TV Hits Trump With 85% Negative News vs. 78% Positive Press for Harris

One week before Election Day, a new analysis from the Media Research Center finds that broadcast evening news coverage of the 2024 presidential race has been the most lopsided in history. Since July, ABC, CBS and NBC have treated Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris to 78 percent positive coverage, while these same networks have pummeled former Republican President Donald Trump with 85 percent negative coverage. (See Methodology explanation at the end of this post.)

The difference in coverage between the two candidates is far greater than in 2016, when both Trump and then-challenger Hillary Clinton received mostly negative coverage (91% negative for Trump, vs. 79% negative for Clinton). It’s even greater than in 2020, when Joe Biden was treated to 66 percent positive coverage, vs. 92 percent negative for Trump.

The main reason for the imbalance: Since July, the Big Three have swamped their audiences with more than 230 minutes of airtime — virtually all of it negative

https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/rich-noyes/2024/10/28/tv-hits-trump-85-negative-news-vs-78-positive-press-harris

Media(and even some of the vocal scientists trying to urge action) have been guilty of overstating confidence in climate modelling. Which is more or less what they are agreeing on in the video.

The IPCC summary of state of the art climate modelling, and virtually ALL published papers on various climate models agree that the unknown and poorly modelled aspects of our climate are larger than the known influence of CO2.

That is to say, the physical modelling largely operates on energy in and out from the Sun and then playing out how changes in that energy balance operate. The thing is, that energy budget is enormous, and the number of factors at play are even larger and dynamic to make it more fun. The influence of CO2 in the energy budget is one of the relatively straightforward elements, and so we've got a pretty good and confident assessment of how much it impacts energy balance. The problem with climate modelling, is that the CO2 impact is smaller than the errors and unknowns in many other factors in the model including clouds.

Which is all saying that our climate modelling is hard, and even though we know CO2 changes are pushing the energy balance up, our modelling of the energy balance is still not good enough to accurately predict energy balance changes. That means we've got a giant 'all other things being equal' qualifier on model projections because if cloud behaviour changes based on temperature, we KNOW that our errors there are larger than the influence of CO2.

Modellers have been trying to draw attention to this nuance, but it's been deemed inconvenient to persuading the public to act and thus ignored by many pushing for action. The almost inevitable side effect though is that over time the reality of the models inaccuracy will play out and the public is gonna be asking why 'science' was wrong.

*related=https://videosift.com/video/Jamiroquai-Virtual-Insanity-3-46

Jamiroquai - Virtual Insanity has been added as a related post - related requested by Zawash.

There was a previous interesting submission of Illustris with embedded commentary here: https://videosift.com/video/Astronomers-create-first-realistic-virtual-universe

(queue lyric) America! F**K Yeah!

Oh... oh... I mean:

America! Ya F***ked!... by successive right-wing policies that lead to this glorious day, and in so many other ways (letting infrastructure crumbles, deny climate change, permanent tax holiday for the rich, fully supporting the MIC and virtually nothing else)

@newtboy,

There's a danger here of having an actual nuanced discussion on Israel/Palestine happening here if we aren't careful...

I agree with your point of difference on illegal immigrants in the US largely not having a plan for 'independence' in their back pocket. The soft equivalence that the right wingers would point to though would be immigrant settling into small area such that they can setup a virtual community without ever needing to learn local languages and pushing hard to keep their 'own' values and way of life. I don't agree with the "Learn English" rednecks or the ones shouting how folks need to act American, but there is at least a soft parallel. virtually the only thing South Park has ever been censored on was depicting the prophet, and that 100% read as fear of violent retaliation, which isn't nothing.

I also think you hit the bigger point on how broken systems of immigration are. Particularly when domestic politics and the situation for legal immigration to refugees is grossly inadequate. I think America today though is just a much more mild example of it than the 30/40s in Palestine. For all the complaints one can level at Zionism, it's very hard to condemn them for encouraging mass emigration out of Europe. It's also clear that waiting on legal immigration routes out wasn't going to get people out fast enough. Thus I really look carefully at any anti-zionist position that includes condemning jewish 'illegal' immigration at the time. It treads dangerously close to saying they should have accepted the alternative, which was by and large remaining in Europe...

"Virtual currency".

Pick one.

Similar to his answer to the question..”do you think this (Putin invading Ukraine) is evil.”

Trump “I think in 100 years people are going to look back and they’re going to say “how did we stand back and nato stand back” which in many ways I’ve called a paper tiger don’t forget I rebuilt nato because when I became president the first thing I noticed when I went there to the first meeting was that most of the countries were not paying or were paying far less than they were supposed to. There were only 8 out of 28 countries that were paid in full the United States was not only one of them, we were making up the deficits in order to protect Europe. We were paying POSSIBLY 80% of nato to protect them and then they take advantage of us yet on trade because on trade they’re every bit as bad as Gina. They treated us very badly on trade. We changed a lot of that around but they were very tough on trade I asked, Angela Merkel how many chevrolets are you selling this month in Munich or Berlin, and she looked at me and said “well probably none” I said you’re exactly right, none and yet we had the Mercedes Benz and the Volkswagens and all of them. We had all of the German companies, and the same thing with farmers, our farmers sell virtually nothing to Europe, you take a look at what we sell and yet we take their product.
They treated us very badly in trade and we defended them and we really if you look at the real numbers I bet you it’s close to 80% and I said “you have to pay and if you don’t pay we’re not going to defend you, and it’s one way or the other I knew Putin very well…almost as well as I know you, Sean, and I will tell you, we talked about it. We talked about it a lot. He did want Ukraine but I said “you’re not going into Ukraine”. He would never ever have gone into Ukraine and President Xi of Gina would never have even thought about going into Taiwan ..not doing windmills because they’re killing eagles. They’re killing the bald eagles and other eagles and other birds and we have these windmills all over the place and the environmentalists pretend they love them, but they’re really hurting our country they’re driving down values, they’re just absolutely killing us it’s one of the most expensive forms of energy…the turbines are all made in Gina or Germany, so they get the advantage of that….it’s…uh…just ridiculous but the real problem…”

Again, the question was “Do you think this (referring to the Russian invasion) is evil?”
This is the second interview where Hannity asked him that very question and he completely ignored it to ramble nonsensically.

Just as rambling, disjointed, fact free, casting blame, flattering himself, and completely ignoring the question because he cannot say anything rational, certainly nothing remotely against Putin or the pee tape goes public….or something worse.

@bobknight33…this is you guy? This is want you want? Mr stream of consciousness word salad spewing Trump? My 97 year old grandmother could still think and talk circles around him with her teeth out … and she’s been dead for 8 years.

@newtboy,

Finally we're talking about my Canada .

I'm agreed with calling 90% of what the convoy and truckers are protesting as being misguided, ill informed or flat out wrong. That however shouldn't be what the right to protest is based upon.

The extent of the protestors illegal activity seems to have been blocking of roadways and borders. Which in Canada isn't exactly new:
-Blockading of roads to logging work sites to "protect old growth forest"
-Blockading of roads pipeline construction sites
-Blockading of transportation highways and railroads

In the past 2 years alone, those various sites have seen blockades ranging from weeks to months. In virtually every single one of those instances the Liberal government went out to meet and negotiate with the protestors while allowing them to continue for weeks to months. In one of the biggest protests Trudeau himself went to meet with the groups in person. Trudeau has a video of himself praising the farmer convoy and blockades in India, declaring his government will always defend the right of groups to protest.(those groups blocked multiple border crossings)

This time though, Trudeau started out with insulting, ridiculing and belittling the protestors. Within the first day of the protests, politicians and our national news corp in CBC were demanding an immediate end to the protests.

The protests that have seen comparable zero violence to the protests in the US in support of Floyd(which I support), where condemned repeatedly by the CBC and Trudeau as terrorizing the populace and inciting violence. For reference, Trudeau remained steadfast in support of the Floyd protestors right to protest.

The federal government essentially tried insults and ridicule to try and end this protest though, and when that didn't work they invoked a national emergency measures act that requires both:
-A threat to Canada's sovereignty
-A threat that can not be addressed by any other laws or means

The government then proceeded to empower themselves to not merely arrest protestors, but to freeze/seize the bank accounts of anyone considered to be supporting the protest, with no court oversight required.

The difference in how protestors are treated based upon what it is they are protesting is alarming and should be a red flag for anyone and everyone.

For reference, while these protests were going on, a pipeline worksite in BC that has been continually shut down by protests for the last several years was attacked in the night by a mob wielding machetes and axes. The workers and security were chased off and millions in damages were done to the site afterwards. Trudeau didn't feel the need to even address the incident though because he was to busy villianizing the convoy. The CBC media buried the incident under local BC news, and downplayed it as an 'alleged' incident, despite RCMP having responded and even having had an officer injured in the incident. CBC also emphasized there wasn't any verified connection to the ongoing protests against the pipeline...

When you look at the narrative, despite my disagreeing with the vast majority of what the convoy is wanting to say, I am disgusted by the attempt to remove their right to say it and everyone wanting to support a strong democracy with the right protest should feel the same.

Bob,

"as else mentioned" Evidence wise though, it looks like self defense, after breaking many laws and putting himself in harms way, is still factually part of the night."

This is completely correct; however, it is not a viable defense. You cannot go "looking for trouble" (trust me, I know this one).

Here's a link to a counter-argument, out of fairness sake:

https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/looking-trouble-framing-and-dignitary-interest-law-self-defense

This part is what will send Baby Rambo to Fed for the next billion years:

"This means that any lawful intent or behavior that may have contributed to the confrontation should not be used to undermine the claim of self-defense."

Please note the "lawful intent or behavior" part. Everything Rittenhouse did was illegal up until the point when he went postal on innocent, if rowdy, protestors. The prosecution is going to nail him to the cross and he won't be coming back in three days.

Can't keep it in a virtual machine of the original softwares and emulated hardwares?

https://blog.simplejustice.us/2021/01/19/shameka-oneils-hang-up/

From the linked article:

Later in the day, O’Neil joined Kaelin’s virtual courtroom again to ask the judge for clarification about the contempt order.

“Mark my words: If you take adverse action against me, you better be sure about it, because you made some mistakes here today,” O’Neil told Kaelin. “I will attempt to hold you civilly or however responsible that I can, and that’s my word.”

When reached for comment, the attorney responded:

“As for that fine — straight cash homie, bottomline don’t disrespect me and try to humiliate me in front of my client and other professionals then think I’m going to sit there and take it whether you got on a robe or not I’m a person just like her I’m not her child nor do I work for her get respect and I give respect. Period.”

Update:

Before becoming a defense lawyer, it appears that O’Neil was a prosecutor in Jefferson County, Kentucky, where she encountered problems as well.

Take, for instance, Jefferson County prosecutor Shameka O’Neil, who last year resigned after falsely assuring a judge that no recording of a 911 call existed to be turned over to defense counsel in a stolen property case. She had spoken personally to the Louisville Metro police, she told the court, to confirm the lack of a recording. The problem being that, in fact, she had not spoken to the police, and there was a 911 call. Jefferson County Circuit Court Judge Barry Willett dismissed the case, citing O’Neil’s “outrageous conduct.”

Seth once again proving how big of a moron his is. NYTimes clearly crafted the article to sound like he only paid $750, but those were his tax liability fees.....what people are failing to read is that in the very same smear article, he actually paid $5.2 million.
"Each time, he requested an extension to file his 1040; and each time, he made the required payment to the I.R.S. for income taxes he might owe — $1 million for 2016 and $4.2 million for 2017. But virtually all of that liability was washed away when he eventually filed, and most of the payments were rolled forward to cover potential taxes in future years." - NYTimes.
and at the very end of the NYTimes article indicates "Nor do they reveal any previously unreported connections to Russia"
wasn't the whole premise of releasing his tax returns was because there were ties to russian collusion?

Your video, Trump Says COVID “Affects Virtually Nobody”, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 56 Badge!