patrick.net

Maybe they're afraid that under a Trump dictatorship we won't have any real pollsters any more ?

Maybe because they do the polling so they know who is going to win and give accordingly.

It does seem to be true the the press is overwhelmingly partisan:

Conventional journalistic wisdom holds that reporters and editors are referees on politics’ playing field — bastions of neutrality who mustn’t root for Team Red or Team Blue, either in word or deed.

But during this decidedly unconventional election season, during which “the media” has itself become a prominent storyline, several hundred news professionals have aligned themselves with Clinton or Trump by personally donating money to one or the other.

In all, people identified in federal campaign finance filings as journalists, reporters, news editors or television news anchors — as well as other donors known to be working in journalism — have combined to give more than $396,000 to the presidential campaigns of Clinton and Trump, according to a Center for Public Integrity analysis.

Nearly all of that money — more than 96 percent — has benefited Clinton: About 430 people who work in journalism have, through August, combined to give about $382,000 to the Democratic nominee, the Center for Public Integrity’s analysis indicates.

https://www.publicintegrity.org/2016/10/17/20330/journalists-shower-hillary-clinton-campaign-cash

So is it a good idea to trust their reporting?

Thought experts world wide agree that Hillary will win. The media only reports what's on the script don't blame them they are just the messenger.

$382K from the pollsters to illary. It would be nice if she could donate some of that money to our disabled and hospitalized veterans.

Dropping off some coffee, courtesy of Chapter 5, DAV, for the veterans in the VA Hospice this afternoon. Before I could leave, one of the nurses asked me if I could go up to the ICU and visit one of our guys. For sure!

The only thing Hillary wins is war and revolution. Her presidency will be chocked full with foreign conflict and domestic conflict and internal conflict. She will have turmoil and conflict on every front.
While Peter Thiel grows and assumes the role of Trump. There will probably have to be a paper ballot to vote on declaring Electronic voting unconstitutional.
Then the kids right now 12 to 15 are something like 70% conservative and more pro Trump than their parents were willing to admit.

The two parties is dead there's a Patriot movement that aims to see Making America great again a reality. And we wont settle for a stolen election.

We've got Judges in Battle ground states saying it will be a crime to even suspect someone of voter fraud, then in NC a judge just ruled that all of the dead voters that was purged must be put back. You had Obama yelling to day at a group of unruly Hillary supporters, that anyone can vote, it doesn't matter if they are legal, illegal, registered to vote or not. He said the only people turned away are the people that don't show up.

That is the first shot in a coup of our Republic if you ask me.

rando says

So is it a good idea to trust their reporting?

2016 was the year the Democratic Activists decided that the overwhelming tide of big money wasn't an indicator of pernicious influence in elections.

Though perhaps it started in 2008 with Obama's big bank donations.

Watch kids and pay attention. This is what happens to your brain if you do too much cocaine over the years.

rando says

It does seem to be true the the press is overwhelmingly partisan:

Virtually all major newspapers have endorsed Clinton, including ones that don't usually endorse a candidate. Talk to almost any serious and intelligent person (true for about 85% of them) and they're going to tell you that having Trump as President is risky to say the least, and that Clinton is a FAR BETTER CHOICE.

Then, since many people in the media, and especially at high levels within the media, are intelligent serious people, they too support Hillary. This is not surprising and it's not bad.

If suddenly the most evil and worst possible person for the country became a candidate for PResident (not saying that's Trump - just making a logical point) and the media at some point were seen to be clearly biassed (that is to say, full of people that understood the danger), would that be a bad thing ?

If you understand this question, then you understand that the media seeming biassed isn't in and of itself bad. Even in Patricks quote above. He's not saying that people are paying the media to be biassed. He's saying that members of the media are overwhelmingly contributing money to Clinton's campaign. MAny of these are very intelligent very well informed people. It's not a bad thing.

don't worry. he's on the cusp of calling you a "little shit"...

Tenpoundbass says

Funny how Duckie has dropped his favorite mantra,

Ranina ranina says

don't worry. he's on the cusp of calling you a "little shit"...

Well he would be wrong, I aint so little anymore.

YesYNot says

So is it a good idea to trust their reporting?

It's never a good idea to trust anyone.