Trump acts like a child while everyone else stands for the anthem

[Billy000]

Your source is Byron York. He is biased and untrustworthy.

A Harvard study is biased and untrustworthy?

You didn't link to a Harvard study, you linked to Byron York talking about a Harvard study. Byron York is biased and untrustworthy. Should I trust that he accurately conveyed the study findings?

He didn't opine on it. He listed the findings in the Harvard Study. Here is the link to the actual study, LOL.



https://research.hks.harvard.edu/publications/getFile.aspx?Id=1590

He did a shit job. Did he mention the study excludes neutral stories?

Here are some more links for you. Since you're still not convinced.

Anti-Trump Media? 92% Of Coverage Of His Presidency Is Negative: Study | Investor's Business Daily
A broadcast tradition: 90% of Trump coverage remains negative, study finds
Here's Undeniable Proof That the Media Despises Trump
Study: News Coverage Of Trump More Negative Than For Other Presidents
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...ent-network-trump-coverage-has-been-negative/
Broadcast news slams Trump with 96 percent negative coverage since impeachment inquiry began, study says
Who's to blame for negative Trump coverage?
Study Finds TV Networks Fixated on Negative Impeachment Coverage of Trump

Okay I need some clarification on this. In your opinion, how much of the negative coverage is Trump’s own fault?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

A Harvard study is biased and untrustworthy?

You didn't link to a Harvard study, you linked to Byron York talking about a Harvard study. Byron York is biased and untrustworthy. Should I trust that he accurately conveyed the study findings?

He didn't opine on it. He listed the findings in the Harvard Study. Here is the link to the actual study, LOL.



https://research.hks.harvard.edu/publications/getFile.aspx?Id=1590

He did a shit job. Did he mention the study excludes neutral stories?

Here are some more links for you. Since you're still not convinced.

Anti-Trump Media? 92% Of Coverage Of His Presidency Is Negative: Study | Investor's Business Daily
A broadcast tradition: 90% of Trump coverage remains negative, study finds
Here's Undeniable Proof That the Media Despises Trump
Study: News Coverage Of Trump More Negative Than For Other Presidents
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...ent-network-trump-coverage-has-been-negative/
Broadcast news slams Trump with 96 percent negative coverage since impeachment inquiry began, study says
Who's to blame for negative Trump coverage?
Study Finds TV Networks Fixated on Negative Impeachment Coverage of Trump

Okay I need some clarification on this. In your opinion, how much of the negative coverage is Trump’s own fault?

Tough to state as he is very polarizing but anything over 60% is extreme in my opinion.

 

[colfax_m]

Your source is Byron York. He is biased and untrustworthy.

A Harvard study is biased and untrustworthy?

You didn't link to a Harvard study, you linked to Byron York talking about a Harvard study. Byron York is biased and untrustworthy. Should I trust that he accurately conveyed the study findings?

He didn't opine on it. He listed the findings in the Harvard Study. Here is the link to the actual study, LOL.



https://research.hks.harvard.edu/publications/getFile.aspx?Id=1590

He did a shit job. Did he mention the study excludes neutral stories?

Here are some more links for you. Since you're still not convinced.

Anti-Trump Media? 92% Of Coverage Of His Presidency Is Negative: Study | Investor's Business Daily
A broadcast tradition: 90% of Trump coverage remains negative, study finds
Here's Undeniable Proof That the Media Despises Trump
Study: News Coverage Of Trump More Negative Than For Other Presidents
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...ent-network-trump-coverage-has-been-negative/
Broadcast news slams Trump with 96 percent negative coverage since impeachment inquiry began, study says
Who's to blame for negative Trump coverage?
Study Finds TV Networks Fixated on Negative Impeachment Coverage of Trump

Don’t try to pretend media coverage is 93% without knowing what you’re talking about. It’s not an honest or accurate assessment.

I don’t find any problem with the assessment that the media coverage of Trump is more negative than positive (although it’s definitely not 93% negative). I also don’t pretend to know exactly what percentage it should be.

The point is he’s not a very transparent president. Claiming he’s transparent because of Twitter makes no sense.

 

[boedicca]

Ah, the usual Trump hypocrisy. Acting like a jackass during the anthem is okay but kneeling is blasphemy!

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/article239913588.html

Let me guess: you're a big fan of Beyonce and JayZ.

 

[colfax_m]

You didn't link to a Harvard study, you linked to Byron York talking about a Harvard study. Byron York is biased and untrustworthy. Should I trust that he accurately conveyed the study findings?

He didn't opine on it. He listed the findings in the Harvard Study. Here is the link to the actual study, LOL.



https://research.hks.harvard.edu/publications/getFile.aspx?Id=1590

He did a shit job. Did he mention the study excludes neutral stories?

Here are some more links for you. Since you're still not convinced.

Anti-Trump Media? 92% Of Coverage Of His Presidency Is Negative: Study | Investor's Business Daily
A broadcast tradition: 90% of Trump coverage remains negative, study finds
Here's Undeniable Proof That the Media Despises Trump
Study: News Coverage Of Trump More Negative Than For Other Presidents
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...ent-network-trump-coverage-has-been-negative/
Broadcast news slams Trump with 96 percent negative coverage since impeachment inquiry began, study says
Who's to blame for negative Trump coverage?
Study Finds TV Networks Fixated on Negative Impeachment Coverage of Trump

Okay I need some clarification on this. In your opinion, how much of the negative coverage is Trump’s own fault?

Tough to state as he is very polarizing but anything over 60% is extreme in my opinion.

If Trump lies about something and the media reports a lie (gosh when would that ever happen), it’s a negative story. A lot of it he brings on himself.

 

[Billy000]

Ah, the usual Trump hypocrisy. Acting like a jackass during the anthem is okay but kneeling is blasphemy!

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/article239913588.html

Let me guess: you're a big fan of Beyonce and JayZ.

Not at all. I don’t give a shit.

 

[bodecea]

Ah, the usual Trump hypocrisy. Acting like a jackass during the anthem is okay but kneeling is blasphemy!

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/article239913588.html

Cultists say it's ok.

 

[Correll]

He didn't opine on it. He listed the findings in the Harvard Study. Here is the link to the actual study, LOL.



https://research.hks.harvard.edu/publications/getFile.aspx?Id=1590

He did a shit job. Did he mention the study excludes neutral stories?

Here are some more links for you. Since you're still not convinced.

Anti-Trump Media? 92% Of Coverage Of His Presidency Is Negative: Study | Investor's Business Daily
A broadcast tradition: 90% of Trump coverage remains negative, study finds
Here's Undeniable Proof That the Media Despises Trump
Study: News Coverage Of Trump More Negative Than For Other Presidents
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...ent-network-trump-coverage-has-been-negative/
Broadcast news slams Trump with 96 percent negative coverage since impeachment inquiry began, study says
Who's to blame for negative Trump coverage?
Study Finds TV Networks Fixated on Negative Impeachment Coverage of Trump

Okay I need some clarification on this. In your opinion, how much of the negative coverage is Trump’s own fault?

Tough to state as he is very polarizing but anything over 60% is extreme in my opinion.

If Trump lies about something and the media reports a lie (gosh when would that ever happen), it’s a negative story. A lot of it he brings on himself.

Do you support and spread the media lie that he said that nazis were very fine people?

 

[boedicca]

Ah, the usual Trump hypocrisy. Acting like a jackass during the anthem is okay but kneeling is blasphemy!

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/article239913588.html

Let me guess: you're a big fan of Beyonce and JayZ.

Not at all. I don’t give a shit.

Oh c'mon. It's okay to admit it. Be proud of your horrible taste in music.

 

[Billy000]

Ah, the usual Trump hypocrisy. Acting like a jackass during the anthem is okay but kneeling is blasphemy!

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/article239913588.html

Let me guess: you're a big fan of Beyonce and JayZ.

Not at all. I don’t give a shit.

Oh c'mon. It's okay to admit it. Be proud of your horrible taste in music.

Lol um okay whatever.

 

[colfax_m]

He did a shit job. Did he mention the study excludes neutral stories?

Here are some more links for you. Since you're still not convinced.

Anti-Trump Media? 92% Of Coverage Of His Presidency Is Negative: Study | Investor's Business Daily
A broadcast tradition: 90% of Trump coverage remains negative, study finds
Here's Undeniable Proof That the Media Despises Trump
Study: News Coverage Of Trump More Negative Than For Other Presidents
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...ent-network-trump-coverage-has-been-negative/
Broadcast news slams Trump with 96 percent negative coverage since impeachment inquiry began, study says
Who's to blame for negative Trump coverage?
Study Finds TV Networks Fixated on Negative Impeachment Coverage of Trump

Okay I need some clarification on this. In your opinion, how much of the negative coverage is Trump’s own fault?

Tough to state as he is very polarizing but anything over 60% is extreme in my opinion.

If Trump lies about something and the media reports a lie (gosh when would that ever happen), it’s a negative story. A lot of it he brings on himself.

Do you support and spread the media lie that he said that nazis were very fine people?

Who was he referring to? It was never clear to me.

 

[Correll]

Here are some more links for you. Since you're still not convinced.

Anti-Trump Media? 92% Of Coverage Of His Presidency Is Negative: Study | Investor's Business Daily
A broadcast tradition: 90% of Trump coverage remains negative, study finds
Here's Undeniable Proof That the Media Despises Trump
Study: News Coverage Of Trump More Negative Than For Other Presidents
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...ent-network-trump-coverage-has-been-negative/
Broadcast news slams Trump with 96 percent negative coverage since impeachment inquiry began, study says
Who's to blame for negative Trump coverage?
Study Finds TV Networks Fixated on Negative Impeachment Coverage of Trump

Okay I need some clarification on this. In your opinion, how much of the negative coverage is Trump’s own fault?

Tough to state as he is very polarizing but anything over 60% is extreme in my opinion.

If Trump lies about something and the media reports a lie (gosh when would that ever happen), it’s a negative story. A lot of it he brings on himself.

Do you support and spread the media lie that he said that nazis were very fine people?

Who was he referring to? It was never clear to me.

People on both sides of the issue of historical statues.

He explicitly states that he was NOT talking about nazis.


THe media lied about that, over and over again, convincing half the nation that the other have is pure evul.

 

[colfax_m]

Okay I need some clarification on this. In your opinion, how much of the negative coverage is Trump’s own fault?

Tough to state as he is very polarizing but anything over 60% is extreme in my opinion.

If Trump lies about something and the media reports a lie (gosh when would that ever happen), it’s a negative story. A lot of it he brings on himself.

Do you support and spread the media lie that he said that nazis were very fine people?

Who was he referring to? It was never clear to me.

People on both sides of the issue of historical statues.

He explicitly states that he was NOT talking about nazis.


THe media lied about that, over and over again, convincing half the nation that the other have is pure evul.

He was quite clearly talking about people at the rally. Not just people who have taken sides on the issue.

 

[Correll]

Tough to state as he is very polarizing but anything over 60% is extreme in my opinion.

If Trump lies about something and the media reports a lie (gosh when would that ever happen), it’s a negative story. A lot of it he brings on himself.

Do you support and spread the media lie that he said that nazis were very fine people?

Who was he referring to? It was never clear to me.

People on both sides of the issue of historical statues.

He explicitly states that he was NOT talking about nazis.


THe media lied about that, over and over again, convincing half the nation that the other have is pure evul.

He was quite clearly talking about people at the rally. Not just people who have taken sides on the issue.

Well, yes, people at the rally who were on both sides of the issue. And explicitly NOT the white supremacists.


Are you claiming to be unaware of this Lie? Or are you preparing to support the Lie?

 

[colfax_m]

If Trump lies about something and the media reports a lie (gosh when would that ever happen), it’s a negative story. A lot of it he brings on himself.

Do you support and spread the media lie that he said that nazis were very fine people?

Who was he referring to? It was never clear to me.

People on both sides of the issue of historical statues.

He explicitly states that he was NOT talking about nazis.


THe media lied about that, over and over again, convincing half the nation that the other have is pure evul.

He was quite clearly talking about people at the rally. Not just people who have taken sides on the issue.

Well, yes, people at the rally who were on both sides of the issue. And explicitly NOT the white supremacists.


Are you claiming to be unaware of this Lie? Or are you preparing to support the Lie?

Wasn’t it a white supremacist rally?

 

[Correll]

Do you support and spread the media lie that he said that nazis were very fine people?

Who was he referring to? It was never clear to me.

People on both sides of the issue of historical statues.

He explicitly states that he was NOT talking about nazis.


THe media lied about that, over and over again, convincing half the nation that the other have is pure evul.

He was quite clearly talking about people at the rally. Not just people who have taken sides on the issue.

Well, yes, people at the rally who were on both sides of the issue. And explicitly NOT the white supremacists.


Are you claiming to be unaware of this Lie? Or are you preparing to support the Lie?

Wasn’t it a white supremacist rally?

It was a rally organized by white supremacists that was publicized as a rally about historical statues, in a dishonest attempt by the white supremacists to co-opt a larger and more popular issue to dishonestly inflate their perceived numbers and relevance.


ANYTIME that a rally has numbers in the triple digits, it is not likely to actually be white supremacists. Their rallies are considered successes in they can get double digits. And I mean like 12.


There were plenty of people there, who supported the statues who were not white supremacists.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

Ah, the usual Trump hypocrisy. Acting like a jackass during the anthem is okay but kneeling is blasphemy!

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/article239913588.html

c'mon triple zero, take a day off to celebrate your victory in Iowa

 

[Pogo]

Okay I need some clarification on this. In your opinion, how much of the negative coverage is Trump’s own fault?

Tough to state as he is very polarizing but anything over 60% is extreme in my opinion.

If Trump lies about something and the media reports a lie (gosh when would that ever happen), it’s a negative story. A lot of it he brings on himself.

Do you support and spread the media lie that he said that nazis were very fine people?

Who was he referring to? It was never clear to me.

People on both sides of the issue of historical statues.

He explicitly states that he was NOT talking about nazis.


THe media lied about that, over and over again, convincing half the nation that the other have is pure evul.

Of course he wasn't polishing the Nazi Knob. Sure.

And he really wasn't mocking that reporter's congenital disability because the reporter wouldn't lie for him.
And the Bronx really is a very wonderful place in Germany.
And Kansas City Missouri really is in Kansas.
And the word "would" really does mean the word "wouldn't".
And he really didn't say "Tim Apple" and "Marilyn Lockheed".'
And it really wasn't his voice on the Access Hollywood tape.
And the Continental Army really did take over the airports.
And Time Magazine really did publish that issue with his orange face on it. It's a collector's item
And the sound of windmills really has been proven to cause cancer.
And they really do sacrifice every day for the furniture.
And he really did get more Electoral Votes than anybody since Reagan, even though Mike Pence's number was higher.
And there really were "three million illegals" voting.
And Google really did "manipulate" many more votes.
And "thousands and thousands of people" really were dancing on rooftops.
And Celestino Martínez really does go by the name "DJ".
And he really never did pretend to be the mythical "John Miller", "John Baron" and "David Dennison".
And he really never did go bankrupt.
Or pay 25 million bucks to make a fraud suit go away that he swore he'd never settle.
And the judge he made the deal with really was Mexican, Indiana being a Mexican state.
And England and the UK really are the same thing.

And War really is Peace, and Freedom really is Slavery, and Ignorance is absolutely Strength.

Because Alternate Facts and Self-Delusion are bleeding from your wherever. Believe me.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Ah, the usual Trump hypocrisy. Acting like a jackass during the anthem is okay but kneeling is blasphemy!

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/article239913588.html

trump is the hypocritical president. Beloved by all hypocrites.

I would never have guessed you would openly say you loved the President

 

[colfax_m]

Who was he referring to? It was never clear to me.

People on both sides of the issue of historical statues.

He explicitly states that he was NOT talking about nazis.


THe media lied about that, over and over again, convincing half the nation that the other have is pure evul.

He was quite clearly talking about people at the rally. Not just people who have taken sides on the issue.

Well, yes, people at the rally who were on both sides of the issue. And explicitly NOT the white supremacists.


Are you claiming to be unaware of this Lie? Or are you preparing to support the Lie?

Wasn’t it a white supremacist rally?

It was a rally organized by white supremacists that was publicized as a rally about historical statues, in a dishonest attempt by the white supremacists to co-opt a larger and more popular issue to dishonestly inflate their perceived numbers and relevance.


ANYTIME that a rally has numbers in the triple digits, it is not likely to actually be white supremacists. Their rallies are considered successes in they can get double digits. And I mean like 12.


There were plenty of people there, who supported the statues who were not white supremacists.

It’s hard for me to imagine the person who accidentally winds up at a rally organized by known white supremacists advertising using white supremacist imagery and hosting white supremacist speakers, marching along people flying Nazi flags chanting anti-Semitic slogan.

You want me to believe that normal people do that? I just find that a bit hard to believe.