Tomtrout

Extrapolated t***h remains a supposition influenced by bias regardless of credentials of those making the claim of prediction. Where is the "new ice age" predicted in the 70's. Miami should have been underwater in 2013. The stock market will crash and a new economic depression should be underway since Trump was elected.

Those of the greatest influence, reputation, and power resist evidence of deviation from their prediction. Denial of Trump as president is a good example. It must have been the Russians because i could not have made that big of a mistake. Celebrities actually think that their opinions and ideas have a greater influence than any common person.

The best predictors and the most t***hful are those who have little to gain. It is easy to say that you are wrong if your professional reputation and influence is not threatened by a personal misjudgment. It is easier to forget and move on rather than to justify mistakes. The greater the power and influence the greater the probability of bulls**t by trying to suppress the t***h of their mismanagement or misjudgments. The main stream media got it all wrong and now they will say or do anything to support their errors in judgement and to protect their power and influence.

The most powerful deniers or supporters have the greatest potential for bulls**t. T***h and honesty comes from the common person and not from the influential or the most credentialed The outrage against Trump comes from the fact the he is focused on the problems of today and minimizing effort on the extrapolations of the future problems. In other words he is trying to fix what is broken and not on what might break in the future.

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

As is evident by the BS being spewed by media, as well as their crony followers...

Propaganda, just dismiss it?? NO, let's not just dismiss it..Let's hold them accountable..

Choice comes in being responsible and moving forward for the betterment of our country..

If their choice is to wallow in self pity to the detriment of our Nation then they are not to be taken seriously at all..Nor will they by the majority...

T***h and honesty, I hope we get back to that measurement in living.. The division created is staggering...

America Only Loc: From the right hand of God

We don't have news reporters...we have Political Lobbyist that sit in front of a television camera, and go by names like Lester Holt, and work for C linton N ews N etwork, and other shabby dishonest pits of crud that sells to the weak and feeble minded dip sticks that call themselves....democrats.

funguy1949

Right on the money Young Lady right on

funguy1949

100% right An 98% if not all the liberals fit that bill to a T !!!!!!

son of witless

I wonder if any liberal can measure the benefits that Obama delivered as far as saving the ice caps? We can measure the cost of his stupidity in lost jobs and lost economic growth. As far as I can tell the liberals are still saying the North Pole is melting. They still say the polar bears are starving. How many cubic feet of sea ice did Obama save? How many cuddly polar bears did he save?

theotts

What lost jobs are those, boy? Unemployment is currently lower than at any time during the Bush Administration. The Dow is at 20,000. So, that falacious argument has become the big lie.
As to g****l w*****g, it is advancing. Miami is losing ocean-front. No-one said it would be underwater at any particular time. No-one said polar bears are starving. They're drowning because there is more open water than they can navigate. Each of the last four years have successively been the warmest on record. The distribution of flora and fauna is shifting markedly. And the people with actual science degrees agree.

Oh... and your president is unhinged, a fully fledged narcissist and a feckless i***t. Apparently, you like him because he's sympatico. Sad.

Tgards79

Tell me, who do you think had more people at their Inaugural, Obama or Trump?

theotts

Obama, by nearly double, as demonstrated by photo and by numbers of rides on t***sit. Before you say it, you should be aware that the photo Trump has is dated January 21st, 2017, the Saturday on which the women's march was held.

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

Amen AO....Trump is canning the other Lobbyist on the hill, and he's going to do the same with media... His gag order to all Federal divisions is a start..

They will really be left making up news by the time he finishes.. That or they will start doing as asked, just fair reporting...

Shows the low level scum we have spewing their lies and I'm not about to support any of them...

Media outlets are coming up to the 2wst Century and leaving these l*****t owned garbage reporters by the way side!!

Revolunized by their own doing... I love it!!

theotts

You are clearly intellectually and emotionally incapable of understanding how anything works, but I'll give you the dope. All but a tiny minority of the media are for profit businesses. Their profits come primarily from advertising revenue. Most of the businesses that advertise are Republicans. Advertisers have, for a very long time, stopped buying ads if the paper became "too liberal." Similarly with media owners, such as Time Warner. They own CNN, and they are known to have contributed heavily to Republican campaign coffers. The owners control their vompany

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

I didn't say any were for profit, so let's strike that, ok...Likewise, knowing where the revenue comes from, I said I will not support them..
If what you say is true then your l*****t owned media rags should be out of business now...

And one more thing~~

Estimated spending in the p**********l race is considerably higher than in 2012 at this same point in time (Table 3). The increase from 2012 is over $130 million, though the total number of ad airings is down by about 100,000, a 14.4 percent decrease from the earlier cycle.[2] About 350,000 ads have been aired by or on behalf of Democratic p**********l candidates, compared to about 258,000 ads that have been aired by or on behalf of Republican candidates. The vast majority of pro-Democratic advertising in the primaries and general (to date) was sponsored by the candidates themselves (mostly Clinton and Sanders), while the majority of Republican advertising has been sponsored by groups, many of which are organized as super PACs. These groups paid $168 million in 2012 for 250,000 ad airings promoting GOP primary candidates. They paid $215 million in 2016 for a significantly smaller number of airings (143,000).

Table 4 breaks down ad spending by sponsor in the p**********l general e******n, which we define as beginning June 8, 2016, the day after the last p**********l primaries (with the exception of the District of Columbia’s Democratic primary on June 14). Hillary Clinton’s campaign has aired over 70,000 ads at an estimated cost of $57 million, while Priorities USA Action, a super PAC supporting Clinton, has aired 28,000 ads at an estimated cost of $26.7 million. As of August 18, the Trump campaign had purchased no ads on broadcast television during the general e******n period, though on August 19, Trump’s campaign started airing ads in North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida—19 media markets in total (Table 5 below contains the market breakdown of airings from Friday, August 19 through Sunday August 21).

A pro-Trump super PAC, Rebuilding America Now PAC, however, has filled some of the gap, airing about 5,000 ads at an estimated cost of $5.4 million. The NRA Political Victory Fund has also aired over 3,600 ads supporting Trump.

Green Party candidate Jill Stein had aired only 38 ads, while Purple PAC, which supports Libertarian Party nominee Gary Johnson, has aired only two ads.

WHO SPENT what there Mr.theotts??
And not be selective on my snip, here's the whole article...

http://mediaproject.wesleyan.edu/releases/aug-2016/

And here's another one on who spends what in TV advertising~~
All told, Clinton’s campaign and Democratic groups are spending nearly $9.3 million on television advertisements in seven swing states this week. Two Republican groups that back Trump are spending almost $1.9 million on advertising in five swing states.

Sorry, but your facts are skewed, also not surprising..

theotts

Lindajoy.
Here's the flaw in your jeremiad; you completely misunderstood my op. Spookily, I predicted exactly that at the beginning of my post.

My post was about media bias, not ad-buying. Apparently mommy read it too fast.

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

This is your post~~ And it's about media bias my as* it's laced with nothing but advertisement and "for profit business" and how they generate their profit..Along with your incorrect claim that most whom advertise are Republicans..Along with your incorrect claim that Advertisers stopped buying ads..

Yes, your a true, twist it up when your challenged on your false assertions...

Where in this supposed post on" media bias now," do you even suggest such a thing??You may wish to look in the mirror when your telling people they are emotionally incapable of understanding...You obviously have zero ability to comprehend...

And you now try to discredit your own post by claiming it was another topic you never even addresses until now!
That double talking BS may get you buy with your buddies, but I'm not buying it.. Do you see what a fool you make of yourself?? Of course not or you wouldn't have tried something so underhanded!!

YOUR POST~~
You are clearly intellectually and emotionally incapable of understanding how anything works, but I'll give you the dope. All but a tiny minority of the media are for profit businesses. Their profits come primarily from advertising revenue. Most of the businesses that advertise are Republicans. Advertisers have, for a very long time, stopped buying ads if the paper became "too liberal." Similarly with media owners, such as Time Warner. They own CNN, and they are known to have contributed heavily to Republican campaign coffers. The owners control their vompany
theotts

son of witless

You know what is SAD? The quality of your arguments. I realize that you are as passionate for Obama as I am for Trump, but come on. Do you ever vet your own statements before you write your posts?

Lost jobs. What planet have you lived on for the last 8 years? No really, what freaking planet? Not Earth. Maybe bizzarro earth? The unemployment rate is false because it ignores the Labor Participation Rate which has sucked Obama nuts for 8 years. The jobs that are there are part time retail crap. And they got even crappier because under Obama Kare employers cut back hours even more.

Are you even aware of that FACT ? ? ? ?

As far as Global Fracking Warming, thank you for not calling it c*****e c****e. I am so fed up with that slight of hand by Liberals. Do you know that the climate is always changing? Do you know what the climate where you live was like 1,000 years ago? 1,500 years ago? Most likely you are looking at c*****e c****es the media is screaming of that are in the last 30 years. 30 years in terms of climate is nothing. If you would study HISTORY you might remark about how often the climate shifts. Flora and fauna always shift, that is what they do. I remember reading about Wooley Mammoths who inhabited North America, Siberia, and Northern Europe. Over hundreds of thousands of years scientists can judge what the climate was doing by the Mammoth teeth. As the climate cycled warmer-cooler, wetter-drier the plants the Mammoths ate changed and their teeth reflected those changes.

The point being that climate is always changing.