Via the Hill:
The American public thinks the media wants Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton to win by an almost 10-to-1 margin, according to a new poll.
The Suffolk University/USA Today poll released Friday asks, “Who do you think the media, including major newspapers and TV stations, would like to see elected president: Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump?”
Of the 1,000 adults surveyed, 75.9 percent answered Clinton, while just 7.9 percent picked Trump, the Republican nominee. Just more than 16 percent of respondents chose either “neither” or “undecided.”
The Suffolk University/USA Today poll comes on the heels of an Associated Press/GkF poll last week showing that 56 percent of likely voters, including 87 percent of his supporters, believe the media is biased against Trump.
In that poll, 51 percent of Clinton supporters said the media is biased in her favor, while just 8 percent said it’s biased against her.
NO!! You don’t say?
It appears to me that is the poll was that overwhelming, it has to include some Hillary supporters. Do they not realize that, though THEY support Hillary, a media with the same predisposition would not objectively present them with the information they need to make an intelligent decision?
Oh. I guess we know the answer to that one.
At this point, any responsible media outlet should be taking the side of Hillary Clinton. That isn’t the case, however.
What do you think Trump has cleverly exploited and manipulated throughout the course of his campaign to further his game, if not the media? How do you think his face and voice have gotten into your livings room and heads? Trump is a creation of the media. He’s a reality television candidate. He has sought the lowest common denominator of tabloid politics and found it. That’s what his television program has been all about.
The idea that Trump has struggled against and somehow prevailed over a national media that has resisted him every inch of the way is just part of the show, folks. He wouldn’t even be there if it weren’t for them.
@Greg
Why, why should the media be on one side or another? Are they not supposed to be impartial?
Obviously your candidate, that nasty woman, mrs clinton, in your view is unable to make the point that voters should select her.
We all know it the media is overwhelmingly bias toward a democrat vs a republican. That has been historically documented and is no where in dispute…
The media should report established facts. That doesn’t mean they should ration facts carefully to make certain that two candidates appear to be equally qualified when one of them clearly is not. There’s a point where impartiality crosses over into dishonesty or irresponsibility.
For example, the Clintons have released their personal tax returns and Clinton Foundation documents for public inspection every years for many years. Trump refuses to release such documents. The two levels of transparency cannot be honestly portrayed as being equivalent. There’s nothing remotely equivalent about them, and anyone who thinks what might be hidden is irrelevant isn’t playing with a full deck.
@Greg: Again Dummy you miss the points. CNN gave HRC the list of questions that would basked by them in the debate. That is taking sides. When the MSM fails to describe the consequences of lying to he FBI. Making light of failure to secure government secret information, that is taking sides. Releasing tax returns is not a requirement for President or any other elective federal office. Failure to produce documents requested by government committees are a requirement.
No surprised at all these liberal journalists are the demacrats bootlickers and loyal lapdogs and these journalists are crookerder then a bolt of lightning
@Greg:
But this is what you said. If you say it you have to think it. You believe a “responsible media outlet should be taking the side of that nasty woman, mrs clinton”.
A responsible media should not take the side of either candidate.
@Greg:
Well, ever since the Clinton’s have been in office, that has been the case. That is how we wound up with an incompetent community organizer as a failure of a President and how your party fielded the most corrupt candidate this country has ever seen. A liberal-biased media has decided to redirect the country into a direction the liberal-biased media thinks it should go. The citizens get no say in the matter; the liberal media feeds them their version of truth and facts and tells them what to think and they vote for celebrity instead of capability.
Hillary is simply too toxic for the media to whitewash.
The media has been covering the unpolished Trump thinking they were exposing his non-elitist nature and this would turn the public against him. The media, in their elitist isolation, never realized that most people are sick of this elitism that looks down its nose at the problems, like the disappearance of jobs and skyrocketing health care, that the “little people” suffer. Liberal elitists in the media think not getting a nod from a populist President or access to Hollywood mouthpieces is a real problem.
The more they exposed Trump and his message to the vast majority of people, the more his popularity grew. Then they had to try to destroy him, just as the Democrats had to resort to violence and intimidation, exposing their fascist tendencies they try to keep hidden unless absolutely necessary.
Were they to investigate and report on Hillary’s lies, corruption and diplomatic failures, it would be clear to everyone that Hillary does not belong in the race. Instead, criminals like Wikileaks and Anonymous have to do the job the corrupt media refuses to do, on ideological grounds.
Hillary set up a secret, private, unsecured email server for the express purpose of hiding the business she was conducting under the auspices of the State Department from FOIA requests. Is that transparency?
Astute people have been very suspicious of the Clinton’s for a long time, and over time, the substantiation of those suspicions have been validated. We now know Hillary is a liar, corrupt, incompetent and a criminal. The only surprise is that anyone other than Bill and Chelsea actually support her. Only a corrupt, biased liberal media makes this possible.
@July 4th American, #7:
They should be reporting the established facts and highlighting the real issues. If doing so doesn’t reflect well on Donald Trump, that isn’t media bias. It has to do with Donald Trump.
@Greg:
Hey zippered, maybe that is what you think they should be doing. Unfortunately they do not highlight the dark aspects of the clintons. You really can not see the forest for the trees.
Why it just seems like yesterday when the Democrats and the media, but I repeat myself, were signing the praises of director comey.
Now this: