wide organizations that help women in dangerous countries. I've never done those things. Know anyone who has?

Just spend a month being a community organizer and you will be ready for the job.

 

[Oldstyle]

A newly released media analysis found that the “biggest news outlets have published more negative stories about Hillary Clinton than any other presidential candidate — including Donald Trump — since January 2015.” The study, conducted by social media software analytics company Crimson Hexagon, also found that “the media also wrote the smallest proportion of positive stories about her.”

As Media Matters has noted throughout the primary campaign, the coverage of Hillary Clinton has tended to focus on fake scandals such as her use of a private email server while her Republican counterparts have enjoyed more positive characterizations. This criticism has been backed up by a former New York Times editor who agreed that the publication has given the Clinton’s “an unfair ‘level of scrutiny.’”

Crimson Hexagon’s analysis, reported by Vox’s Jeff Stein, “shows that the media has battered Clinton more than any other candidate, perhaps because of the ongoing controversy over her emails.” Accusations of “the media being in the tank for Clinton,” Stein notes, simply “may not square with reality.” Crimson Hexagon’s analysis -- which examined reporting from The Washington Post, Politico, Fox News, the Huffington Post, and CNN -- ultimately found that more “negative stories” were published about Clinton than any other presidential candidate, and that Clinton herself received “the smallest proportion of positive stories.”

------------------------------------------------------------

I know I'm repeating myself, but where's the beef? Hillary Clinton received official emails on a personal account. Jeb Bush did the same thing. So did Colin Powell. So did a bunch of folks in the Bush White House (using RNC servers). Some of the emails Hillary received may have contained information that's now deemed classified, but it's quite clear that government officials routinely send classified reports over email. Maybe they shouldn't, but they do. It's neither new nor unusual nor really a very big deal.

As for the personal emails, they're a complete red herring. No one ever turns over personal emails, and officials have always decided for themselves which ones are personal. No one cares whether those emails were on a private server.

So we're left with one thing: Hillary received official emails on her personal account. That's it. It's fair game for Republicans to attack her bad judgment in doing that, but there's just nothing more to learn about it. She did it. She's admitted it. It's part of her record as secretary of state. It's done.

But every new tidbit turns into a front-page story. Every release of emails turns into another set of front-page stories. (Gefilte fish!) And every front-page story leads to a poll decline, which then turns into another front-page story.

-----------------------------------------------------

I thought she had the media in her back pocket. Guess not.

But you have to admit, she is fighting Bernie Sanders, the entire Republican Party and the so called liberal press ----------------------------> and is still winning.

-----------------------------------------------------

Study: Hillary Clinton, not Donald Trump, gets the most negative media coverage

It's official: Hillary Clinton is just being hammered by the press

Media Analysis: Hillary Clinton Received Most Negative Stories, Least Positive Stories Of All Presidential Candidates

Gee, you've got a career politician who would throw her own mother under a bus to get elected...who's prone to telling bald faced lies...and has taken millions in "speaking fees" from Wall Street fat cats. Now why on earth would ANYONE write negative things about such a wonderful person! (eye roll)

What is wrong with being paid to speak to companies years after you left government service? I wish they would pay me.

Wake up and smell the coffee, R-Derp! Nobody pays the obscene amounts that those Wall Street fat cats paid for a speech...they were buying political influence. They contributed millions to the Clinton's because they think Hillary stands a good chance to be the next President. Bill Clinton was collecting those big pay offs even when Hillary was Secretary of State. Hillary started collecting them the second that she quit as Secretary of State.

 

[Dot Com]

If she gets a lot of negative commentary and coverage, rderp is not able to wrap his diminutive little mind around the prospect that maybe she gets what she's actually earned.

True

That ever occur to you rdean?

whitewater

sniper fire in Kosovo

we left the WH broke

etc..., etc...

She's a life-long politician who got rich by selling-out. She certainly didn't get wealthy by her gov't salary

 

[Oldstyle]

If she gets a lot of negative commentary and coverage, rderp is not able to wrap his diminutive little mind around the prospect that maybe she gets what she's actually earned.

True

That ever occur to you rdean?

whitewater

sniper fire in Kosovo

we left the WH broke

etc..., etc...

She's a life-long politician who got rich by selling-out. She certainly didn't get wealthy by her gov't salary

When Hillary says something like "We left the WH broke!" she's insulting everyone's intelligence! That same year that the Clinton's were supposedly "broke"...they bought a million dollar mansion in Washington DC...and they bought a multi million dollar mansion in Westchester County, New York. How many broke people can R-Derp name who bought not one...but TWO million dollar mansions in the same year?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

A newly released media analysis found that the “biggest news outlets have published more negative stories about Hillary Clinton than any other presidential candidate — including Donald Trump — since January 2015.” The study, conducted by social media software analytics company Crimson Hexagon, also found that “the media also wrote the smallest proportion of positive stories about her.”

As Media Matters has noted throughout the primary campaign, the coverage of Hillary Clinton has tended to focus on fake scandals such as her use of a private email server while her Republican counterparts have enjoyed more positive characterizations. This criticism has been backed up by a former New York Times editor who agreed that the publication has given the Clinton’s “an unfair ‘level of scrutiny.’”

Crimson Hexagon’s analysis, reported by Vox’s Jeff Stein, “shows that the media has battered Clinton more than any other candidate, perhaps because of the ongoing controversy over her emails.” Accusations of “the media being in the tank for Clinton,” Stein notes, simply “may not square with reality.” Crimson Hexagon’s analysis -- which examined reporting from The Washington Post, Politico, Fox News, the Huffington Post, and CNN -- ultimately found that more “negative stories” were published about Clinton than any other presidential candidate, and that Clinton herself received “the smallest proportion of positive stories.”

------------------------------------------------------------

I know I'm repeating myself, but where's the beef? Hillary Clinton received official emails on a personal account. Jeb Bush did the same thing. So did Colin Powell. So did a bunch of folks in the Bush White House (using RNC servers). Some of the emails Hillary received may have contained information that's now deemed classified, but it's quite clear that government officials routinely send classified reports over email. Maybe they shouldn't, but they do. It's neither new nor unusual nor really a very big deal.

As for the personal emails, they're a complete red herring. No one ever turns over personal emails, and officials have always decided for themselves which ones are personal. No one cares whether those emails were on a private server.

So we're left with one thing: Hillary received official emails on her personal account. That's it. It's fair game for Republicans to attack her bad judgment in doing that, but there's just nothing more to learn about it. She did it. She's admitted it. It's part of her record as secretary of state. It's done.

But every new tidbit turns into a front-page story. Every release of emails turns into another set of front-page stories. (Gefilte fish!) And every front-page story leads to a poll decline, which then turns into another front-page story.

-----------------------------------------------------

I thought she had the media in her back pocket. Guess not.

But you have to admit, she is fighting Bernie Sanders, the entire Republican Party and the so called liberal press ----------------------------> and is still winning.

-----------------------------------------------------

Study: Hillary Clinton, not Donald Trump, gets the most negative media coverage

It's official: Hillary Clinton is just being hammered by the press

Media Analysis: Hillary Clinton Received Most Negative Stories, Least Positive Stories Of All Presidential Candidates

You are smoking crack if you believe that bullshit lol