Never any media bias - well maybe just a little. All the time.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:hey Goose - look.. that mean 'ol librul media has your hero winning..

LooseGoose wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:hey Goose - look.. that mean 'ol librul media has your hero winning..

Keep repeating the big lie and somehow you think you'll convince someone other than Turtle it's true.

LooseGoose wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:hey Goose - look.. that mean 'ol librul media has your hero winning..  

Keep repeating the big lie and somehow you think you'll convince someone other than Turtle it's true.

Turtleneck wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

Keep repeating the big lie and somehow you think you'll convince someone other than Turtle it's true.

I independently reached that conclusion. In fact, I was the first poster to pick up on your closet turn toward Trump.

Loose says he despises both Clinton and Trump, but a recent textual analysis of Loose's posts since the end of the D convention show he has made 417 negative posts about Clinton compared to one negative post about Trump.

In total he has made 615 posts about the election and 522 about the candidates. In the analysis, 104 posts were coded as neutral or about another candidate, compared to 418 that took a position on Clinton or Trump. Of the 418 that took a position, 99.8% were negative posts about Clinton. There were no positive posts about Clinton. While there were no positive posts about Trump, only the remaining .2% were negative. In this case the relative absence of negative suggests a positive.. It could not be more transparent.

For every post that Loose mentioned supporting Castle, he failed to articulate a reason or show any knowledge of the candidate. This was interpreted as a deflection tactic.

Turtleneck wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

Keep repeating the big lie and somehow you think you'll convince someone other than Turtle it's true.

I independently reached that conclusion. In fact, I was the first poster to pick up on your closet turn toward Trump.

Loose says he despises both Clinton and Trump, but a recent textual analysis of Loose's posts since the end of the D convention show he has made 417 negative posts about Clinton compared to one negative post about Trump.

In total he has made 615 posts about the election and 522 about the candidates. In the analysis, 104 posts were coded as neutral or about another candidate, compared to 418 that took a position on Clinton or Trump. Of the 418 that took a position, 99.8% were negative posts about Clinton. There were no positive posts about Clinton. While there were no positive posts about Trump, only the remaining .2% were negative. In this case the relative absence of negative suggests a positive.. It could not be more transparent.

For every post that Loose mentioned supporting Castle, he failed to articulate a reason or show any knowledge of the candidate. This was interpreted as a deflection tactic.

LooseGoose wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:

I independently reached that conclusion. In fact, I was the first poster to pick up on your closet turn toward Trump.

Loose says he despises both Clinton and Trump, but a recent textual analysis of Loose's posts since the end of the D convention show he has made 417 negative posts about Clinton compared to one negative post about Trump.

In total he has made 615 posts about the election and 522 about the candidates. In the analysis, 104 posts were coded as neutral or about another candidate, compared to 418 that took a position on Clinton or Trump. Of the 418 that took a position, 99.8% were negative posts about Clinton. There were no positive posts about Clinton. While there were no positive posts about Trump, only the remaining .2% were negative. In this case the relative absence of negative suggests a positive.. It could not be more transparent.

For every post that Loose mentioned supporting Castle, he failed to articulate a reason or show any knowledge of the candidate. This was interpreted as a deflection tactic.

lol, bullshit. But you and your twin carry on supporting your felon.

Rocinante wrote:Goose is voting for Trump. lol.

LooseGoose wrote:it's amusing how all the felon supporters are trying to project their guilt on others.   I'm voting for Darrell Castle.   Shall I take a picture and break MI law to prove it?   If so, I'll expect pics from all of you supporting Hills as she tries to become the 1st PResident to be impeached before she's sworn in.

LooseGoose wrote:it's amusing how all the felon supporters are trying to project their guilt on others. I'm voting for Darrell Castle. Shall I take a picture and break MI law to prove it? If so, I'll expect pics from all of you supporting Hills as she tries to become the 1st PResident to be impeached before she's sworn in.

Turtleneck wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:it's amusing how all the felon supporters are trying to project their guilt on others.   I'm voting for Darrell Castle.   Shall I take a picture and break MI law to prove it?   If so, I'll expect pics from all of you supporting Hills as she tries to become the 1st PResident to be impeached before she's sworn in.

To put the analysis in proper context, through the primaries Loose was equally negative about both Trump and Clinton. Like the post-convention results of our study, through the primaries Loose had nothing positive to say about Clinton or Trump and was relatively equal in his negative remarks about the two candidates.

Between the end of the primaries and the conventions, the absence of positive remarks held true but a gap between negative remarks about Clinton and Trump emerged. Loose was willing to be far more critical of Clinton than Trump. After the conventions, the number of negative posts about Clinton actually increased while the number of negative posts about Trump dropped below 1%.

So, it is not that Loose always supported Trump. Clearly this was not the case. However, at some point, there was a shift that has been accounted for in this study.

Rocinante wrote:lol Trump voter.

Turtleneck wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:it's amusing how all the felon supporters are trying to project their guilt on others. I'm voting for Darrell Castle. Shall I take a picture and break MI law to prove it? If so, I'll expect pics from all of you supporting Hills as she tries to become the 1st PResident to be impeached before she's sworn in.

To put the analysis in proper context, through the primaries Loose was equally negative about both Trump and Clinton. Like the post-convention results of our study, through the primaries Loose had nothing positive to say about Clinton or Trump and was relatively equal in his negative remarks about the two candidates.

Between the end of the primaries and the conventions, the absence of positive remarks held true but a gap between negative remarks about Clinton and Trump emerged. Loose was willing to be far more critical of Clinton than Trump. After the conventions, the number of negative posts about Clinton actually increased while the number of negative posts about Trump dropped below 1%.

So, it is not that Loose always supported Trump. Clearly this was not the case. However, at some point, there was a shift that has been accounted for in this study.

Turtleneck wrote:

Rocinante wrote:lol Trump voter.

One wonders if this has something to do with Loose's love of the game euchre, or that he is a trumpet player in a Mio jazz band.

Rocinante wrote:OTPT is not an entitled millennial.

.... See?  Saying something doesn't make it true.

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:Goose is not a republican.

Rocinante wrote:OTPT is not an entitled millennial.

.... See? Saying something doesn't make it true.

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:

Rocinante wrote:OTPT is not an entitled millennial.

.... See? Saying something doesn't make it true.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:bump..

Hey Goose - let me know when the liberal media covers your hero's impending hearing on a child rape charge.

LooseGoose wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:bump..

Hey Goose - let me know when the liberal media covers your hero's impending hearing on a child rape charge.

"impending hearing" becomes - she dropped her civil lawsuit today.

So no criminal hearings at all, in fact no court appearances at all.   Just the smear.

xsanguine wrote:I dont even see anything about them in this thread, which is strange.

Watch closely.

Beginning as early as today, but definitely by January 20, 2017, the mainstream media will discover a host of problems, dangers, failures, troubles, mistakes, and catastrophes that somehow escaped their attention, or were considered unimportant, during the last eight years under Obama.

For example, When jobs numbers come out, nothing less than 250,000 full-time jobs will be considered ”strong.” A 4.9 percent unemployment rate will be considered almost as disastrous as the 4.2 percent rate under Bush in 2006. “Real” unemployment will be adjusted once again by the labor force participation rate and will be found to be 9.5 percent, not 4.9 percent.

Crises in the Middle East will be attributed to American bellicosity and maladroit U.S. policy. When Iran acquires a nuclear weapon, it will be because of then-current foreign policy failures.

Adding even twelve cents to the current $20 trillion national debt will be “unpatriotic” and a fiscal catastrophe in the making.

The worst race relations in 50 years will have commenced with, and will be due to, Republican control of the White House and Congress.

Public outrage over health insurance will have commenced with, and will be due to, Republican failure to fix the health care system. Last year.

We will learn that 13 million more people than in, oh, 2008, have instantly descended into poverty. Anything less than 3 percent growth in any quarter will be due to abysmal administration failures.

The Justice Department will be found to have been horribly politicized. By Republicans. There will be alarm over the derogation of the rule of law.

The ranks of racists, sexists, homophobes, xenophobes, and bigots of every stripe will have swelled tenfold.

Actual instances of government incompetence will be uncovered after eight years of astonishing bureaucratic perfection.

Welcome back mainstream media. Your eight -year vacation from reality is over.

LooseGoose wrote:

Watch closely.

Beginning as early as today, but definitely by January 20, 2017, the mainstream media will discover a host of problems, dangers, failures, troubles, mistakes, and catastrophes that somehow escaped their attention, or were considered unimportant, during the last eight years under Obama.

For example, When jobs numbers come out, nothing less than 250,000 full-time jobs will be considered ”strong.” A 4.9 percent unemployment rate will be considered almost as disastrous as the 4.2 percent rate under Bush in 2006. “Real” unemployment will be adjusted once again by the labor force participation rate and will be found to be 9.5 percent, not 4.9 percent.

Crises in the Middle East will be attributed to American bellicosity and maladroit U.S. policy. When Iran acquires a nuclear weapon, it will be because of then-current foreign policy failures.

Adding even twelve cents to the current $20 trillion national debt will be “unpatriotic” and a fiscal catastrophe in the making.

The worst race relations in 50 years will have commenced with, and will be due to, Republican control of the White House and Congress.

Public outrage over health insurance will have commenced with, and will be due to, Republican failure to fix the health care system. Last year.

We will learn that 13 million more people than in, oh, 2008, have instantly descended into poverty. Anything less than 3 percent growth in any quarter will be due to abysmal administration failures.

The Justice Department will be found to have been horribly politicized. By Republicans. There will be alarm over the derogation of the rule of law.

The ranks of racists, sexists, homophobes, xenophobes, and bigots of every stripe will have swelled tenfold.

Actual instances of government incompetence will be uncovered after eight years of astonishing bureaucratic perfection.

Welcome back mainstream media. Your eight -year vacation from reality is over.

From National REview.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:bump..

the mainstream media, as I predicted, got the candidate they wanted..

NigelUno wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

From National REview.

In a thread about media bias that YOU started, you just linked something from the National Review?

CheesySpartan wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:bump..

the mainstream media, as I predicted, got the candidate they wanted..

Lmfao...We'll if Bob says it, it must be true.

DWags wrote:FTR, I see a lot of people in this thread who are arrogantly disregarding the type of person that siad "fuck you, I'm tired of being disregarded and made fun of".   

Somehow the Democratic party has to figure out where they became so elite and arrogant and forgot about rural poverty in favor of urban poverty. Going to West Virginia and sayign shit reverbated to every rural town in America.   Having  Obama, his wife and Bill up on stage along with a rocker from the 70's and 80's to close out your campaign, sent a stron message that things indeed weren't ever going to change.  

I didn't vote for Trump.  I have voted democratic most of my life, but somehow we have to stop being this arrogant smartest guy in the room.   Self reflection needs to be done, I'm not so sure Trump didn't just change the electoral college map all over America.   Why did so many states abandon the same old same old.  Lets try figuring that out instead of arguing about the media and putting down those who are sick of it.

LooseGoose wrote:

DWags wrote:FTR, I see a lot of people in this thread who are arrogantly disregarding the type of person that siad "fuck you, I'm tired of being disregarded and made fun of".   

Somehow the Democratic party has to figure out where they became so elite and arrogant and forgot about rural poverty in favor of urban poverty. Going to West Virginia and sayign shit reverbated to every rural town in America.   Having  Obama, his wife and Bill up on stage along with a rocker from the 70's and 80's to close out your campaign, sent a stron message that things indeed weren't ever going to change.  

I didn't vote for Trump.  I have voted democratic most of my life, but somehow we have to stop being this arrogant smartest guy in the room.   Self reflection needs to be done, I'm not so sure Trump didn't just change the electoral college map all over America.   Why did so many states abandon the same old same old.  Lets try figuring that out instead of arguing about the media and putting down those who are sick of it.

70% Trump votes in many rural counties in Michigan.

Yet most Hills supporters here would have you believe all of those people only voted that way because they're ignorant, racist and misogynists.  

The refusal to accept that they have legitimate grievances is the 1st mistake.

LooseGoose wrote:

DWags wrote:FTR, I see a lot of people in this thread who are arrogantly disregarding the type of person that siad "fuck you, I'm tired of being disregarded and made fun of".   

Somehow the Democratic party has to figure out where they became so elite and arrogant and forgot about rural poverty in favor of urban poverty. Going to West Virginia and sayign shit reverbated to every rural town in America.   Having  Obama, his wife and Bill up on stage along with a rocker from the 70's and 80's to close out your campaign, sent a stron message that things indeed weren't ever going to change.  

I didn't vote for Trump.  I have voted democratic most of my life, but somehow we have to stop being this arrogant smartest guy in the room.   Self reflection needs to be done, I'm not so sure Trump didn't just change the electoral college map all over America.   Why did so many states abandon the same old same old.  Lets try figuring that out instead of arguing about the media and putting down those who are sick of it.

70% Trump votes in many rural counties in Michigan.

Yet most Hills supporters here would have you believe all of those people only voted that way because they're ignorant, racist and misogynists.

The refusal to accept that they have legitimate grievances is the 1st mistake.

LooseGoose wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

In a thread about media bias that YOU started, you just linked something from the National Review?

Even as I type this I know you're probably too fucking stupid to understand the difference but I'll try anyway.

National Review doesn't fucking pretend to be unbiased you dolt. That's a HUGE difference.