Was the 2016 election covered fairly?

One of the myths that has already developed about the 2016 election was that the mainstream media somehow tried to help Clinton, or tried to hurt the so-called President or generally was not fair and objective in their coverage, with their liberal bias favoring Clinton. To me this is just an indication of our short memories and the bias against facts that underpin the beliefs of supporters of the so-called President.

The media, mainstream and fake news alike, helped get the so-called President elected. They did this by covering his campaign events to the exclusion of covering the rallies of other candidates. This is too obvious to dispute.

But they also covered him in a way that they did not cover the other candidates. His lies, irrationality, ugliness were normalized while the indiscretions of others were inflated even though the transgressions of the so-called President were magnitudes greater. He called other candidates "lying Ted Cruz", "little Marco", "crooked Hillary," and worse. He accused them of things we all know he had done many times over; he lied and insulted the families of other candidates.

He begged Russia to hack the emails of his opponents.

This is not a biased memory - it is fact. No other candidate in the history of the country got as many breaks and as much coverage and as much a second chance to display some competence, humanity and decency. He never showed any.

If the press were fair they would have ALWAYS noted he was a liar, a bigot, a misogynist and ignorant. That would have been fair and objective. By not doing so, they gave him a break that they gave no one else. Studies are coming out that support the obvious. Please read:

https://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-general-election/

https://cyber.harvard.edu/node/99982

Obama, Trump and Russia

The news about the Obama administration trying to combat Russia's hacking in 2016 is an important story and many details about motivations are sure to be filled in. The main thrust is US intelligence discovered the hacking and that it was intended to hurt Clinton and help Trump and investigate what was done in response. There were public discussions of the Russian threat and covered in the news last year - but some ignored it or did not understand its import. One of those was, of course, the so-called President.

Here is the key point: if Obama announced in late 2016 that Russia was trying to hack our actual voter files in numerous states and help Trump, it would have been seen by many as mere "partisan politics" designed to help Clinton and hurt Trump. So they did not publicize this.

The Obama administration noted "that by August it was too late to prevent the transfer to WikiLeaks and other groups of the troves of emails that would spill out in the ensuing months. They believe that a series of warnings — including one that Obama delivered to Putin in September — prompted Moscow to abandon any plans of further aggression, such as sabotage of U.S. voting systems."

Also a number of cyber weapons were planted by the U.S. in response in Russian systems as well. But it was too late and probably not possible to do anything about the flood of fake news coming out of Russia or the bots they used to spread this news. News or ideas, like those of Al Qaeda or ISIS, are difficult to eradicate.

But now the graceless so-called President attacks Obama for not using the Russian hacks to effect the Presidential race - he criticizes Obama for not publicizing the fact of Russian interference in our election that the so-called President still refuses to acknowledge!

The so-called President wants to have it both ways: he wants to deny the fact of the Russian hacks while criticizing Obama for not doing something about the hacks. Also, the so-called President is behaving as if he is just learning about all of this when he has had access to security briefings since he became the nominee and and certainly since he became President 5 months ago. What is he talking about? From the Washington Post: "Trump tells Fox News contributor Pete Hegseth in an interview set to air Sunday that he “just heard today for the first time” that former President Barack Obama “knew about Russia a long time before the election, and he did nothing about it.”" Wait a minute - you, the so-called President have had access to this info for 5 months, probably more and you found out only now?

This is the most incompetent person ever to be President.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/world/national-security/obama-putin-election-hacking/?utm_term=.823b1e7553e4

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/the-latest-trump-questions-obamas-handling-of-russia-intel/2017/06/23/e85916b0-5865-11e7-840b-512026319da7_story.html?utm_term=.915a56929273

Today Was a Bad Day, November 9, 2016

Today, November 9, 2016, was a bad day, .

It was a bad day for voters; the presidential candidate that more voters voted for than any other candidate lost the election.  The person with the second most votes won the election.  This is the second time in the last 5 presidential elections that this has happened.  Since the party in power has now benefited both times from this absurd system, nothing will change.  The U.S. will remain the only country in the world where losing the popular vote is sometimes better than winning it.  We do not have a democracy; instead we play a game with odd rules that often rewards something other than the will of the people.  Instead of making everyone's vote count equally, some votes in some states are relatively irrelevant while some votes in a handful of states are all important.

It was bad day for Muslims; the president elect has stated he wanted to ban Muslims from entering the country on the basis of their religious beliefs.  Other religious folk, no matter how dangerous, crazy and un-American their beliefs may be are welcome as long as they are not Muslims.  Furthermore, the president elect has hallucinated seeing thousands of Muslims on the roofs of homes in Jersey City, New Jersey, celebrating the attack on the World Trade Center back in 2001 on TV.

It was a bad day for women who have been sexually assaulted.  They now have a president elect who has bragged about sexually assaulting women and we have all seen the women who have been the victims he claims to have assaulted.  He has insulted them horribly for confirming his own claims.

It was a bad day for women who may sometime have an unwanted or dangerous pregnancy.  They may be forced to have their babies, even if they are the victims of rape or if the pregnancy poses a danger to their lives.

It was a bad day for women who are not fashion model thin; for women who are over 35 which is "check-out" time according to the president elect; for women who are "nasty"; for women who do not have huge breasts; or for women who have faces the president elect does not like.

It was a bad day for persons with pre-existing conditions.  It was a bad day for young adults under 26 who have been insured under their parents health insurance plans.  They may lose their health insurance sometime soon.  Even those who complain about their premiums exploding may have second thoughts when they try to buy their insurance outside of the exchanges created by the ACA and lose their subsidies - as they would have had to do before Obamacare was created.

It was a bad day for those who are scientifically oriented and have concerns about global warming and the teaching of evolution in schools.

It was a bad day for people who are appalled that a candidate encouraged the illegal hacking of his opponent's email account.  At the same time the president elect never offered to release his own tax returns, much less his own emails.

It was a bad day for people who care about the deficit.  The president elect's budget plans would explode the deficit - but will there be fights over the debt ceiling by Republicans in the next 4 years as there were in the previous 4 years?

It was a bad day for the undocumented -  even if they are persons who were brought here as children and have known no other country.  All are to be deported, period.

It was a bad day for most taxpayers who will have a greater share of the tax burden after the rich get their incredible tax cuts.

It was a bad day for persons who believe corporations are not people.  Future supreme court judges will be chosen, in part, based on their inability to tell the difference between a human person and a corporation.

It was a bad day for future victims of gun violence.  Not only will no reasonable gun laws be passed but even research and  record collection of gun related crimes and violence will remain prohibited because some do not want to know the truth.

It was a bad day for those with disabilities.  The president elect has no problem mocking you.

It was a bad day for those who value honesty and rationality.  Most of what the president elect said during the campaign was untrue and why should that change now?  The campaign that began with birtherism ended with false claims too numerous to list.

It was a bad day for Americans; the campaign that said "we are stronger together" lost; the one that said "lock her  up" won.