Sad that the media is taken in by Trump's transparent tactics

[stopbush]

Last edited Sun Aug 28, 2016, 07:34 PM - Edit history (1)

You would think that anyone who has been a parent would recognize the childishly transparent tactics Trump employs: name calling, projection, telling lies that are easily disproved with your own words, etc.

But for some reason, they don't - it won't - see it.

[left-of-center2012]

1. "telling lies"

I watched parts of the Sunday shows on MSNBC and CNN where Trump mouthpieces each said:
"Clinton wants open borders so anyone who wants to can just walk into the United States."

It must have been said 15 times, and not one time was it challenged.

[LAS14]

2. Yes, their uncertainty about what "objectivity" means...

... has resulted in a ridiculous equation between Trump and Clinton. Like las week when the mantra was that both were engaging in personal attack. Nonsense! Clinton was quoting facts. Trump was yelling "bigot" with no more reason than a two year old throwing a tantrum.

[NanceGreggs]

3. I have no doubt whatsoever ...

... that the media is fully aware of Trump's tactics, along with being well aware of his lack of qualifications for the office is POTUS.

The fact is they don't care about any of that. What they care about is putting asses on the couch over the next two months - and the only way to do that is to go with the "horse-race" scenario.

Between now and election night, the media will use their own "transparent tactics" to keep audiences tuned-in to their infotainment-passed-off-as-news programming. If they don't shore-up Trump's campaign and keep him looking like a viable candidate, there is no horse-race. It's as simple as that.

Trump could be polling at 10% to Hillary's 90%, and the media would still be yelling, "It's a horse-race! Anything can happen! Trump had 20 people at a rally today. He only drew a crowd of 10 last week, so it looks like things are really turning around for him!"

Rinse. Lather. Repeat.

[stopbush]

4. I would imagine that 90% of the money spent on political campaigns

goes to TV ads.

They depend on that $ for their salaries and perks.

[NanceGreggs]

6. Exactly.

They also depend on viewership numbers, because that's what dictates what they can charge for ALL ads, not just political ads.

And no one is going to tune-in if they think the horse-race has already been won. The illusion of "anyone can still win this thing" has to be maintained at all costs.

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

7. If his crowd went from 10 to 20 the MSM would report

"Trump's crowds have doubled while Hillary's have only increased by 10%."

[NanceGreggs]

8. I think there's a job awaiting you at CNN!!!

That's just the kind of creative thinking they're looking for!


Good one!

[no_hypocrisy]

5. They see it as entertainment, not politics or democracy.

Advertising $ $ $ $

[pansypoo53219]

9. as i keep saying. the gnewz media is still kissing reagan's balls.