And yet he sounds like such a moron.
I have no difficulty believing that he did lousy in school.
I wonder about your world, however: you hear something that disagrees with your belief and your first thought is that it’s a conspiracy.
Maybe if the fake news didn’t make up stories (using supposedly unnamed sources or sources with no evidience) all lean one way, I wouldn’t be so skeptical.
They’ve been faking news for a long time. Wasn’t very easy to find this video and why doesn’t snopes, a fact checking site mention this? Why does every omission seem to benefit the left and why does ever attack seem to be on the right?
After seeing that, why wouldn’t anyone not be skeptical?
There was a video of the fake news cutting off guest after guest after guest… can’t find it now. All the people cut off were from the right. If there was one like this cutting off people from the left, you know it would be played nonstop.
It’s not a question of being skeptical.
It’s a question about why your first thought is that any news critical of Trump must be the result of a conspiracy. That’s very different.
Maybe if all of the news that came out about Trump wasn’t negatively biased, that wouldn’t be my first thought.
The professor story… how is that relevant in any way to what’s going on? Total smear job, negative to be negative and likely fake. The MSM spent more time on that (something that can’t be proved) than they did on Biden lying about his degrees and academic background (something that can be proved). What does that tell you?
You have a choice how you view it. Please don’t blame the media for the choices you make.
Got me.
That suggests that it’s not true, for which you have no evidence.
Assumes facts not in evidence.
Again, assumes facts not in evidence, and betrays an incredible bias on your part.
Harvard study showed strong bias. Have to click into the PDF.
1 Like
There was a really, really good compilation of how each of the MSM reacted on election night (all very sad!) but I can’t find it on google or youtube… I wonder why:
Google exec’s react to the election:
That’s an interesting paper.
Their conclusion on why Trump has received a lot more negative reporting than Obama, Clinton, or Bush:
“Given that tendency [of the media to highlight the negative], the fact that Trump has received more negative coverage than his predecessor is hardly surprising. The early days of his presidency have been marked by far more missteps and miss-hits, often self-inflicted, than any presidency in memory, perhaps ever.”
Cue hp’s claim that the Harvard study is fake news in . . . 3 . . . 2 . . . 1 . . . .
Those “missteps and miss-hits” were fake news.
I knew that I could count on you!
Thank you so much!
1 Like
From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump:
“In 2015, Trump’s lawyer Michael Cohen threatened Fordham University and the New York Military Academy with legal action if they released Trump’s academic records.”
Ashford, Grace (February 27, 2019). “Michael Cohen Says Trump Told Him to Threaten Schools Not to Release Grades”. The New York Times . Retrieved June 9, 2019.
So . . . you can’t see Trump’s academic records because he told his lawyer to threaten schools if they tried to release those records. It’s your buddy’s fault. Maybe he has something to hide.
There’s no upside… if had a 4.0, they’d say he was taking classes that weren’t hard, he cheated, or some other excuse. No matter how good his academic records are, they’ll find something to complain about. So what’s the point of releasing them?
Even if it was low, he turned out pretty good. I had a low GPA and I’m doing alright.
Just wanted to remind everyone that Hillary deleted 33,000 emails and wiped her servers, maybe she had something to hide…
A true Trump acolyte: change the subject rather than address Trump’s shortcomings.
Hint: Clinton isn’t running.
Poor hp cryin in the corner
Sounds like the debates − should there ever be any − may be moot:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/how-biden-wallops-trump-114537297.html
434:104. Biden gets only 81% of the electoral vote.
I wonder what Mr. Rick Newman had to say back in 2016… oh here we go:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-clinton-is-still-a-huge-favorite-to-win-161657760.html
Oh and days after Trump won:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/what-could-prevent-donald-trumps-recession-064927716.html
“What could prevent Donald Trump’s recession”, pre-coronavirus… what recession was he talking about?
Let’s try to use some objective sources.
Of course, Trump was less well known for his lying and incompetence back then than he is today.
Trump has proved himself to be a great leader, he might win by an even greater margin this time.