That said, a slight change in search technique shows:
NY Times: Hillary Clinton Struggles to Gain Traction in Florida, Despite Spending
CNN: [Why Democrats are anxious](Sexism plays a role in the closeness of presidential contest, Obama says)
At this point, unless your understanding of “crickets” is very different from mine, I think it’s safe to call you a liar.
Horseshit. They all reported it, but they reported it when it was news, two or three days ago, as a quick google search would show. Fox and Drudge keep flogging the stories they’re trying to push for days, weeks, months, or years, so that’s why it’s still on their front page. Real news sites report the news the day it’s news, and put new headlines up the next day. Hope that helps.
Say, do those crickets happen to wear a top hat and spats, and carry an umbrella?
Yes, we have, because when they do it right, it involves goatse.
SA, you’re a tool, and you can’t even do that right.
But that would never work, leaving old news stories in place and pretending they are recent! Why, all anyone would have to do is visit any actual news site and…oh. Wait. I see the problem…
I see. So by changing search terms to find info that focuses on Clinton rather than Trump you managed to find some reportage I didn’t see while visually scanning (i.e., not searching with keywords) the site for mention that Trump had pulled ahead, and from this you deduce I’m a liar? I suggest you refamiliarize yourself with the definition of liar because this in no way fits.
Now here’s the thing, guys. For a couple weeks now I’ve been seeing mention on Fox, Drudge and some of the sites Drudge links to that the race between Clinton and Trump is drawing closer and closer and is now virtually neck and neck.
Yet here on the good old Dope I read time and time again during this same period about how Clinton is comfortably ahead and leading by five, six, eight and ten points. So I’m wondering why here, on the smartest message board in the world, so many people seem uninformed as to how close recent poll findings are.
So I’m looking at headlines on Fox’s website last night and I’m looking at Drudge’s aggregate of links and I says to myself, “Self, I wonder if the biased mainstream sites are even reporting this stuff?” So I goes to the [del]landlady[/del] (uh, sorry, Thorogood in the background) mainstream sites to find out for myself, and lo and behold, no mention of a tight race is to be found anywhere. And knowing how this place works and that the slightest, teensy-weensiest mention anywhere would be used as an excuse to claim I’m wrong, you can believe I scrutinized each site’s home page exhaustively.
And like I said, crickets were chirping all over each site’s home page.
Now it may well be that all these sites had indeed reported this information a few days earlier, but I can hardly be blamed for being unaware of that since none of the poll-related comments I’d been seeing on the board over that time reflected this.
So, simple and understandable mistake on my part. No lies and no attempts to call anyone “liberal WHORES” involved. (I have to say I was particularly amused at that little scenario. Over my time here I’ve come in for far, far more abuse and insults than I’ve ever dished out and even now am among the most polite posters in this thread. Are you people really so thin-skinned that my tepid criticisms now and then seem this aggressive, insulting and over-the-top? No wonder you twist off like pop-bottle rockets over every little thing the way you do.
And as far as my coming back after I said I was leaving, and the ridiculous assertion that by having done so I’m a liar, I simply changed my mind. This is not an unusual phenomenon at all, and to me it speaks of how desperate you are to find something to criticize me for that you not only see fit to mention it but to exaggerate its importance to such ridiculous lengths.
And so for now I’m out. Maybe I’ll come back, maybe I won’t. I’ll have to see what Cher thinks.
(bolding mine)
If that’s what you wondering, maybe you should have started a thread on that topic you lying ignorant mope, but you didn’t.
Holy fuck, you’re so stupid that you can’t even start your own discussions correctly.
Maybe I should have. But it simply didn’t occur to me as my curiosity had been piqued as to what the mainstream sites were doing, and what better way to answer that question than to visit them myself?
There’s absolutely nothing wrong with that and your condemnation over my having done so is as silly as it is meritless.
It never ceases to amaze me how much ire my posts seem to generate around here. I’m one lone wolf occasionally cracking wise about liberals in roughly the same vituperative way that countless liberals around here condemn and insult conservatives dozens if not hundreds of times a day every day. I realize the truth hurts but you guys really need to try to keep at least a little sense of perspective.
And I wouldn’t be criticizing anyone for not knowing how to start anything correctly (or necessarily, or non-stupidly) if I were you, quarry-boy. That’s the most wordy, idiotic, nonsensical and just plain awkward and unworkable phrase to try to turn into a meme anyone has ever been moronic enough to think worth the effort.
You have a hilariously fictional estimate of yourself.
I frequent Vox, Slate, NewRepublic, The Nation, Washington Post, and New York Times. I saw articles on all of them during my regular reading bemoaning Trump’s rise in the polls and the continuing trend towards a Trump majority.
The stupid part about all of this is that this is a constant, and fucking retarded, right-wing refrain. “Why isn’t X in the news! Why isn’t Y in the news! The news media is biased because their front page doesn’t look the way I think it should look!” It’s stupid even when the articles aren’t right fucking there for all to see (which they are, you incredibly dense fuckwit), because your personal priorities do not a reasonable news headline make. Should news of Trump’s rise overtake, say, the news of the explosion in New York? Or the news of Trump’s recent birther “announcement”? Or his latest wink and nudge towards Clinton’s second amendment positions and someone shooting her? Your bizarrely twisted priorities (wherein for some reason this should be headline news for weeks on end, which is far more a critique of the disgustingly shitty news sources you apparently frequent like Drudge and FOX) have no proportion to reality.
Oh, and “lone wolf”? Buddy, you’re Moon Moon’s retarded cousin. You’re like Clothahump, except he doesn’t often pretend to not be a fucking retard.
Sorry but I’m not answerable for what you claim is a constant right-wing refrain. It hasn’t been one of mine, though I will admit that I’ve wondered from time to time whether any criticism of Barack Obama ever shows up on CNN, USA Today, the NY Times, etc. I spot check periodically and have never once seen him being being called to task or spoken of critically even once on any of these sites. This is one of the reasons I read the Fox site and Drudge’s site, though perhaps I just kept mysteriously missing mainstream criticisms of Obama by two or three days, who knows? But as far as I’ve been able to determine, if I wanted to drift through life believing that Obama never did anything wrong I’d certainly choose one of the mainstream sites. This isn’t to claim that nothing critical of Obama has ever appeared on any of these sites, but they’ve certainly never been there any time I’ve looked.
And now we come to the plethora of false assumptions you make as to news story priorities and they’re apparent ability to present themselves only as singularities. Can not news of Trump’s rise exist anywhere on the same web page as the story about the NYC bombing? Same with his birther announcement and/or any and all of his alleged winks and nudges. There are a great many stories presented at once for a reader’s perusal on any of the major online news sites. Why you apparently think I believe the ones about Trump should supersede all others is anybody’s guess, but you do yourself no favors in your attempts to make me look stupid by making yourself look stupid in the process.
And you guys are certainly free to keep it up with your routine moron/idiot/retard/liar/whatever insults and use them all you want. But really, isn’t it obvious by now that after some fourteen or so years on this board that I’m immune to them. Do any of you think you’ve ever scored any sort of a point with anyone by using them? And do you actually think you’ve intimidated me or hurt me caused me to back off because you insulted me or called me some name or other? It is to laugh!
There have been lots of discussions on the Dope about the tightening polls, and the worry of Clinton supporters. If you missed them than you just didn’t look very hard.
Except now.
…Birther conspiracies appeal to you…?
<snipping mine>
Do you allow liberals that same courtesy? I seem to recall that not being the case.
So how many times can one change one’s mind before earning a “liar” title?
Starving Artist won’t address me directly because I’m just to real for him to handle!
I’ll grant you the courtesy of not calling you a liar as soon as you admit that you’re an idiot who plays fast and loose with facts. Given the ample evidence I showed above that you’d characterized NYTimes, CNN, Drudge, and Fox incorrectly, you could have said, “oh shit, sorry guys, I’ll try to be more responsible next time.” Instead, you give a long defense of why your mischaracterizations were perfectly okay.
As for Obama never being criticized, let’s just say your spot checks in this instance are as spotty as your spot checks that led to the OP.
YOUR THESIS IS WRONG.
But it’s somehow our fault that he hasn’t seen them. Because liberals.
Oh never mind him. No matter how much the media have reported and we have discussed the narrowing polls he will just say he never saw any evidence of it. Because somehow it’s not good enough.
I think the issue is that, “Trump Narrows Clinton’s Lead,” just doesn’t sing well enough for Starv. I mean what would be wrong with, “Real Man Donald Trump Now Leading Tired Old Crooked Twat Hillary ‘Monica Lewinsky Blew My Husband’ Clinton”?
Just to clarify my previous statement, it is The Donald’s election to lose, and he’s doing a great job of it. Hillary needs to up her dosing of glycerin …