Good point. Yes The Liberal media ALWAYS seeks to pick the Republicans candidate for them. The Liberal Media endeavors to promote a Republican Candidate that, ‘A’ ,they believe they, the Press, can discredit and Democrats can then beat, and, ‘B’, one the Conservative Base of the Republican Party doesn’t like and won’t vote for. In the case of Trump there is a part, ‘C’, Trump distracts attention from Hillary Clinton’s scandals and generally poor performance. So once Trump becomes the Republican nominee we can expect the Liberal media to cease promoting him and to go all out to destroy him. The Media will attempt to paint Trump as the definition of what a Republican is: a crass, loud-mothed, misogynistic, privileged buffoon with no consistent ideological grounding. Also remember, the GOP “war against women” is the current Democrat narrative, which the Dems and Media feel will play well to Democrat voters once Trump faces Hillary. The Media has lot of video and audio clips they are sitting on that doesn’t make Trump look very good; it will all come out should he get the nomination. Believe it! Will Trump be able to survive this onslaught and remain electable? On the other hand Trump is the only one talking about stopping runaway mass immigration and that is what most average Americans think is the greatest threat to the survival of the country now. Actually the Trump candidacy is shaping up much like the candidacy of Barack Obama: a blank slate on which people are writing their hope and fears. Other than that we don’t really know what we are getting and there is much in the candidate’s past that we should be concerned about. Hope we don’t get fooled again.
One of the more stunning things about Donald Trump’s victory in Saturday’s South Carolina primary was the fact that he spent only $1.78 million to win.
By contrast, second-place finisher Marco Rubio spent $4.71 million on television advertising and third-place finisher Ted Cruz spent $2.34 million. In addition, Rubio and Cruz had more than $11 million in total Super PAC support, while Jeb Bush—who suspended his campaign after a disappointing finish in South Carolina—received a whopping $13.7 million in Super PAC support himself.
Trump received none.
So how did he win? Because he has the unwavering support of the nation’s most powerful Super PAC: The mainstream liberal media.
Even though Trump declared his candidacy midway through 2015, he had more than twice as much coverage on the three nightly network newscasts as all of his Republican rivals...combined.
Television analyst Andrew Tyndall found that the evening news programs on ABC, NBC, and CBS dedicated 327 minutes to Trump in 2015 compared with 57 minutes for Jeb Bush, 57 minutes for Ben Carson, 22 minutes for Rubio, and 21 minutes for Cruz.
Even though Cruz was the first major candidate to enter the race—a full three months before Trump did—he received just 7% of the coverage that Trump did. Rubio entered two months before Trump but received just one minute more than Cruz...and 305 minutes less than Trump.
Shockingly, the network newscasts devoted more than double the amount of airtime to Trump than to presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, who got 121 minutes of coverage in 2015.
2015 was, of course, the year in which Clinton’s email scandal exploded; so it is only natural that left-leaning network news programs would want to avoid coverage of this potentially devastating and criminal development.
Instead, it seems, they focused on Trump. In an illustrative example, all three networks completely ignored the one of the most recent releases of Clinton’s emails on January 19th and instead devoted 10 minutes and 31 seconds across five different segments on Sarah Palin’s endorsement of Trump.
And it’s not as though the emails released on the 19th weren’t newsworthy: They contained “intelligence from the U.S. government's most secretive and highly classified organization operation.”
Yet they were ignored in favor of Trump.
That has been a consistent hallmark of a 2016 election cycle in which negative news about Clinton and nearly any news about other Republican candidates is ignored so that the media can focus on Trump.
This goes well beyond just network newscasts, though, as Trump coverage is nearly wall-to-wall on the cable news networks—especially MSNBC and CNN, which seem to revel in showcasing the latest Trump event or outburst.
Remember, MSNBC hosted what amounted to a Trump infomercial last week as Cruz and Rubio took part in a town hall meeting on CNN and every cable news network offered at least partial coverage of the Trump town hall held opposite the Republican debate in Iowa that Trump skipped.
On the Monday before the South Carolina primary, all three major news networks (CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News) aired a Trump press conference that a Rubio Super PAC argued amounted to $2.8 million in free advertising.
On that same day, video emerged of Clinton literally barking like a dog in an embarrassing attempt to attack Republicans. This, however, was all but ignored in favor of Trump.
Noticing a pattern yet?
Since the moment he announced his candidacy, Trump has proven to be a convenient distraction from the trainwreck that is the Clinton campaign while simultaneously allowing liberal-leaning news networks to deprive other Republican candidates of much-needed airtime.
In essence, this helps to create a “bandwagon effect” in which voters who don’t generally pay much attention to presidential elections many months ahead of time gravitate toward the only candidate whom they know.
Trump entered the race with nearly universal name-recognition, which afforded him a massive advantage over other Republicans. By quickly becoming the only candidate who was extensively covered, Trump prevented any of those Republicans from getting traction (or even noticed) in a crowded field.
George Washington University political science professor John Sides noticed this almost immediately, writing:
Donald Trump’s surge to the front of the GOP presidential polls has occasioned not a little media attention and endless speculation as to why. You can disregard most of that speculation. The answer is simple: Trump is surging in the polls because the news media has consistently focused on him since he announced his candidacy on June 16.
Seven months later, nothing has changed. The news media is still consistently focusing on him almost exclusively and still refusing to allow either Rubio or Cruz to gain any real toehold with voters—even after Cruz won the Iowa caucuses.
The obvious reason for this is that Trump is simply more of an audience draw than either Cruz or Rubio, but Trump’s dominance of traditionally liberal news coverage likely goes deeper.
In December, the liberal-leaning site POLITICO asked Democratic Party insiders about the Republican field and their answers were eye-opening to say the least:
Democrats think Donald Trump would be the easiest Republican to beat next November but they fear Marco Rubio.
That’s according to a majority of the Democratic insiders in this week’s POLITICO Caucus, our survey of the top strategists, operatives and activists in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada.
Nearly 60 percent of Democratic insiders in the first four nominating states say the businessman — who has mostly avoided tapping his vast personal fortune to fund his campaign — would be the easiest of the leading GOP candidates to defeat in the general election.
Roughly two out of three picked Rubio from a list of five leading GOP contenders — including Trump, Ben Carson, Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush — as the most formidable GOP hopeful due to his biography and political skill.
See how this works?
Rubio is feared by Democrats...and subsequently ignored by news outlets that back Democrats. Trump is cheered by Democrats...and subsequently promoted by news outlets that back Democrats.
Trump received 327 minutes of network coverage in 2015, and searches of the largest left-leaning online and print news publications shows that he dominates coverage there, too.
“Donald Trump” registered 2.48 million hits on the New York Times’ website, 169,000 hits on the Washington Post’s site, 147,000 on POLITICO, and 134,000 on USA Today’s site.
In contrast, “Marco Rubio” registered just 110,000 hits on the New York Times’ website, 52,300 on the Washington Post’s site, 88,600 on POLITICO, and 58,000 on USA Today’s site.
A Google search of all news outlets found 87.7 million results for “Donald Trump” but just 13.1 million for “Marco Rubio.”
Could this massive discrepancy have anything to do with the admission that liberals are far more scared of Rubio as the Republican nominee than of Trump as the Republican nominee?
Could covering Trump incessantly to the detriment of every other Republican have anything to do with the admission that liberals desperately want their candidate to face Trump in a general election?
According to RealClearPolitics.com’s poll tracker, Rubio, Cruz, and even John Kasich all consistently beat Clinton in hypothetical general election matchups.
Among Republicans, only Trump consistently loses to her.
Only one poll out of five shows Trump beating Clinton, while four out of five show Cruz defeating her and all five show Rubio topping her.
Is it any wonder, then, that in a media environment where only 7% of journalists identify themselves as Republicans and self-identified Democrats outnumber Republicans 4-to-1, media outlets would tend to provide coverage that is friendly to the presumptive Democratic nominee and hostile to any challenges to her general election chances?
This friendly coverage has extended to the Republican race, as Trump is both a convenient excuse not to cover Clinton email stories extensively or cover at all more real threats to Clinton in a general election.
The liberal media covers Trump not only because Trump provides ratings, but also because they believe Trump will provide them with what they really want—a Hillary Clinton presidency.
In refusing to cover any other Republican, the liberal media has made it perfectly clear who they want to represent the Republican Party in November’s election.
They want the candidate whom they believe makes the Republican Party look most ridiculous. They want the candidate whom they believe will lose to Clinton.
They want Donald Trump. So why should we?
No comments:
Post a Comment