3 ms·
Maybe it wasn't the press? Sure, they were completely one-sided, but look, the opponent won with 0 press by his side. So, why do we think that whatever the medi
by return0 10y ago
Maybe it wasn't the press? Sure, they were completely one-sided, but look, the opponent won with 0 press by his side. So, why do we think that whatever the media said matters so much? Maybe the rhetoric of the democrats was wrong? Maybe every time hillary unconditionally pandered to minorities or women , a switch flipped inside the head of a voter?
Anyway, if you want to attribute something to the press it's their inability to doubt themselves. This actually begins in academia, where social sciences have switched from arguments to a war of punchlines. Skepticism is the foundation of science.
- AznHisoka 10y agohe won precisely because he had 0 press on his side. when the press exaggerated the idiocy of trump's words and actions, that played right into the anti-establishment sentiment of voters. as a result when trump really did do dumb things, and the press continue to make him look bad, the public would respond by saying "screw you! u elitists want to make us feel this way but we are going to respond by just not caring twice as much!"
- bloat 10y agoWhether they were on his side or not, they still printed every single thing he said, often in giant letters on the front page.
- return0 10y ago... thinking that it would deter voters, because they could not fathom that someone might actually agree with it.