McLuhan's words are more relevant than ever before in this connected world, Trump's use of tweets being the perfect example. It is more difficult to separate fact from fiction (alternative facts) or opinion from reporting.
During the last election we saw two parties in denial, neither acknowledging that the electorate wanted real change from the same old politics. Trump represented change however misguided it was, the GOP establishment did not want him but were afraid of him, when he threatened to go it alone if he didn't get the nomination they knuckled under. The democrats on the other hand had Sanders as their agent of change, but he could not pull a Trump since he was relatively broke and could not go it alone, so we had business as usual Hillary as their candidate.
Since change seemed to be what the electorate wanted more than anything else and with Bernie out of the way Trump had that side of the street to himself and the voters that came with it. During the first debate Clinton mopped the floor with the Donald, showing she was the knowledgeable candidate, but in doing so she also showed her elitist and condescending attitude. For the Trump fans this strengthened their resolve and for the undecided it was a reminder of the same old politics Hillary represented. That was the beginning of an actual race to the White House, not a walk in the park like many pollsters predicted.
As for your premise, was the media having a liberal bias or just reporting what they were seeing at the Trump rallies, let's face it news has become a ratings game and reporting on fisticuffs gets more readers than lofty promises.
My two cents.
Return to Odd
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
Reply to message