I won't let you be made into a lampshade.

Our hotel smelled like dead hooker vagina (before you ask I had gotten a detailed description from beardown)

Why can't a lot of people that lean left see this when media bias gets mentioned. It doesn't have to be something that has to be denied ferociously. It is what it is and it is in fact real. It is about as silly as saying Hollywood isn't mainly democrat.

Yes! That was your excuse for criticizing him within days of becoming president. You later admitted to voting for Bob Barr.

Many that is true, but an incomplete statement.

I won't let you be made into a lampshade.

This is sort of complicated in that while I'd agree that many popular hosts (Burnett, Cooper, Fox, etc.) may lean left, and that persuasion is apparent in their coverage, the entities for whom they work are not "liberal." Often times these major conglomerates are dominated by republicans. That aside, and I'm not looking for a right vs left thing, I think in this particular election the Trump factor transcended partisan lines. You had many on the right, whether journalists or politicians, repeatedly attack Trump, sometimes with even more ferocity than putative liberal hosts (Ana Navarro comes to mind). This is because, again, Trump ran an incredibly unique campaign that compelled more fact-checking than normal, which came off as partisan but again there was nothing partisan about it. To be fair, things came off the rails a bit after the Access NBC thing, but on the other hand that arguably became more of a moral issue than a political one, and certainly much more personal.

Sure you have Fox and Breitbart, but educated people laugh at them and consider them "fringe" media. The media bias is natural. Most people who work in media are educated, live in large cities, and tend to have liberal viewpoints. It's usually easy to see when a subject isn't being covered fairly. If the media was comprised of hundreds of Sean Hannitys I'd be railing against anti-Clinton bullshit.

The crisis consists precisely in the fact that the old is dying and the new cannot be born; in this interregnum a great variety of morbid symptoms appear.

I don't think this last part of your sentence is true--the surveys I've read show that those affiliated with the corporate media tend to be fiscally conservative while being just left of center on social issues.

Also, I think it's clear that the corporate media reflects the views of our ruling elites, who may disagree with one another on some issues but still represent a very narrow range of opinion.

This is death rattle of the victim left.

The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.

I have to laugh at this....."expert" commentators have been offering up this theory, I believe partially to explain their own ineptitude in predicting wrongly that Clinton would coast to an easy victory in the Presidential election.

If all these idiots actually voted maybe she would have won.

Laurence Holmes is a fucking weirdo, a nerd in denial, and a wannabe. Not a very good radio host either.

This is going to reach a head pretty soon.

The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.

I love the spin on this whole thing. This is truly rich. Hillary Clinton is to blame because America has Donald Trump for President now. No one wants to admit that the reason that he is President is because a large portion of this country wanted him to be President. It's just that simple.

Hillary Clinton played some role but the truth is that a number of people supported him because they agree with views.

I thought about yesterday actually and it supports what Ive been saying about the xenophobic racist elements in his campaign. There was a period during the primaries when his support began to wane. Coincidentally it occurred when he changer his positions on the wall and Muslim ban. He briefly pivoted and when he did they began booing him and bashing him. It lasted for about a week and he reverted back to his original positions out of fear that he'd lose a portion of his "base".

The blame starts and just about ends with the DNC. They're the ones who Bill Bucknered this.

Um, no.

The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.

Nah...half the people who didnt vote, would have gone either way..both candidate suck. Bernie was the ray of of hope for this country, these Clinton backing turds fucked him. They deserve this outcome.

I don't understand how one can believe that the lesson to be extrapolated here is that The United States of America was just itching to elect an elderly, Athiest, Jewish Socialist.

The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.

I love the spin on this whole thing. This is truly rich. Hillary Clinton is to blame because America has Donald Trump for President now. No one wants to admit that the reason that he is President is because a large portion of this country wanted him to be President. It's just that simple.

Hillary Clinton played some role but the truth is that a number of people supported him because they agree with views.

I thought about yesterday actually and it supports what Ive been saying about the xenophobic racist elements in his campaign. There was a period during the primaries when his support began to wane. Coincidentally it occurred when he changer his positions on the wall and Muslim ban. He briefly pivoted and when he did they began booing him and bashing him. It lasted for about a week and he reverted back to his original positions out of fear that he'd lose a portion of his "base".

Clinton’s supporters among the media didn’t help much, either. It always struck me as strange that such an unpopular candidate enjoyed such robust and unanimous endorsements from the editorial and opinion pages of the nation’s papers, but it was the quality of the media’s enthusiasm that really harmed her. With the same arguments repeated over and over, two or three times a day, with nuance and contrary views all deleted, the act of opening the newspaper started to feel like tuning in to a Cold War propaganda station. Here’s what it consisted of:

-Hillary was virtually without flaws. She was a peerless leader clad in saintly white, a super-lawyer, a caring benefactor of women and children, a warrior for social justice.
-Her scandals weren’t real.
-The economy was doing well / America was already great.
-Working-class people weren’t supporting Trump.
-And if they were, it was only because they were botched humans. Racism was the only conceivable reason for lining up with the Republican candidate.

How did the journalists’ crusade fail? The fourth estate came together in an unprecedented professional consensus. They chose insulting the other side over trying to understand what motivated them. They transformed opinion writing into a vehicle for high moral boasting. What could possibly have gone wrong with such an approach?

Put this question in slightly more general terms and you are confronting the single great mystery of 2016. The American white-collar class just spent the year rallying around a super-competent professional (who really wasn’t all that competent) and either insulting or silencing everyone who didn’t accept their assessment. And then they lost. Maybe it’s time to consider whether there’s something about shrill self-righteousness, shouted from a position of high social status, that turns people away.

The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.

The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.