Re: Goose, your ban is in the process of being reduced

by **Watch Out Pylon!** 2017-06-19, 13:31

Herbie Green wrote:
Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

Do you have a cheat sheet or something I could use?

You refused to cooperate. At this point I would suggest a formal apology post to both the board and Goose.

Thank you for contacting me. As your Moderator, your thoughts and concerns are very important to me. Please know that I have received your message and will respond in a timely manner.

In the meantime, please visit my website - watchoutpylon.swill.gov - where you can find additional information and sign up for my newsletter. You can also follow me on Twitter, as well as my official Facebook Page. These are great resources for keeping up to date on what I'm doing.

I look forward to serving you and the families of tSwill.

by **Cameron** 2017-06-19, 13:38

GRR Spartan wrote:You all realize The Pantry and Cameron have become the gHost twins to Goose's TanFan.

Goose, your ban is in the process of being reduced - Page 6 502811600

by **The Pantry** 2017-06-19, 15:49

A Harvard study published Thursday has revealed a dramatic anti-Trump bias in the media, with major outlets including CNN and NBC producing more than 90 percent negative coverage of Trump’s first 100 days in office.

CNN, NBC, and CBS give Trump’s presidency 93 percent, 93 percent, and 91 percent negative coverage, respectively, Harvard’s Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy found.

On the broadcast side of the media spectrum, Fox News provided the most even-handed coverage, with 52 percent anti-Trump coverage.

Harvard Report: There Is A Huge Anti-Trump Bias In Corporate Media

by **Floyd Robertson** 2017-06-19, 16:14

The Pantry wrote:A Harvard study published Thursday has revealed a dramatic anti-Trump bias in the media, with major outlets including CNN and NBC producing more than 90 percent negative coverage of Trump’s first 100 days in office.

CNN, NBC, and CBS give Trump’s presidency 93 percent, 93 percent, and 91 percent negative coverage, respectively, Harvard’s Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy found.

On the broadcast side of the media spectrum, Fox News provided the most even-handed coverage, with 52 percent anti-Trump coverage.

Harvard Report: There Is A Huge Anti-Trump Bias In Corporate Media

I'm just being devil's advocate here...

Trump scored 80 percent negative coverage, whereas Obama, Bush, and Clinton received 41 percent, 57 percent, and 60 percent, respectively.

...isn't it possible the other three just sucked less and gave the media less ammo?

by **Travis of the Cosmos** 2017-06-19, 16:57

Floyd Robertson wrote:
The Pantry wrote:A Harvard study published Thursday has revealed a dramatic anti-Trump bias in the media, with major outlets including CNN and NBC producing more than 90 percent negative coverage of Trump’s first 100 days in office.

CNN, NBC, and CBS give Trump’s presidency 93 percent, 93 percent, and 91 percent negative coverage, respectively, Harvard’s Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy found.

On the broadcast side of the media spectrum, Fox News provided the most even-handed coverage, with 52 percent anti-Trump coverage.

Harvard Report: There Is A Huge Anti-Trump Bias In Corporate Media

I'm just being devil's advocate here...

Trump scored 80 percent negative coverage, whereas Obama, Bush, and Clinton received 41 percent, 57 percent, and 60 percent, respectively.

...isn't it possible the other three just sucked less and gave the media less ammo?

Why yes, that is entirely possible.

by **The Pantry** 2017-06-19, 17:36

Obama had no business being president but if the media had jumped him the race card would have popped out

by **Travis of the Cosmos** 2017-06-19, 17:45

The Pantry wrote:Obama had no business being president but if the media had jumped him the race card would have popped out

Oooookkkkkaaayyyyy guy.

You still haven't answered my question. That'd be a solid.

by **Watch Out Pylon!** 2017-06-19, 17:51

The Pantry wrote:Obama had no business being president but if the media had jumped him the race card would have popped out

Why not? Because he won the popular vote and the electoral college?

by **The Pantry** 2017-06-19, 18:25

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
The Pantry wrote:Obama had no business being president but if the media had jumped him the race card would have popped out

Oooookkkkkaaayyyyy guy.

You still haven't answered my question. That'd be a solid.

I'm sure they could find plenty of other stuff to report on. It's just they are completely obsessed on digging up any possible dirt on Trump. When the stuff they find isn't suitably dirty, they twist it into something dirtier with speculation.

I've already given you data from a highly credible, and undoubtedly liberal source. There's pretty much nothing Trump could do to make any of you poor-loser democrats happy except resign. That ain't gonna happen and the media will continue their witch hunt.

by **Travis of the Cosmos** 2017-06-19, 18:30

The Pantry wrote:
Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

Oooookkkkkaaayyyyy guy.

You still haven't answered my question. That'd be a solid.
I'm sure they could find plenty of other stuff to report on. It's just they are completely obsessed on digging up any possible dirt on Trump. When the stuff they find isn't suitably dirty, they twist it into something dirtier with speculation.

I've already given you data from a highly credible, and undoubtedly liberal source. There's pretty much nothing Trump could do to make any of you poor-loser democrats happy except resign. That ain't gonna happen and the media will continue their witch hunt.

A) you didn't give me data that proves your point, you gave me data that proves mine. There simply isn't that much positive stuff going on. Which, again, since I don't think you read it the first time... everyone, especially yourself, should have expected.

B) for the like eighth time, what positive stories do you want them extensively reporting on?

by **GRR Spartan** 2017-06-19, 18:44

If you have access to CBSNews they have a segment from their morning program with Frank Luntz GOP wordsmith with a focus group of Trump voters.

They all sounded like a few of the posters here. No sense arguing.
Its the fundamentalist Christian mindset I knew growing up with a political twist.

It seemed most were still: "Trump said it. I believe it. That settles it."

The Swill mods are under no mandate to make sure a minimum number of web sites, articles or publications meet a litmus test.

by **Turtleneck** 2017-06-19, 18:46

The Pantry wrote:
Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

Oooookkkkkaaayyyyy guy.

You still haven't answered my question. That'd be a solid.
I'm sure they could find plenty of other stuff to report on. It's just they are completely obsessed on digging up any possible dirt on Trump. When the stuff they find isn't suitably dirty, they twist it into something dirtier with speculation.

I've already given you data from a highly credible, and undoubtedly liberal source. There's pretty much nothing Trump could do to make any of you poor-loser democrats happy except resign. That ain't gonna happen and the media will continue their witch hunt.

From the study...

First, the study cites a negativity bias in media reporting as opposed to a liberal bias. It goes on to say coverage of Bill Clinton, a Democrat, was only marginally better than the coverage of Donald Trump's first 100 days.

Presidents are more than the main focus of U.S. reporters. Presidents are also their main target. Although journalists are accused of having a liberal bias, their real bias is a preference for the negative.[22] News reporting turned sour during the Vietnam and Watergate era and has stayed that way.[23] Journalists’ incentives, everything from getting their stories on the air to acquiring a reputation as a hard-hitting reporter, encourage journalists to focus on what’s wrong with politicians rather than what’s right.[24] Once upon a time, the “honeymoon” period for a newly inaugurated president included favorable press coverage.[25] That era is now decades in the past. Today’s presidents can expect rough treatment at the hands of the press, and Donald Trump is no exception (see Figure 4). Of the past four presidents, only Barack Obama received favorable coverage during his first 100 days, after which the press reverted to form. During his second 100 days, Obama’s coverage was 57 percent negative to 43 percent positive.[26]

Trump’s coverage during his first 100 days was negative even by the standards of today’s hyper-critical press. Studies of earlier presidents found nothing comparable to the level of unfavorable coverage afforded Trump. Should it continue, it would exceed even that received by Bill Clinton. There was not a single quarter during any year of Clinton’s presidency where his positive coverage exceeded his negative coverage, a dubious record no president before or since has matched.[29] Trump can’t top that string of bad news but he could take it to a new level. During his first 100 days, Clinton’s coverage was 3-to-2 negative over positive.[30] Trump’s first 100 days were 4-to-1 negative over positive.

But the real kicker is this statement near the end, which tends to fly in the face of the "witch hunt" argument you keep pushing. Rather than a witch hunt, the very study you cite to support your claims blasts Trump for being dishonest and unworthy of the office, and suggest the media remain vigilant in their coverage.

If a mud fight with Trump will not serve the media’s interests, neither will a soft peddling of his coverage. Never in the nation’s history has the country had a president with so little fidelity to the facts, so little appreciation for the dignity of the presidential office, and so little understanding of the underpinnings of democracy. The media’s credibility today is at low ebb, but the Trump presidency is not the time for the press to pull back. The news media gave Trump a boost when he entered presidential politics. But a head-on collision at some point was inevitable. It’s happened, it isn’t pretty, and it isn’t over.

I know this is hard for most of you, but maybe, from time-to-time, read what you link to in your posts.

by **The Pantry** 2017-06-19, 18:47

You're like the lib media, manipulating. There are no positive stories...only the negative, largely twisted ones. Again, you dems are poor losers.

The obsession with Trump is off the charts. Wouldn't be surprised to learn the media has someone analyzing sewage water coming out of the White House.

by **Travis of the Cosmos** 2017-06-19, 18:49

Turtleneck wrote:
The Pantry wrote:
I'm sure they could find plenty of other stuff to report on. It's just they are completely obsessed on digging up any possible dirt on Trump. When the stuff they find isn't suitably dirty, they twist it into something dirtier with speculation.

I've already given you data from a highly credible, and undoubtedly liberal source. There's pretty much nothing Trump could do to make any of you poor-loser democrats happy except resign. That ain't gonna happen and the media will continue their witch hunt.

From the study...

First, the study cites a negativity bias in media reporting as opposed to a liberal bias. It goes on to say coverage of Bill Clinton, a Democrat, was only marginally better than the coverage of Donald Trump's first 100 days.

Presidents are more than the main focus of U.S. reporters. Presidents are also their main target. Although journalists are accused of having a liberal bias, their real bias is a preference for the negative.[22] News reporting turned sour during the Vietnam and Watergate era and has stayed that way.[23] Journalists’ incentives, everything from getting their stories on the air to acquiring a reputation as a hard-hitting reporter, encourage journalists to focus on what’s wrong with politicians rather than what’s right.[24] Once upon a time, the “honeymoon” period for a newly inaugurated president included favorable press coverage.[25] That era is now decades in the past. Today’s presidents can expect rough treatment at the hands of the press, and Donald Trump is no exception (see Figure 4). Of the past four presidents, only Barack Obama received favorable coverage during his first 100 days, after which the press reverted to form. During his second 100 days, Obama’s coverage was 57 percent negative to 43 percent positive.[26]

Trump’s coverage during his first 100 days was negative even by the standards of today’s hyper-critical press. Studies of earlier presidents found nothing comparable to the level of unfavorable coverage afforded Trump. Should it continue, it would exceed even that received by Bill Clinton. There was not a single quarter during any year of Clinton’s presidency where his positive coverage exceeded his negative coverage, a dubious record no president before or since has matched.[29] Trump can’t top that string of bad news but he could take it to a new level. During his first 100 days, Clinton’s coverage was 3-to-2 negative over positive.[30] Trump’s first 100 days were 4-to-1 negative over positive.

But the real kicker is this statement near the end, which tends to fly in the face of the "witch hunt" argument you keep pushing. Rather than a witch hunt, the very study you cite to support your claims blasts Trump for being dishonest and unworthy of the office, and suggest the media remain vigilant in their coverage.

If a mud fight with Trump will not serve the media’s interests, neither will a soft peddling of his coverage. Never in the nation’s history has the country had a president with so little fidelity to the facts, so little appreciation for the dignity of the presidential office, and so little understanding of the underpinnings of democracy. The media’s credibility today is at low ebb, but the Trump presidency is not the time for the press to pull back. The news media gave Trump a boost when he entered presidential politics. But a head-on collision at some point was inevitable. It’s happened, it isn’t pretty, and it isn’t over.

I know this is hard for most of you, but maybe, from time-to-time, read what you link to in your posts.

Hey

by **Travis of the Cosmos** 2017-06-19, 18:51

The Pantry wrote:You're like the lib media, manipulating. There are no positive stories...only the negative, largely twisted ones. Again, you dems are poor losers.

The obsession with Trump is off the charts. Wouldn't be surprised to learn the media has someone analyzing sewage water coming out of the White House.

Cool. Glad we agree there. Sorry that the mean media just reports what they see. It's very mean.

by **The Pantry** 2017-06-19, 19:13

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
The Pantry wrote:You're like the lib media, manipulating. There are no positive stories...only the negative, largely twisted ones. Again, you dems are poor losers.

The obsession with Trump is off the charts. Wouldn't be surprised to learn the media has someone analyzing sewage water coming out of the White House.

Cool. Glad we agree there. Sorry that the mean media just reports what they see. It's very mean.

It's not what they see. It's the way they twist it.

Came down to this cesspool wondering why Goose got banned. Found out why. You guys like your news "tabloid style" and don't care to hear anything else. I'm outta here for awhile.

Please, continue your lib circle jerk and hating on the POTUS.

by **Travis of the Cosmos** 2017-06-19, 19:18

I still really wish you could tell me what it is that they should be saying. But, you're pretty much a typical republican. "Oh that side is so wrong!!!" "Okay, what is it you want?" "Errrrr..... that side is so wrong!" For reference, see in your local dictionary- that time the dog caught the car after 7 years of yelling about Obamacare.

by **GRR Spartan** 2017-06-19, 19:22

The Pantry has convinced himself he is a warrior for truth and everyone else just doesn't know the truth.

Because this place isn't the Wells Hall circle jerk of connies this place must be a "lib" circle jerk.

No one is forcing The Pantry to post here. There is no $149.95 annual fee he paid so he's under no monetary pressure to stay.

Don't like having your ideas questions then quit posting here. There are other message boards you can find where other posters will almost always agree with you.

Don't let the door knob bump your butt on the way out.

by **Travis of the Cosmos** 2017-06-19, 19:25

Wait how do I get the money for posting here

by **Watch Out Pylon!** 2017-06-19, 19:28

The Pantry wrote:
Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

Cool. Glad we agree there. Sorry that the mean media just reports what they see. It's very mean.
It's not what they see. It's the way they twist it.

Came down to this cesspool wondering why Goose got banned. Found out why. You guys like your news "tabloid style" and don't care to hear anything else. I'm outta here for awhile.

Please, continue your lib circle jerk and hating on the POTUS.

Still waiting on that hug, big guy.

by Herbie Green 2017-06-19, 19:31

I could do a study and find that the majority of the press coverage of MSU football during the last 8 months has been negative. Is that because of a media bias or a reflection of the actual events?
It is mostly the latter but it does turn into a similar feeding frenzy where these are the stories that sell.

by **Rocinante** 2017-06-19, 19:32

Does it surprise anyone that raw milk drinkers are more susceptible to authoritarian thugs? They probably have parasites boring around in their brains.

by **DWags** 2017-06-19, 19:35

Herbie Green wrote:I could do a study and find that the majority of the press coverage of MSU football during the last 8 months has been negative. Is that because of a media bias or a reflection of the actual events?
It is mostly the latter but it does turn into a similar feeding frenzy where these are the stories that sell.

There is media bias in politics and sports. No big deal and it gives fans something to bitch about.

by **Watch Out Pylon!** 2017-06-19, 19:35

Rocinante wrote:Does it surprise anyone that raw milk drinkers are more susceptible to authoritarian thugs? They probably have parasites boring around in their brains.

This.

by **kingstonlake** 2017-06-19, 20:00

I think the media should reflect on Trump's positive tone during the primaries and general election. There way he genuinely tried to bring people together and heal a nation was remarkable and refreshing in this day and age. He continually showed respect, grace, and dignity in his big for the White House. Never has a man been so undeserving of negative reporting or discussion.

by **Robert J Sakimano** 2017-06-20, 07:35

The Pantry wrote:
Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

Cool. Glad we agree there. Sorry that the mean media just reports what they see. It's very mean.
It's not what they see. It's the way they twist it.

Came down to this cesspool wondering why Goose got banned. Found out why. You guys like your news "tabloid style" and don't care to hear anything else. I'm outta here for awhile.

Please, continue your lib circle jerk and hating on the POTUS.

I love when the snowflake supporters of the racist, bigoted sexual predator {sniffle} whine about how mean people are to him and then {sniffle} get sad and go home.

Goose, your ban is in the process of being reduced - Page 6 502811600

by msugolfguy 2017-06-20, 07:49

Robert J Sakimano wrote:
The Pantry wrote:
It's not what they see. It's the way they twist it.

Came down to this cesspool wondering why Goose got banned. Found out why. You guys like your news "tabloid style" and don't care to hear anything else. I'm outta here for awhile.

Please, continue your lib circle jerk and hating on the POTUS.

I love when the snowflake supporters of the racist, bigoted sexual predator {sniffle} whine about how mean people are to him and then {sniffle} get sad and go home.

Lol tabloid style. President talked to Alex Jones who thinks the government has lizard people within it's ranks. Let that sink in for a minute.

by **Robert J Sakimano** 2017-06-20, 07:55

msugolfguy wrote:
Robert J Sakimano wrote:
I love when the snowflake supporters of the racist, bigoted sexual predator {sniffle} whine about how mean people are to him and then {sniffle} get sad and go home.

Lol tabloid style. President talked to Alex Jones who thinks the government has lizard people within it's ranks. Let that sink in for a minute.

their whole existence is based on bigotry, racism, hate and rage.. but.. don't you dare say anything mean about their hero.

Goose, your ban is in the process of being reduced - Page 6 502811600

but, yeah - their "tabloid" journalism assertion is fun when you consider that a) the mainstream media is the reason their sexual predator was elected and b) they get their "news" from their racist uncle on Facebook.

oh well - they're fun to mock. Goose, your ban is in the process of being reduced - Page 6 969504605

Goose, your ban is in the process of being reduced - Page 6 969504605

by Herbie Green 2017-06-21, 13:44

Robert J Sakimano wrote:
msugolfguy wrote:

Lol tabloid style. President talked to Alex Jones who thinks the government has lizard people within it's ranks. Let that sink in for a minute.

their whole existence is based on bigotry, racism, hate and rage.. but.. don't you dare say anything mean about their hero.

but, yeah - their "tabloid" journalism assertion is fun when you consider that a) the mainstream media is the reason their sexual predator was elected and b) they get their "news" from their racist uncle on Facebook.

oh well - they're fun to mock.

I am starting to see it the other way around after the Goose ban. You make these sweeping generalizations of all Trump supporters as racist, bigoted rage monsters that only get information from their racist uncle but that is just aok. Just as it was for you to celebrate countless shootings as victories for your team. But as soon as one single shooting happened from the left it seems people didn't like the shoe being on the other foot so much. So who are the fragile snowflakes?

by msugolfguy 2017-06-21, 13:57

Herbie Green wrote:
Robert J Sakimano wrote:

their whole existence is based on bigotry, racism, hate and rage.. but.. don't you dare say anything mean about their hero.

but, yeah - their "tabloid" journalism assertion is fun when you consider that a) the mainstream media is the reason their sexual predator was elected and b) they get their "news" from their racist uncle on Facebook.

oh well - they're fun to mock.

I am starting to see it the other way around after the Goose ban. You make these sweeping generalizations of all Trump supporters as racist, bigoted rage monsters that only get information from their racist uncle but that is just aok. Just as it was for you to celebrate countless shootings as victories for your team. But as soon as one single shooting happened from the left it seems people didn't like the shoe being on the other foot so much. So who are the fragile snowflakes?

You must have missed the libtard, non patriot (that one ran through 2008), socialist, Un-American, the devils (Dennis Prager all day long), weak, cuck, etc... the brush paints both ways. I'll agree that it's lazy thinking and I don't partake in it but when politics become tribal that's what you get.

by **GRR Spartan** 2017-06-21, 14:04

Goose is back to posting on the 247 board.

Herbie shows up leading with his chin regardless of topic.

by **Death Roe** 2017-06-21, 14:07

Herbie Green wrote:
Robert J Sakimano wrote:

their whole existence is based on bigotry, racism, hate and rage.. but.. don't you dare say anything mean about their hero.

but, yeah - their "tabloid" journalism assertion is fun when you consider that a) the mainstream media is the reason their sexual predator was elected and b) they get their "news" from their racist uncle on Facebook.

oh well - they're fun to mock.

I am starting to see it the other way around after the Goose ban. You make these sweeping generalizations of all Trump supporters as racist, bigoted rage monsters that only get information from their racist uncle but that is just aok. Just as it was for you to celebrate countless shootings as victories for your team. But as soon as one single shooting happened from the left it seems people didn't like the shoe being on the other foot so much. So who are the fragile snowflakes?

Everything you said is fact. Bravo. I'm on your side. I completely agree, and have agreed, for a long time.

Pro-Democrat posts are encouraged here and it is simply fact.

by **Turtleneck** 2017-06-21, 14:11

Death Roe wrote:
Herbie Green wrote:

I am starting to see it the other way around after the Goose ban. You make these sweeping generalizations of all Trump supporters as racist, bigoted rage monsters that only get information from their racist uncle but that is just aok. Just as it was for you to celebrate countless shootings as victories for your team. But as soon as one single shooting happened from the left it seems people didn't like the shoe being on the other foot so much. So who are the fragile snowflakes?

Everything you said is fact. Bravo. I'm on your side. I completely agree, and have agreed, for a long time.

Pro-Democrat posts are encouraged here and it is simply fact.

Is this where you tell your made up story about how you were told not to post?

by **Death Roe** 2017-06-21, 14:12

That wasn't made up. WBH said I shouldn't really post pro-Republican after the election. That did happen.

by **Death Roe** 2017-06-21, 14:16

Don't forget that Bob posted a picture of dead children on a beach, and that was labeled as okay because it helped his cause.

by msugolfguy 2017-06-21, 14:44

Turtleneck wrote:
Death Roe wrote:

Everything you said is fact. Bravo. I'm on your side. I completely agree, and have agreed, for a long time.

Pro-Democrat posts are encouraged here and it is simply fact.

Is this where you tell your made up story about how you were told not to post?

Looks like a yes

by **Watch Out Pylon!** 2017-06-21, 14:59

I've already stated the reasons why Goose was banned many many times. Nothing I say or do will change anyone's minds. This is just rehashing drama. Locking the thread. Wheeeeee!!!!!!

by Sponsored content