- Banned
- #1
Usually you would think the "US" media would report on hotly contested races in key states. That is not the case in this 2016 "Jerry Springer" election.
No, the "US" media has reported more on one candidate for Senate than the rest of the Senate candidates in the US summed together. Is this candidate winning? um, no. Is this candidate in a close race? Um, it is close, but he isn't. He is in 5/6th place with 3% of the vote...
Boustany closes the gap on Kennedy in 2016 Louisiana Senate poll
"former KKK leader and convicted felon David Duke each polled at 3 percent."
Every year there are fringe candidates. Usually, the media mostly ignores them. Certainly a candidate polling under 5% is officially a "fringe candidate."
WHY is the "US" media so obsessed with reporting on this one Senate candidate with uber fringe poll numbers?
Is it because the "US" media is horrifically biased?
No, the "US" media has reported more on one candidate for Senate than the rest of the Senate candidates in the US summed together. Is this candidate winning? um, no. Is this candidate in a close race? Um, it is close, but he isn't. He is in 5/6th place with 3% of the vote...
Boustany closes the gap on Kennedy in 2016 Louisiana Senate poll
"former KKK leader and convicted felon David Duke each polled at 3 percent."
Every year there are fringe candidates. Usually, the media mostly ignores them. Certainly a candidate polling under 5% is officially a "fringe candidate."
WHY is the "US" media so obsessed with reporting on this one Senate candidate with uber fringe poll numbers?
Is it because the "US" media is horrifically biased?
