Excellent example of how leftist mainstream media tries to shape the 'news'

Two articles this morning, one from Bloomberg that celebrates the cash-raising prowess of Democratic Party congressional candidates:

Democrats are hoping a blue wave of support will carry them to victory in this fall’s elections. In the meantime, they’ve caught a green wave of cash—the torrent of money pouring into Democratic campaign coffers helped 73 House candidates outraise Republican incumbents and opponents in races for open seats in the second quarter, a Bloomberg analysis of Federal Election Commission data shows.

The entire article – well, almost – goes on and on how leftists are engerized and raising money because Trump.

Oh oh, Republicans are in trouble! Right? Right?

Except at the very end of the article, the second to last paragraph, we see this rather huge fact:

While Democrats have a financial advantage in some races, the Republican National Committee has still raised more money this cycle than the Democratic National Committee: $213 million to the DNC’s $109 million.

The Republicans have almost doubled what the Democrats have raised!

The Democratic Party operative posing as a journalist who wrote the article had to grit his teeth to put in this last fact, I guess. But in attempting to pretend he is reporting free of bias he had to include it. And the propagandist is too committed to Team Blue to realize he just blew up his entire argument in promoting fellow leftists.

https://www.bloombergquint.com/busi...ngers-are-outraising-gop-opponents#gs.Pd9jeTE

Then we have this, from the conservative Washington Times:

A recent Harvard/Harris poll recorded a 10-point spike in Hispanic support for Mr. Trump. It hasn’t received much attention from the mainstream media, which is heavily invested in its portrait of the president as an unrepentant — and unpopular — “nativist.”

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jul/31/good-news-for-the-gop-hispanics-are-boosting-trump/

Yes, the leftist mainstream media will ignore this.

And when the 'Blue Wave' fails to materialize this fall, when the liberals/progressives/socialists fail to gain enough seats to take the House, we'll hear nothing except, "bbbuuttt Russia!" from the echo chamber leftists who fail to look outside their propaganda bubble...

 

You are angry at Bloomberg for reporting the entire news regarding DNC spending compared to RNC spending. Yet are thrilled at Washington Times only reporting good news for Trump worshippers such as yourself.

Well, have fun living in an angry little bubble.

 

Nope.

I'm simply pointing out that the Bloomberg article, for almost its entirety, spins blatant propaganda making it appear that the Democratic Party has made great strides and has had more success in its fundraising for candidates than the Republican Party.

It's not until the end of the article that we see that the repubs have out raised the dems by a margin of 2-1. They've raked in twice the cash from donors than the Democrats.

You make an excellent example of the person who believes the Bloomberg article is good new for Democrats after perusing it; news flash, it isn't good news, quite the contrary.

And then we see that a Harvard/Harris poll recorded a 10-point spike in Hispanic support for Trump. I think you'll agree that we'll more than likely not see this is a mainstream leftist 'news' site?

And my closing was to point out that when the Blue Wave fizzles, many leftists who only read mainstream media propaganda sources will be surprised and once again blame RUUSSSIIIAA!!!, as they will be unaware of what really occurred due to remaining in the liberal/progressive/socialist echo chamber...

 

Be interesting to watch the election results - if Democrats can gain seats despite having raised only half the money, it says something about what voters want more.

 

Very true.

But if we learn the voters once again rejected the Democrats, will they simply blame everything but their ability to connect to moderates and rely even more on victimization and identity politics?

Those who escape the leftist mainstream media bubble will have learned that Hispanic support for Trump has spiked 10 percent I linked to, for example, and may recognize this as the reason for defeat.

But how many will venture outside their echo chamber?

 

A reminder -
Clinton's unsuccessful campaign ($768 million in spending) outspent Trump's successful one ($398 million) by nearly 2 to 1. The Democratic National Committee and left-leaning outside groups also outspent their Republican counterparts by considerable margins.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-election-its-a-doozy/?utm_term=.157328184335

It's about the message not the money and Dems don't have a message other than hate.

 

I wonder how much the Russians paid for the above post?

 

The Republican establishment sucks. Many will lose their seats in Congress.
They will be racing establishment Democrats down the swirling political toilet.

 

$ Gazillions.

 

The media constantly tries to demoralize the right and fire up the left both with reporting and polls. Same ole same ole.

 

Hyper-partisans continually snivel and/or rant in their persecution complex about those nefarious, ubiquitous, and nebulous "leftists!", "liberals!" "libs!", or "the left!" that fester in their noggins (planted their by their ideological media entertainers.)

Their paranoid delusion is now spreading to include conservatives such as George Will, Max Booth, the Koch Brothers, etc., etc., etc., (All in on stuff like China's climate change "hoax!" presumably.)

Whenever they are thusly afflicted, I recommend a bracing cup of tea and a hot, buttered scone.

 

Haha, blaming the Russians has become the new liberal/progressive/socialist shout of Raaaccciiissst! when they are unable to debate:

 

The OP apparently doesn’t understand that the RNC and DNC account for only a fraction of total party spending. Which is why the amount raised by them is a footnote to the larger story.

Conservative ignorance strikes again.

 

Yep; and especially if they have also lost 10% of Hispanic support over all. Of course leftists need to ask themselves WHY they have lost that support.

 

Why is the story leaving out how rightist media tries to shape the news?

 

The article indicated (at the end, would have been in small print if the Democratic Party operative posing as a journalist could have gotten away with it) that overall, the GOP had raised twice the cash the Dems did. Where in the story did it indicate local fundraising on the part of Dems and not repubs?

Liberals/progressives/socialists should look beyond their propaganda providers so they're not shocked this November...

 

Of course they do, just as the leftist media does. But you guys believe your leftist media is accurate and unbiased...

 

I am a single person so again you use the incorrect words in your attempts at grammar...All media is biased-duh. Humans are biased-duh...

 

Much of what passes for the "progressive" "left" these days knows that MSM = FAKE NEWS.
They just pretend they don't.

“THREE PROMINENT CNN journalists resigned Monday night after the network was forced to retract and apologize for a story linking Trump ally Anthony Scaramucci to a Russian investment fund under congressional investigation. That article — like so much Russia reporting from the U.S. media — was based on a single anonymous source, and now, the network cannot vouch for the accuracy of its central claims.” THE INTERCEPT, CNN Journalists Resign: Latest Example of Media Recklessness on the Russia Threat, Glenn Greenwald, June 27 2017.
https://theintercept.com/2017/06/27...e-of-media-recklessness-on-the-russia-threat/

 

The good news is that none of the polls until the last one after the election will be accurate. People don't want to be assaulted by the fascist progressive thought police. They will never tell the truth until the curtain is pulled behind them. I wonder who they plan to blame for fronting their party with Maxine Waters and the socialist child?

 

Polls only reflect a .00003% of the population. Anyone that uses them to justify any action is not doing it according to a logical conclusion.

 

No, it didn't indicate that. It indicated the RNC had raised twice asn much money as the DNC.

But the vast majority of political donations bypass the RNC and the DNC. They go directly to candidates, or to the various party election committees (like the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee).

Here is total fundraising so far this cycle:
https://www.opensecrets.org/overview/

Between the House and the Senate, Democrats have raised nearly $1 billion. The DNC accounts for only $109 million of that.

Reublicans have raised less than that -- $712 million. The RNC accounts for $213 million of that.

I don't understand the question. Can you elaborate?

 

In Venezuelan currency that's what, $1.25 max

 

You really should read more carefully. The article was about the 73 candidates who out raised republican house incumbents. It wasn't about the entire RNC vs the entire DNC in fundraising. Your second point wasn't even a point. Speculating what might happen if something happens in the future is more stating what your imagination tells you than any kind of point to be made.

 

If 73 candidates raising more money than incumbent republicans isn't "great strides", I don't know what it. Sounds like you're just mad they didn't fawn over the president's party. I suggest you look to fox or Alex Jones for that. They won't disappoint you.