OpinionCenter.li   Random page
Update this page |
Election Coverage 2012
News

Election 2012: How TV networks handled coverage
Careful media coverage of a close presidential election Tuesday exploded so suddenly Tuesday that it left the bizarre spectacle of Fox News Channel analyst Karl Rove, a major fundraiser for Republican Mitt Romney, publicly questioning his network's ...

Indiana Election Results 2012: Donnelly beats Mourdock in Senate race; Pence ...
For full coverage of Election Night breaking news, including reporting from swing states around the country, follow The Post's Election 2012 liveblog. - The Grid aggregates the best multimedia, and commentary from across the social web in a clean ...

Florida Election Results 2012: Sen. Bill Nelson coasts to reelection; Rivera ...
President Obama led Mitt Romney 49.8 percent to 49.3 percent with 100 percent of precincts reporting, according to the Associated Press. Although Obama won the state in 2008, it was among the toss-up states that the Romney camp was most confident of ...

Missouri Election Results 2012: Claire McCaskill defeats Todd Akin in Senate ...
In the hotly contested Missouri Senate Race, incumbent Claire McCaskill beat back challenger Todd Akin. As Greg Jaffe reported: Rep. Todd Akin, who had been favored to win the Senate seat in this Republican-leaning state before his statements on ...

submit to reddit

Real-time

JesseWaxWilson RT @FoxNews: ABC's Diane Sawyer drunk during election coverage? The Twitterati weigh in http://t.co/vAu3Dqmp #election #2012election

Bill_Kos How embarrassed should @abc be about the @dianesawyer kerfuffle? http://t.co/u1cJ9H7e

TheNewsGlobe Election Day 2012: Constant Coverage - http://t.co/JthDYxdW

nbn_tweets ICYMI: NBN Politics was updating election coverage all night, with reactions from students & professors. http://t.co/pEqtX1pw

newyorkeventsco New York Events Election Day 2012: Constant Coverage: Continuous updates throughout the day and night until this... http://t.co/GdPLZu5w

Jane_Pomona RT @FoxNews: ABC's Diane Sawyer drunk during election coverage? The Twitterati weigh in http://t.co/vAu3Dqmp #election #2012election

greensaved1 Election Day 2012: Constant Coverage GII

Nina_Nelson @BravoAndy @AlbieManzo @chris_manzo Looks like you were't the only ones who thought so. http://t.co/0aq7ANtQ #election #2012election”

ksylou RT @FoxNews: ABC's Diane Sawyer drunk during election coverage? The Twitterati weigh in http://t.co/vAu3Dqmp #election #2012election

CrazyLynn1980 RT @FoxNews: ABC's Diane Sawyer drunk during election coverage? The Twitterati weigh in http://t.co/mXSXb9hS #election #2012election

kimberlyvi17 Diane Sawyer Mocked on Twitter for Slurring Speech During Election Coverage http://t.co/kUE6EaVG via @THR

bigredsoutham RT @FoxNews: ABC's Diane Sawyer drunk during election coverage? The Twitterati weigh in http://t.co/vAu3Dqmp #election #2012election

15scoulosv News journalist possibly drunk during election coverage http://t.co/GprKDVVl @ptmediaweb

Benwatban RT @MarketWatch: Mitt Romney: I pray the president will be successful http://t.co/FomwD2AA

Discussions

Instead of awards for "excellence in journalism" should the American press receive "excellence in propaganda"? by Gol(D)en Showe(R) Economics 2012 Q: I'm fascinated by the candidacy of Ron Paul because he so clearly frustrates the American MSM. In 2008 they blackballed him and labeled him "crazy" and "fringe". Then he came back 4 years later with more supporters, more money and more people wanting to know what he was about. So then they switched to the tactic of: Let's pretend he doesn't even exist. Apparently they were VERY successful in this particular venture as evidenced by this new Pew Research study on 2012 presidential coverage. I understand this is unethical and the exact opposite of good journalism, but it still requires skill to make someone dissapear. So shouldn't a special set of awards be developed to recognize the best propaganda, yellow journalism and misinformation campaigns? http://news.yahoo.com/ron-paul-media-blackout-confirmed-133943628.html Ron Paul loyalists have been vindicated. After months of observations that the mainstream media was ignoring the libertarian standard-bearer, a new study by the Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism shows just that: the Texas Congressman, who has consistently polled in the high single digits -- Real Clear Politics's aggregate poll currently has him at 8 percent -- has received the least overall coverage of any candidate. From May 2 to October 9, Paul appeared as the "primary newsmaker in only 2% of all election stories." Related: First GOP Debate with Recognizable Candidates Will Be on June 13 @rico........."Freedom of speech means anyone can say anything they want and it doesn't have to be something you agree with." This question has nothing to do with freedom of speech. It has everything to do with a corporate owned media filtering out anything that might potentially upset the status quo (aka the rigged game that screws about 95% of those participating).

A: Yes.

Did you know we are in war with 8 countries? by Mark Q: I understand all of us are too distracted to worry about these because of elections 2012, Occupy Wall Street, death trial of Michael Jackson, NFL football and even perhaps recently...Lady Gaga. Iraq Afghanistan Pakistan Somalia Libya Sirya Yemen And recently, Obama just send 100 troops to Uganda. The terroists in Uganda have been attacking innocent people and destroying villages for decades and probably asked U.S to help them. Now according to the Obama administration, they have send 100 armed troops to Uganda, not to fight, but as "advisors". Now if you recall, the last time we sent advisors was back at the vietnam war, and well, you all know what happened there. We are in all of these countries in just 1 year time frame. You know why we receive little coverage of this wars??? I think because the people who would usually organize these protests, like Obama too much. Let me tell you something, could you imagine the uproar if Bush was still in office? There would be no Occupy Wall Street, but these protests would be protesting the wars instead. I just thought you should let you know about it. Comment if you like.

A: We are in more countries than just those 8. Our military is deployed in over 150 countries along with 737 military installations around the world. Our troops see active combat in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Lybia, Yemen and now Uganda, but mostly in Iraq and Afghanistan. We actually aren't in Somalia anymore, but we were at one time. Regardless, we are ending up like the Roman Empire. The Roman Empire collapsed cause it could not afford the upkeep of its military that was spread all around Europe, the Middle East and Northern Africa. If our occupation of the world continues then the collapse of our country will be in the near future. As much as we would all like to help the countries that need help, we cant. We simply cannot afford it anymore. This unwanted foreign military policy is costing American tax payers $1.7 trillion dollars a year and we haven't even started on paying for it yet. The more our government spends the more taxes we will have to pay.

Insurance lapsed few days and will re-enroll through Cobra --- are we covered? by AL Q: I am living in California. After being laid off from work, my family's insurance coverage expired last July (7/31/2012). Our insurance administrator sent me a notice regarding eligibility to continue our coverage through COBRA, with final election date of September 30, 2012. I have decided to avail of the offer and have planned to submit all the required election documents as well as the premium payments this first week of August. My understanding is, as long as we elect coverage before our deadline (September 30, 2012), any ER expenses and doctor visits we incur during this current month of August will be covered as per the original terms of our original insurance, even though we had a lapse of a few days. Can anyone confirm if this is accurate? My concern is, we had an emergency situation over this weekend and I'm wondering if anyone out there knows if the expenses we incurred will be covered, including anything else we could incur this entire month of August. Thank you so much for your help/guidance.

A: Yes. Although I am notorious for saying that the understanding of Yahoo Answers users is nearly always wrong, your understanding is actually correct (mostly)! By law, COBRA is retroactive in all cases in which it is available. If you get COBRA, then the first date covered by COBRA will be August 1, 2012. You do have two minor errors: 1. The statement "as long as we elect coverage..." is not entirely accurate: you only get the coverage if you make the election and the premium payments; the election alone is not enough. 2. Technically, you will not have had a "lapse of a few days". Because COBRA is retroactive, if you do get COBRA, then you had it for all of August (even before the election) and there was no lapse.

Would recovery be strong if Dems didn't pass law imposing healthcare mandate on employers, penalizing hiring? by Smart Guy Q: Was it a mistake to ignore the seriousness of the economic problems and instead pass new healthcare law imposing huge new costs and burdens on job creators by linking employment with costly coverage for comprehensive healthcare through new federal penalties?!?! Did Democrats blow and opportunity when they had 60 Senate Seat majority by focusing on their own partisan goals and not the crisis faced by the American people? Is this why we're stuck with greater than 8%+ unemployment? Can Democrats in media cover for the President and his party and minimize the electoral damage of these horrible mistakes in the 2012 elections? Do people still believe NBC's Brian Williams, CNN's Soledad O'Brien, or ABC's George Stephanopoulos anymore??? Can they manipulate the public one more time, for one more election cycle??? justagrandma - FEDERAL CONTROL OVER EVERYONE'S HEALTHCARE IS A PARTISAN GOAL. We both know they didn't fix any problems with healthcare---they made it much worse.

A: I lost my job because of Obama's bullshit. Fck him and his communist laws.

So what happen to the Post Partisan, Post Racial new era of cooperation and openness? Obama promised so much? by Texan~to_the-Max Q: Promised to stop the political fighting and open up the legislative activity with 72 hour internet access to bills and Cspan access to closed door meetings in particular on healthcare. Yet the closed doors remain and the promises broken. The promise of ending the fighting and bitterness has instead seen the biggest bullying by the White House in a generation if ever. Calling Foxnews not a real News Organization and freezing them out of coverage. Tearing into the insurance after they break with White House and anyone else who dares oppose them. The elderly are selfish healthcare hogs and the young selfish healthy non insurance payers. They act like dictators do and try and bully everyone into agreeing to their agenda or at least not opposing. So are you disappointed in your vote or are you still delude with the cult figure of Obama the Messiah? Or are you one of the smart ones who saw the communist radical for what he was before the election? Ready for 2010 and 2012 elections already to stop the Communist Party, oops sorry Democrat Party plans for our countries demise?

A: The barriers to cooperation come from the Republican party. President Obama has kept most promises and, yes, has left a few undone. But he's still a very effective leader. Here's something you might think about. If the economy improves (as most economists believe it will) and if we're moving forward on health care with a congressional consensus (and that now looks very possible) and if international relations continue to improve (as I believe they will) then the Democratic Party will hold both houses in 2010 and President Obama will be re-elected in a landslide in 2012. Comment in response to HowWouldIKnow: I think I'm on fairly firm ground, here. There have been accomplishments, and the latest polls show the president with a 56% approval. As for the Republicans being at fault, well, if the shoe fits...

Is Obama's 'Shiny Object' Campaign Strategy working? Are You really as dumb as Obama and Lib-Media think? by Pa Q: What issues are most important to voters this presidential election year? If you said the economy, jobs and the budget deficit, congratulations, you are like the rest of America. But if you said gay marriage, birth control and pranks Mitt Romney pulled in high school in 1965, then you either already are, or may have a future in the liberal media. The Labor Department reports that 367,000 more Americans applied for unemployment benefits last week. That is still about 100,000 more than pre-recession levels. Economists lowered their economic growth projection for 2012 from an already stagnant 2.2 percent to an anemic 1.5 percent. Gallup reported one-in-three young U.S. workers is underemployed. The federal budget deficit is at an all-time high. Americans are fleeing the workforce in record numbers. And if Congress and Obama do nothing, we will all be hit with a job-killing $494 billion tax hike on New Year's Day. So what is the liberal media covering this week? Gay marriage. In fact, not only are they covering it, they created the story. Obama's flip-flop on the issue was forced after NBC News popped the question to Vice President Joe Biden on Sunday. On Monday, NBC News followed up by trapping Education Secretary Arne Duncan with the same question. By Tuesday, the White House press corps would not let Obama spokesman Jay Carney talk about anything but gay marriage. And on Wednesday, it was the only subject being covered by the elite media. On Thursday, the Washington Post chimed in with a 5,000-word hit piece accusing Romney of being a bully in high school. Except that story didn't even make their print edition because it was preempted by ... gay marriage evolution of course! Do Americans care about any of this? Not according to the Pew Research Center. They presented Americans with a list of 18 issues and asked them to identify which ones were important to their vote. The top three? The economy, jobs and the budget deficit. The least important issue of the 18? Gay marriage. If voters decide the 2012 election based on Obama's economic record, he will lose. And so the liberal media, as in love with him as ever, is helping him parade shiny objects to distract voters from that record. The wall-to-wall coverage of Obama's sudden evolution in his personal position on same-sex marriage follows in the tradition of the Republican War on Women; the Buffett Rule; tax breaks for private jets; Romney's supposed soft-spot for Osama bin Laden; a student loan bill that would save the average borrower all of $7 per month; and endless 30-year-old stories about Romney's dog. If he wishes to be president, Romney must not take the bait. This is not the ground he should fight on. He should keep talking about the economy and other issues that actually affect Americans' lives. Eventually, they will hear him through all this sound and fury. @Joe; You do need to join the rest of America in Reality. This Presidential Election is not about Gay Marriage, not even a little bit...it's just not. What is it about? It's the Economy stupid...and Ballooning National Debt, and Doubled Gas prices, and Skyrocketing Food Bills, and Higher Utility Bills, and Depression Era levels of Economic Growth, and still Millions of People out of Work...and ....it is a Very long list...a List of National issues, that we must deal with. Gay Marriage is not on the list...It is a State Issue, not a National one.

A: Gonna be tough for them to keep this up for 6 months... It is entertaining to see all of these stories blowing up in their faces though.

Were you aware that so far in July 2012 we lost 38 in Afghanistan? by WinonaGal Q: I find it interesting that there is enough coverage of Tom Cruise's divorce, Rose Ann Barr and her crass remarks, the usual back and fourth between Obama and Romney when the election is still 4 months away but no mention that between July 1 and today we have lost 38 members of our military. If you don't believe me, check out the releases from the DOD: http://www.defense.gov/releases/ Is there some kind of conspiracy that the media doesn't want us all to know? Why do they think it is inappropriate or unimportant for us to all know this? I sure want to know, don't you?

A: I read somewhere that the main shareholder in one of the major news outlets was a billionaire from Saudi Arabia and his cultural upbringing and self interests will be in seeing the usa fling millions of dollars into their security and infrastructure so as to make Saudi Arabia more secure from attack. A waste of a good usa citizens life. I say just leave them alone to sort out their own problems. Get the government of Afghanistan to tax the rich in their own nation to develop their own infrastructure and democratic government.

Where can I here tonights 2012 presidential debates live on the radio? by Kahn44 Q: I have SiriusXM and their line up says it is just talk shows. Unless they change over to live coverage at the time of the debate, where can I find it on the radio because I'll be driving an hour home from work? I needed a neutral source, like the general news (please, I don't mean to anger media bias believers) because I want to actually hear the debate, rather than some idiot host saying something under his/her breath on the air (I could just dvr it for that, which I have done, but I still want to hear it live because it's a historic election). Help please? Thanks.

A: CNN, Fox, etc.

Need Watch Obama V Ramney US Presidential Debate Live Coverage? by BCS Q: US President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney meet the face-to-face clash of talk on the eve of 57th Presidential Election of the United States. The talk of the world between world's supreme leaders will be available for all the people of the world from Colorado on 3rd Oct 2012. http://goo.gl/dEDK6 http://goo.gl/dEDK6 http://goo.gl/dEDK6 http://goo.gl/dEDK6 http://goo.gl/dEDK6

A: October 3, 2012 Air Time: 9-10:30 p.m. Eastern Standard Time Topic: Domestic policy Location: University of Denver in Denver, CO Sponsor: Commission on Presidential Debates Participants: President Barack Obama and Gov. Mitt Romney Moderator: Jim Lehrer (Host of NewsHour on PBS) The debate will focus on domestic policy and be divided into six time segments of approximately 15 minutes each on topics to be selected by the moderator and announced several weeks before the debate. The moderator will open each segment with a question, after which each candidate will have two minutes to respond. The moderator will use the balance of the time in the segment for a discussion of the topic.. http://www.c-span.org/Debates/ http://www.youtube.com/politics http://debates.aol.com/ http://www.ustream.tv/cbsnews http://www.youtube.com/abcnews http://live.foxnews.com/ http://www.hulu.com/live http://live.wsj.com/ http://www.politico.com/livestream/ http://www.livestation.com/

What time of the evening of Election Day will Mccain concede? by god1oak Q: My guess for the evening: 7pm Virginia polls close 7:30 pm Networks call Virginia for Obama 7:45pm Networks begin to come up with crazy ways McCain could still win without Virginia 8:30 pm Lot of coverage of Senate races 9:00 pm A lot of polls close. Results announced. 9:45pm Networks really begin to say that Obama will win except for a miracle 10:00 pm More polls close out west. 10:30 pm Networks call it for Obama 11:15pm McCain concedes after most all polls close. 11:35 Cut to despondent McCain ballroom people 11:40 pm Obama declares victory, many people do happy dance. 12:15 am Networks report that the Democrats did not get 60 votes in the Senate. (Probably 58 or 59) Republicans begin to feel better that it could have been worse. 12:30 am Huckabee announces 2012 run and 2012 campaign begins (just kidding)

A: As soon as Virginia comes in.

Is Ron Paul going to get shafted by Fox News this election too? by God is coming Q: Email Bomb: Counterattack Against FOX Debate Poll Submitted by ACinMA on Mon, 05/09/2011 - 08:30 in Ron Paul 2012 2 votes Fox News is once again showing its true colors as it attempts to manipulate public perceptions of the GOP race. The 5/5/11 GOP debate was followed by several instances of attempted poll manipulation. Fox released a poll shortly after the debate to which Ron Paul was the clear winner with 56.64%. After the results, Fox removed this poll and added a new poll, seemingly in an attempt to benefit their network favorite, Herman Cain. Once again, Ron Paul wins, and once again the poll is dropped for a new poll. This would occur again after Paul won the first, second, third, then fourth poll release by Fox, clearly showing Ron Paul was the winner of the debate. Yet, no mention of Paul's win(s) after these various polls. Screen Shots of 4 polls: http://i55.tinypic.com/2yyy4g5.gif http://i53.tinypic.com/21ln046.gif http://i54.tinypic.com/nlr68m.gif http://i51.tinypic.com/e00rrd.gif From tribute_13 over at RPF: ATTN! It is not news to anyone that FOX has been doing what they do best. Spinning Ron Paul's victories into defeat. Paul has won the last three post presidential debate polls and FOX keeps taking them down and replacing them with new polls to skew the results. We need to do something about this. It won't take but a few minutes. I've done all the work for you. Copy and paste the email addresses and the letter and screenshots and send this letter to the offices of FOX news and any other outlets you feel will help us in our fight against unfair and unbalanced media coverage. Alright guys, you know what to do. It's that time of year again where we begin our fight against the media's attempt to subvert our efforts and smear our name and our candidate. Posted below is a list of emails and some screenshots to attach to the email. Here's the letter: To the Offices of Fox News, After the coverage of the presidential debate on May 5th, we’ve monitored the polls closely in regards to our candidate of choice, Congressman Ron Paul from the 14th District of Texas. Throughout the past two days, we’ve noticed an attempt at subverting the results. After the clearly orchestrated focus group concerning Cain by Frank Luntz during Hannity’s post show coverage, Ron Paul won the poll with more than 80%. Despite the focus group members, Ron Paul still won the South Carolina straw poll after the debate, the state in which the cross section of voters was misrepresented on Hannity Thursday night. When the post presidential debate poll was taken down in order to push Cain and reset the results, Paul still dominated the poll. After subsequent attempts to reset the polls, Paul has been and still is the leading candidate concerning who won the presidential debate on May 5th. The Ron Paul base has been monitoring this and has withheld a formal address of the activity going on at the “Fair and Balanced” offices of Fox. However, after the third poll was taken down and the fourth one was put up we question when Fox will finally give up on trying to isolate the very real and relevant wing of the republican party that wants to see a return to sensible foreign policy, a return to the moral fabric that made America the great country it is today, and a return to true fair and balanced coverage of differing opinions. We as a nation should pride ourselves on logic, merit and values, and this clear indignation against the Paul camp is contradictory to your organizations mission statement. Our power to spread these issues among others is the main driving force behind this campaign and request that FOX address these inconsistencies with the polls and give an explanation as to why the polls are continually replaced. We request the poll results be shown and that no new polls replace the current results. All we ask is that the poll be allowed to continue and naturally yield a fair cross section of the opinions of the people. The public watched the debate and have continually made up their mind that Paul had the strongest showing. His common sense approach to foreign policy and his experience with the U.S. economy makes him the only viable candidate, but much like the philosophy of the great Doctor, it’s not your job, nor ours, to influence or force certain ideologies on anybody. Let the polls stand and let the American people decide. Quit thinking for us. http://dailypaul.com/164090/email-bomb-counterattack-against-fox-debate-poll

A: Nope but dead people will again vote for 0bama!!!

What does it tell you about the Election that Obama, Romney, Ryan support Free Trade & cutting Social Security? by Richard V Q: Paul Ryan wants to raises taxes on the middle class, cut them for millionaires. Paul Ryan’s infamous budget — which Romney embraced — replaces “the current tax structure with two brackets — 25 percent and 10 percent — and cut the top rate from 35 percent.” Federal tax collections would fall “by about $4.5 trillion over the next decade” as a result and to avoid increasing the national debt, the budget proposes massive cuts in social programs and “special-interest loopholes and tax shelters that litter the code.” But 62 percent of the savings would come from programs that benefit the lower- and middle-classes, who would also experience a tax increase. That’s because while Ryan “would extend the Bush tax cuts, which are due to expire at the end of this year, he would not extend President Obama’s tax cuts for those with the lowest incomes, which will expire at the same time.” Households “earning more than $1 million a year, meanwhile, could see a net tax cut of about $300,000 annually.” http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/08/11/677171/12-things-you-should-know-about-vice-presidential-candidate-paul-ryan/ Obama: As president, however, he has come to believe the news media have had a role in frustrating his ambitions to change the terms of the country’s political discussion. He particularly believes that Democrats do not receive enough credit for their willingness to accept cuts in Medicare and Social Security http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/08/us/politics/obama-is-an-avid-reader-and-critic-of-news-media-coverage.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all Jane Hamsher, Fire Dog Lake: From the moment he took the White House, the President has wanted to cut Social Security benefits. David Brooks reported that three administration officials called him to say Obama “is extremely committed to entitlement reform and is plotting politically feasible ways to reduce Social Security as well as health spending in March of 2009. You can only live in denial for so long and still lay claim to being tethered to reality. http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/07/30-11 Paul Ryan has supported every Free Trade Bill http://www.ontheissues.org/House/Paul_Ryan_Free_Trade.htm The Obama administration is behind these policies being secretly negotiated by Corporations in the Trans Pacific Partnership (Free Trade Pact): Limit how U.S. federal and state officials could regulate foreign firms operating within U.S. boundaries, with requirements to provide them greater rights than domestic firms; Extend the incentives for U.S. firms to offshore investment and jobs to lower-wage countries; Establish a two-track legal system that gives foreign firms new rights to skirt U.S. courts and laws, directly sue the U.S. government before foreign tribunals and demand compensation for financial, health, environmental, land use and other laws they claim undermine their TPP privileges; and Allow foreign firms to demand compensation for the costs of complying with U.S. financial or environmental regulations that apply equally to domestic and foreign firms. http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/06/13-5

A: It tells me that I was right to think we are screwed either way. The international bankers win, we lose. That's America these days and very few politicians would stand up for the American people.

Are liberals proud of their mentor Chris Matthews statement 'I'm so glad we had that storm'? by The Black Bolshevik Q: To all the millions of victims of superstorm Sandy, Chris Matthews has a message: "I'm so glad." The MSNBC host, on a panel of pro-Obama pundits including Rachel Maddow, ended election coverage overnight by saying he's "glad" the storm hit, suggesting it served a greater good by boosting President Obama to a second term. "I'm so glad we had that storm last week," Matthews said, after interjecting to give some final thoughts. Somebody off-screen could be heard saying "ooo" at that remark, but Matthews confidently put his hand up to explain. "No, politically I should say -- not in terms of hurting people. The storm brought in possibilities for good politics," he said. Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/07/chris-matthews-on-obama-win-o-glad-hurricane-sandy-struck/#ixzz2BYLMSR7L

How will Obama's media spin this failure? by James Q: 12/12/12 http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/09/12/No-Marines-Guarding-US-Consulate-In-Libya: Despite Threats, No Marines Guarded U.S. Consulate In Libya This is startling and troubling news, especially in light of the fact that the day before yesterday's attacks, September 10, al-Qaeda chief Ayman al-Zawahri made direct threats against Americans in Libya to avenge the death of Abu Yahya al-Libi, a high-ranking al-Qaeda official taken out by an American drone attack last June. --------------- And they will spin it to help democrats -- always have, always will: Polls on how Americans saw the mainstream media (TV and print) election coverage in 2008: -Rasmussen poll: 69% for Obama, 6% for McCain -Pew Research poll: 67% for Obama, 11% for McCain -Sacred Heart University poll: 68% for Obama, 9% for McCain -Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll: 67% for Obama, 11% for McCain University of Connecticut’s Department of Public Policy survey of journalists, nationwide, during the 2008 election: 52% supported Obama versus 19% for McCain. 9/2009 Sacred Heart University Polling Institute: 69.9% agreed the national news media are intent on promoting the Obama presidency while 26.5% disagreed. 9/23/10 Pew Research poll: 43% of those who perceive bias say it is liberal; 23% say they see conservative bias. 9/29/10 Gallup poll: Distrust of the media Edges Up to Record High Perceptions of liberal bias still far outnumber perceptions of conservative bias: 48% say the media are too liberal; 15% say they are too conservative. 9/22/11 Gallup poll: 60% perceive bias, with 47% saying the media are too liberal and 13% saying they are too conservative. 8/15/12 Rasmussen Poll: 59% of Likely U.S. Voters believe Obama has received the best treatment from the media so far; 18% think his Republican challenger has been treated better. 8/25/12 New York Times: Arthur Brisbane wrote: "Across the paper’s many departments, though, so many share a kind of political and cultural progressivism — for lack of a better term — that this worldview virtually bleeds through the fabric of The Times." “As a result, developments like the Occupy movement and gay marriage seem almost to erupt in The Times, overloved and undermanaged, more like causes than news subjects.” The pro-democrat media has ten times more viewers than Fox: 5/25/11 huffingtonpost.com: NBC Nightly News averaged 9.469 million viewers, ABC's World News 8.380 million; CBS Evening News 6.204 million; among cable networks, Fox News 2.556 million. And those figures don’t include the democrat shills MSNBC and CNN.

A: They cannot blame George W Bush on this one. So they are blaming Romney.

How many democrats are aware of Obama releasing terrorists? by James Q: 9/22/12 http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/09/22/Obama-to-Release-One-Third-of-Gitmo-Inmates: President Barack Obama is about to release or transfer 55 Gitmo prisoners, despite reports that the Libyan believed to be behind the killing of US Ambassador Christopher Stevens was a former Guantanamo inmate transferred to Libyan custody. The ACLU has praised the releases as "a partial victory for transparency." And who's surprised, given the fact that the major media is the democrat party's lapdog? Polls on how Americans saw the mainstream media (TV and print) election coverage in 2008: -Rasmussen poll: 69% for Obama, 6% for McCain -Pew Research poll: 67% for Obama, 11% for McCain -Sacred Heart University poll: 68% for Obama, 9% for McCain -Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll: 67% for Obama, 11% for McCain University of Connecticut’s Department of Public Policy survey of journalists, nationwide, during the 2008 election: 52% supported Obama versus 19% for McCain. 9/2009 Sacred Heart University Polling Institute: 69.9% agreed the national news media are intent on promoting the Obama presidency while 26.5% disagreed. 9/23/10 Pew Research poll: 43% of those who perceive bias say it is liberal; 23% say they see conservative bias. 9/29/10 Gallup poll: Distrust of the media Edges Up to Record High Perceptions of liberal bias still far outnumber perceptions of conservative bias: 48% say the media are too liberal; 15% say they are too conservative. 9/22/11 Gallup poll: 60% perceive bias, with 47% saying the media are too liberal and 13% saying they are too conservative. 8/15/12 Rasmussen Poll: 59% of Likely U.S. Voters believe Obama has received the best treatment from the media so far; 18% think his Republican challenger has been treated better. 8/25/12 New York Times: Arthur Brisbane wrote: "Across the paper’s many departments, though, so many share a kind of political and cultural progressivism — for lack of a better term — that this worldview virtually bleeds through the fabric of The Times." “As a result, developments like the Occupy movement and gay marriage seem almost to erupt in The Times, over-loved and under-managed, more like causes than news subjects.” 9/21/12 http://cnsnews.com/news/article/gallup-only-8-americans-have-great-deal-trust-news-media-new-low: Gallup: Only 8% of Americans Have 'Great Deal' of Trust in News Media--a New Low

A: The people who care about this are not Democrats.

Why don't they ask Carney and/or Ambassador Rice who ordered them to claim that...? by James Q: ...the Benghazi attack was caused by the video? I mean, Obama said he knew it was an organized terrorist attack within the hour, right? But we know there will be no such question. Why? Polls on how Americans saw the mainstream media (TV and print) election coverage in 2008: -Rasmussen poll: 69% for Obama, 6% for McCain -Pew Research poll: 67% for Obama, 11% for McCain -Sacred Heart University poll: 68% for Obama, 9% for McCain -Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll: 67% for Obama, 11% for McCain University of Connecticut’s Department of Public Policy survey of journalists, nationwide, during the 2008 election: 52% supported Obama versus 19% for McCain. 9/2009 Sacred Heart University Polling Institute: 69.9% agreed the national news media are intent on promoting the Obama presidency while 26.5% disagreed. 9/23/10 Pew Research poll: 43% of those who perceive bias say it is liberal; 23% say they see conservative bias. 9/29/10 Gallup poll: Distrust of the media Edges Up to Record High Perceptions of liberal bias still far outnumber perceptions of conservative bias: 48% say the media are too liberal; 15% say they are too conservative. 9/22/11 Gallup poll: 60% perceive bias, with 47% saying the media are too liberal and 13% saying they are too conservative. 8/15/12 Rasmussen Poll: 59% of Likely U.S. Voters believe Obama has received the best treatment from the media so far; 18% think his Republican challenger has been treated better. 8/25/12 New York Times: Arthur Brisbane wrote: "Across the paper’s many departments, though, so many share a kind of political and cultural progressivism — for lack of a better term — that this worldview virtually bleeds through the fabric of The Times." “As a result, developments like the Occupy movement and gay marriage seem almost to erupt in The Times, overloved and undermanaged, more like causes than news subjects.” Who the New York Times endorsed for president, since 1960: 1960 Kennedy; 1964 Johnson;1968 Humphrey; 1972 McGovern; 1976 Carter; 1980 Carter; 1984 Mondale; 1988 Dukakis; 1992 Clinton; 1996 Clinton; 2000 Gore; 2004 Kerry; 2008 Obama. ALL DEMOCRATS. 9/21/12 http://cnsnews.com/news/article/gallup-only-8-americans-have-great-deal-trust-news-media-new-low: Gallup: Only 8% of Americans Have 'Great Deal' of Trust in News Media--a New Low Evidence of collusion between democrats and CNN during the presidential debate of 10/16/12: -10/17/12 http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/10/obama-gots-more-time-138699.html: CNN says Obama got 9% more speaking time [194 seconds]. -2/3/11 http://money.cnn.com/2011/02/03/news/companies/super_bowl_ads/index.htm: Fox Network charges up to $100,000 a second for big sports events. [In other words, CNN gave Obama $19,400,000 worth of free campaign time -- $100,000/second times 194 seconds] The pro-democrat media has ten times more viewers than pro-Republican Fox News: 5/25/11 huffingtonpost.com: NBC Nightly News averaged 9.469 million viewers, ABC's World News 8.380 million; CBS Evening News 6.204 million; among cable networks, Fox News 2.556 million. And those figures don’t include the democrat shills MSNBC and CNN.

A: Obama's actions are beyond the pale of bizarre. He is an international man of mystery we are supposed to worship as a secular savior and follow without question or use of rational thought.

Will the Republican Party ever learn that we cannot trust the main stream media? by James Q: It persists in selecting "the enemy" as the debate venues, and the result was on display last night...again: -10/17/12 http://freebeacon.com/candy-crowley-he-was-right/: ROMNEY: I want to make sure we get that for the record because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror. OBAMA: Get the transcript. CROWLEY: It — it — it — he did in fact, sir. So let me — let me call it an act of terror… OBAMA: Can you say that a little louder, Candy? -http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/10/obama-gots-more-time-138699.html: "According to CNN's timekeeping, Obama got 44:04 minutes of speaking time, while Romney got 40:50." That's 9% or 194 seconds more time for Obama than Romney. What was it worth to Obama? 2/3/11 http://money.cnn.com/2011/02/03/news/companies/super_bowl_ads/index.htm “The biggest football game of the year is scheduled for Sunday, when the Pittsburgh Steelers take on the Green Bay Packers at Cowboys Stadium near Dallas. Fox Network's ad rates break down to about $100,000 a second.” Obama got 194 seconds more than Romney, compliments of CNN. If he had had to pay for those 194 seconds it could have cost as much as $19,400,000. ----------- Polls on how Americans saw the mainstream media (TV and print) election coverage in 2008: -Rasmussen poll: 69% for Obama, 6% for McCain -Pew Research poll: 67% for Obama, 11% for McCain -Sacred Heart University poll: 68% for Obama, 9% for McCain -Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll: 67% for Obama, 11% for McCain University of Connecticut’s Department of Public Policy survey of journalists, nationwide, during the 2008 election: 52% supported Obama versus 19% for McCain. 9/2009 Sacred Heart University Polling Institute: 69.9% agreed the national news media are intent on promoting the Obama presidency while 26.5% disagreed. 9/23/10 Pew Research poll: 43% of those who perceive bias say it is liberal; 23% say they see conservative bias. 9/29/10 Gallup poll: Distrust of the media Edges Up to Record High Perceptions of liberal bias still far outnumber perceptions of conservative bias: 48% say the media are too liberal; 15% say they are too conservative. 9/22/11 Gallup poll: 60% perceive bias, with 47% saying the media are too liberal and 13% saying they are too conservative. 8/15/12 Rasmussen Poll: 59% of Likely U.S. Voters believe Obama has received the best treatment from the media so far; 18% think his Republican challenger has been treated better. 8/25/12 New York Times: Arthur Brisbane wrote: "Across the paper’s many departments, though, so many share a kind of political and cultural progressivism — for lack of a better term — that this worldview virtually bleeds through the fabric of The Times." “As a result, developments like the Occupy movement and gay marriage seem almost to erupt in The Times, overloved and undermanaged, more like causes than news subjects.” Who the New York Times endorsed for president, since 1960: 1960 Kennedy; 1964 Johnson;1968 Humphrey; 1972 McGovern; 1976 Carter; 1980 Carter; 1984 Mondale; 1988 Dukakis; 1992 Clinton; 1996 Clinton; 2000 Gore; 2004 Kerry; 2008 Obama. ALL DEMOCRATS. 9/21/12 http://cnsnews.com/news/article/gallup-only-8-americans-have-great-deal-trust-news-media-new-low: Gallup: Only 8% of Americans Have 'Great Deal' of Trust in News Media--a New Low The pro-democrat media has ten times more viewers than pro-Republican Fox News: 5/25/11 huffingtonpost.com: NBC Nightly News averaged 9.469 million viewers, ABC's World News 8.380 million; CBS Evening News 6.204 million; among cable networks, Fox News 2.556 million. And those figures don’t include the democrat shills MSNBC and CNN.

A: Everyone should know by now that the media can not be trusted.

Why can't democrats accept the fact that their news sources are incredibly biased? by James Q: Here's an example of what they will remain totally ignorant of because the major media won't report it: 9/23/12 http://townhall.com/columnists/kyleolson/2012/09/23/complaints_mount_against_michelle_obamas_new_lunch_menu: Complaints Mount Against Michelle Obama’s New Lunch Menu Despite the fact that the new regulations have increased the cost of a lunch 20 to 25 cents per plate, it’s not pleasing students. Nancy Carvalho, director of food services for New Bedford Public Schools, was quoted as saying that hummus and black bean salads have been tough sells in elementary cafeterias. That means even smaller children are going through the day fighting hunger pains... One government official tried to put the blame on the students: "One thing I think we need to keep in mind as kids say they're still hungry is that many children aren't used to eating fruits and vegetables at home, much less at school. So it's a change in what they are eating. If they are still hungry, it's that they are not eating all the food that's being offered," USDA Deputy Undersecretary Janey Thornton was quoted as saying. -------------------- Why do democrats accept such censorship from their "news" sources? Polls on how Americans saw the mainstream media (TV and print) election coverage in 2008: -Rasmussen poll: 69% for Obama, 6% for McCain -Pew Research poll: 67% for Obama, 11% for McCain -Sacred Heart University poll: 68% for Obama, 9% for McCain -Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll: 67% for Obama, 11% for McCain University of Connecticut’s Department of Public Policy survey of journalists, nationwide, during the 2008 election: 52% supported Obama versus 19% for McCain. 9/2009 Sacred Heart University Polling Institute: 69.9% agreed the national news media are intent on promoting the Obama presidency while 26.5% disagreed. 9/23/10 Pew Research poll: 43% of those who perceive bias say it is liberal; 23% say they see conservative bias. 9/29/10 Gallup poll: Distrust of the media Edges Up to Record High Perceptions of liberal bias still far outnumber perceptions of conservative bias: 48% say the media are too liberal; 15% say they are too conservative. 9/22/11 Gallup poll: 60% perceive bias, with 47% saying the media are too liberal and 13% saying they are too conservative. 8/15/12 Rasmussen Poll: 59% of Likely U.S. Voters believe Obama has received the best treatment from the media so far; 18% think his Republican challenger has been treated better. 8/25/12 New York Times: Arthur Brisbane wrote: "Across the paper’s many departments, though, so many share a kind of political and cultural progressivism — for lack of a better term — that this worldview virtually bleeds through the fabric of The Times." “As a result, developments like the Occupy movement and gay marriage seem almost to erupt in The Times, overloved and undermanaged, more like causes than news subjects.” Who the New York Times endorsed for president, since 1960: 1960 Kennedy 1964 Johnson 1968 Humphrey 1972 McGovern 1976 Carter 1980 Carter 1984 Mondale 1988 Dukakis 1992 Clinton 1996 Clinton 2000 Gore 2004 Kerry 2008 Obama Democrats – all of them. 9/21/12 http://cnsnews.com/news/article/gallup-only-8-americans-have-great-deal-trust-news-media-new-low: Gallup: Only 8% of Americans Have 'Great Deal' of Trust in News Media--a New Low The pro-democrat media has ten times more viewers than pro-Republican Fox News: 5/25/11 huffingtonpost.com: NBC Nightly News averaged 9.469 million viewers, ABC's World News 8.380 million; CBS Evening News 6.204 million; among cable networks, Fox News 2.556 million. And those figures don’t include the democrat shills MSNBC and CNN.

A: Makes you wonder what kind of person pursues a journalism career. Journalists create nothing for society except their opinion. People who actually something tangible for society (construction industry) are inherently conservative. I look at the media as a skewed propaganda outlet.

Should our government teachers educate our kids on how they and the media promote the democrat party? by James Q: http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php… Top All-Time Donors, 1989-2012: -The National Education Association gave $43,613,263: 71% went to democrats, 5% to Republicans. -The American Federation of Teachers gave $34,698,466: 86% went to democrats, 0% to Republicans. Polls on how Americans saw the mainstream media (TV and print) election coverage in 2008: -Rasmussen poll: 69% for Obama, 6% for McCain -Pew Research poll: 67% for Obama, 11% for McCain -Sacred Heart University poll: 68% for Obama, 9% for McCain -Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll: 67% for Obama, 11% for McCain University of Connecticut’s Department of Public Policy survey of journalists, nationwide, during the 2008 election: 52% supported Obama versus 19% for McCain. 9/2009 Sacred Heart University Polling Institute: 69.9% agreed the national news media are intent on promoting the Obama presidency while 26.5% disagreed. 9/23/10 Pew Research poll: 43% of those who perceive bias say it is liberal; 23% say they see conservative bias. 9/29/10 Gallup poll: Distrust of the media Edges Up to Record High Perceptions of liberal bias still far outnumber perceptions of conservative bias: 48% say the media are too liberal; 15% say they are too conservative. 9/22/11 Gallup poll: 60% perceive bias, with 47% saying the media are too liberal and 13% saying they are too conservative. 8/15/12 Rasmussen Poll: 59% of Likely U.S. Voters believe Obama has received the best treatment from the media so far; 18% think his Republican challenger has been treated better. The pro-democrat media has ten times more viewers than Fox: 5/25/11 huffingtonpost.com: NBC Nightly News averaged 9.469 million viewers, ABC's World News 8.380 million; CBS Evening News 6.204 million; among cable networks, Fox News 2.556 million.

A: 64% , around there, distrust the media THAT IS THE MOST EVER MEASURED hopefully everyone who listens to abc,cbs,nbc,msnbc,cnn just does it for comedic relief

Is the democrat media getting payback for their 24/7 trashing of Romney? by James Q: Since we've seen with our own eyes during the debates that Romney is, in fact, a pretty charming, smart guy, not the satanic maniac that Obama's media and Hollywood wooden heads portray him as. 10/19/12 http://washingtonexaminer.com/for-first-time-romneys-favorability-rating-tops-obamas/article/2511203#.UIFIlMXA-4d: Late Thursday the Pew Research Center, the poll that has been toughest on Romney's favorability, released results showing that Romney is ahead of Obama by a point, 50 percent to 49 percent. That is a stunning turnaround from March, when Obama's favorable rating in Pew was about twice Romney's, 55 percent to 29 percent. Gallup also has Romney beating Obama on the favorability rating, 52 percent to 51 percent. ------------ Democrats will deny that the major media is supports them, but the facts make their denials laughable: Polls on how Americans saw the mainstream media (TV and print) election coverage in 2008: -Rasmussen poll: 69% for Obama, 6% for McCain -Pew Research poll: 67% for Obama, 11% for McCain -Sacred Heart University poll: 68% for Obama, 9% for McCain -Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll: 67% for Obama, 11% for McCain University of Connecticut’s Department of Public Policy survey of journalists, nationwide, during the 2008 election: 52% supported Obama versus 19% for McCain. 9/2009 Sacred Heart University Polling Institute: 69.9% agreed the national news media are intent on promoting the Obama presidency while 26.5% disagreed. 9/23/10 Pew Research poll: 43% of those who perceive bias say it is liberal; 23% say they see conservative bias. 9/29/10 Gallup poll: Distrust of the media Edges Up to Record High Perceptions of liberal bias still far outnumber perceptions of conservative bias: 48% say the media are too liberal; 15% say they are too conservative. 9/22/11 Gallup poll: 60% perceive bias, with 47% saying the media are too liberal and 13% saying they are too conservative. 8/15/12 Rasmussen Poll: 59% of Likely U.S. Voters believe Obama has received the best treatment from the media so far; 18% think his Republican challenger has been treated better. 8/25/12 New York Times: Arthur Brisbane wrote: "Across the paper’s many departments, though, so many share a kind of political and cultural progressivism — for lack of a better term — that this worldview virtually bleeds through the fabric of The Times." “As a result, developments like the Occupy movement and gay marriage seem almost to erupt in The Times, overloved and undermanaged, more like causes than news subjects.” Who the New York Times endorsed for president, since 1960: 1960 Kennedy; 1964 Johnson;1968 Humphrey; 1972 McGovern; 1976 Carter; 1980 Carter; 1984 Mondale; 1988 Dukakis; 1992 Clinton; 1996 Clinton; 2000 Gore; 2004 Kerry; 2008 Obama. ALL DEMOCRATS. 9/21/12 http://cnsnews.com/news/article/gallup-only-8-americans-have-great-deal-trust-news-media-new-low: Gallup: Only 8% of Americans Have 'Great Deal' of Trust in News Media--a New Low Evidence of collusion between democrats and CNN during the presidential debate of 10/16/12: -10/17/12 http://freebeacon.com/candy-crowley-he-was-right/: ROMNEY: I want to make sure we get that for the record because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror. OBAMA: Get the transcript. CROWLEY: It — it — it — he did in fact, sir. OBAMA: Can you say that a little louder, Candy? -http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/10/obama-gots-more-time-138699.html: CNN says Obama got 9% more speaking time [194 seconds]. -2/3/11 http://money.cnn.com/2011/02/03/news/companies/super_bowl_ads/index.htm: Fox Network charges up to $100,000 a second for big sports events. [In other words, CNN gave Obama $19,400,000 worth of free campaign time -- $100,000/second times 194 seconds] The pro-democrat media has ten times more viewers than pro-Republican Fox News: 5/25/11 huffingtonpost.com: NBC Nightly News averaged 9.469 million viewers, ABC's World News 8.380 million; CBS Evening News 6.204 million; among cable networks, Fox News 2.556 million. And those figures don’t include the democrat shills MSNBC and CNN.

Is this why 60% no longer trust the major media? by James Q: 9/21/12 http://www.gallup.com/poll/157589/distru… The record distrust in the media, based on a survey conducted Sept. 6-9, 2012, also means that negativity toward the media is at an all-time high for a presidential election year. Is this why? Polls on how Americans saw the mainstream media (TV and print) election coverage in 2008: -Rasmussen poll: 69% for Obama, 6% for McCain -Pew Research poll: 67% for Obama, 11% for McCain -Sacred Heart University poll: 68% for Obama, 9% for McCain -Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll: 67% for Obama, 11% for McCain University of Connecticut’s Department of Public Policy survey of journalists, nationwide, during the 2008 election: 52% supported Obama versus 19% for McCain. 9/2009 Sacred Heart University Polling Institute: 69.9% agreed the national news media are intent on promoting the Obama presidency while 26.5% disagreed. 9/23/10 Pew Research poll: 43% of those who perceive bias say it is liberal; 23% say they see conservative bias. 9/29/10 Gallup poll: Distrust of the media Edges Up to Record High Perceptions of liberal bias still far outnumber perceptions of conservative bias: 48% say the media are too liberal; 15% say they are too conservative. 9/22/11 Gallup poll: 60% perceive bias, with 47% saying the media are too liberal and 13% saying they are too conservative. 8/15/12 Rasmussen Poll: 59% of Likely U.S. Voters believe Obama has received the best treatment from the media so far; 18% think his Republican challenger has been treated better. 8/25/12 New York Times: Arthur Brisbane wrote: "Across the paper’s many departments, though, so many share a kind of political and cultural progressivism — for lack of a better term — that this worldview virtually bleeds through the fabric of The Times." “As a result, developments like the Occupy movement and gay marriage seem almost to erupt in The Times, overloved and undermanaged, more like causes than news subjects.” Who the New York Times endorsed for president, since 1960: 1960 Kennedy 1964 Johnson 1968 Humphrey 1972 McGovern 1976 Carter 1980 Carter 1984 Mondale 1988 Dukakis 1992 Clinton 1996 Clinton 2000 Gore 2004 Kerry 2008 Obama Democrats – all of them. The pro-democrat media has ten times more viewers than Fox: 5/25/11 huffingtonpost.com: NBC Nightly News averaged 9.469 million viewers, ABC's World News 8.380 million; CBS Evening News 6.204 million; among cable networks, Fox News 2.556 million. And those figures don’t include the democrat shills MSNBC and CNN.

A: I think all media is very liberal except Fox News but Fox News is very conservative. There is no fair and balanced network except maybe C-SPAN.

How will democrats spin this report that welfare spending jumped 32% under Obama? by James Q: 10/18/12 http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/18/welfare-spending-jumps-32-percent-four-years/: "Welfare spending jumps 32% in four year" My guess is that they'll say, "Oh, that's garbage, just like the garbage Faux News puts out!" ------------- Democrat "news," of course, has no bias, whatsoever, right? Polls on how Americans saw the mainstream media (TV and print) election coverage in 2008: -Rasmussen poll: 69% for Obama, 6% for McCain -Pew Research poll: 67% for Obama, 11% for McCain -Sacred Heart University poll: 68% for Obama, 9% for McCain -Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll: 67% for Obama, 11% for McCain University of Connecticut’s Department of Public Policy survey of journalists, nationwide, during the 2008 election: 52% supported Obama versus 19% for McCain. 9/2009 Sacred Heart University Polling Institute: 69.9% agreed the national news media are intent on promoting the Obama presidency while 26.5% disagreed. 9/23/10 Pew Research poll: 43% of those who perceive bias say it is liberal; 23% say they see conservative bias. 9/29/10 Gallup poll: Distrust of the media Edges Up to Record High Perceptions of liberal bias still far outnumber perceptions of conservative bias: 48% say the media are too liberal; 15% say they are too conservative. 9/22/11 Gallup poll: 60% perceive bias, with 47% saying the media are too liberal and 13% saying they are too conservative. 8/15/12 Rasmussen Poll: 59% of Likely U.S. Voters believe Obama has received the best treatment from the media so far; 18% think his Republican challenger has been treated better. 8/25/12 New York Times: Arthur Brisbane wrote: "Across the paper’s many departments, though, so many share a kind of political and cultural progressivism — for lack of a better term — that this worldview virtually bleeds through the fabric of The Times." “As a result, developments like the Occupy movement and gay marriage seem almost to erupt in The Times, overloved and undermanaged, more like causes than news subjects.” Who the New York Times endorsed for president, since 1960: 1960 Kennedy; 1964 Johnson;1968 Humphrey; 1972 McGovern; 1976 Carter; 1980 Carter; 1984 Mondale; 1988 Dukakis; 1992 Clinton; 1996 Clinton; 2000 Gore; 2004 Kerry; 2008 Obama. ALL DEMOCRATS. 9/21/12 http://cnsnews.com/news/article/gallup-only-8-americans-have-great-deal-trust-news-media-new-low: Gallup: Only 8% of Americans Have 'Great Deal' of Trust in News Media--a New Low Evidence of collusion between democrats and CNN during the presidential debate of 10/16/12: -10/17/12 http://freebeacon.com/candy-crowley-he-was-right/: ROMNEY: I want to make sure we get that for the record because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror. OBAMA: Get the transcript. CROWLEY: It — it — it — he did in fact, sir. OBAMA: Can you say that a little louder, Candy? -http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/10/obama-gots-more-time-138699.html: CNN says Obama got 9% more speaking time [194 seconds]. -2/3/11 http://money.cnn.com/2011/02/03/news/companies/super_bowl_ads/index.htm: Fox Network charges up to $100,000 a second for big sports events. [In other words, CNN gave Obama $19,400,000 worth of free campaign time -- $100,000/second times 194 seconds] The pro-democrat media has ten times more viewers than pro-Republican Fox News: 5/25/11 huffingtonpost.com: NBC Nightly News averaged 9.469 million viewers, ABC's World News 8.380 million; CBS Evening News 6.204 million; among cable networks, Fox News 2.556 million. And those figures don’t include the democrat shills MSNBC and CNN.

A: they will probably blame bush, their fallback excuse on everything

Why didn't Obama have someone ask the Libyan president before saying it was spontaneous? by James Q: 9/16/12 http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/09/ambassador-susan-rice-libya-attack-not-premeditated/: Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice: Libya Attack Not Premeditated “Our current best assessment, based on the information that we have at present, is that, in fact, what this began as, it was a spontaneous – not a premeditated – response to what had transpired in Cairo,” Rice told me this morning on “This Week.” ---------------------------- 9/16/12 http://www.politico.com/blogs/politico-live/2012/09/libyan-president-no-doubt-consulate-attack-preplanned-135664.html: Libyan president: 'No doubt' attack 'preplanned' "It was planned, definitely. It was planned by foreigners, by people who entered the country a few months ago. And they were planning this criminal act since their arrival," Magariaf said. ---------------------------- It'll be fun to see how Obama's media handles this one. Polls on how Americans saw the mainstream media (TV and print) election coverage in 2008: -Rasmussen poll: 69% for Obama, 6% for McCain -Pew Research poll: 67% for Obama, 11% for McCain -Sacred Heart University poll: 68% for Obama, 9% for McCain -Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll: 67% for Obama, 11% for McCain University of Connecticut’s Department of Public Policy survey of journalists, nationwide, during the 2008 election: 52% supported Obama versus 19% for McCain. 9/2009 Sacred Heart University Polling Institute: 69.9% agreed the national news media are intent on promoting the Obama presidency while 26.5% disagreed. 9/23/10 Pew Research poll: 43% of those who perceive bias say it is liberal; 23% say they see conservative bias. 9/29/10 Gallup poll: Distrust of the media Edges Up to Record High Perceptions of liberal bias still far outnumber perceptions of conservative bias: 48% say the media are too liberal; 15% say they are too conservative. 9/22/11 Gallup poll: 60% perceive bias, with 47% saying the media are too liberal and 13% saying they are too conservative. 8/15/12 Rasmussen Poll: 59% of Likely U.S. Voters believe Obama has received the best treatment from the media so far; 18% think his Republican challenger has been treated better. 8/25/12 New York Times: Arthur Brisbane wrote: "Across the paper’s many departments, though, so many share a kind of political and cultural progressivism — for lack of a better term — that this worldview virtually bleeds through the fabric of The Times." “As a result, developments like the Occupy movement and gay marriage seem almost to erupt in The Times, overloved and undermanaged, more like causes than news subjects.” Who the New York Times endorsed for president, since 1960: 1960 Kennedy 1964 Johnson 1968 Humphrey 1972 McGovern 1976 Carter 1980 Carter 1984 Mondale 1988 Dukakis 1992 Clinton 1996 Clinton 2000 Gore 2004 Kerry 2008 Obama Democrats, all. The pro-democrat media has ten times more viewers than Fox: 5/25/11 huffingtonpost.com: NBC Nightly News averaged 9.469 million viewers, ABC's World News 8.380 million; CBS Evening News 6.204 million; among cable networks, Fox News 2.556 million. And those figures don’t include the democrat shills MSNBC and CNN.

A: The mainstream madia had been reporting for a couple of weeks that there were indications of something in the works to happen on 9/11. If they knew why did Obama say he didn't know? In Libya the attacks on the embassy began a couple of hours BEFORE the protest marches about the so called offensive movie. This is yet one more example of malfeasence on the part of the Obama Administration and their denials are nothing but moves to cover their asses.

Do democrats understand why Fox News is growing and MSNBC and CNN are static? by James Q: 10/17/12http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/fox-news-ratings-debate-palin-biden-379609: "FNC locks down another win as viewership rises across cable, and MSNBC falls below CNN again. Early ratings for cable network coverage of Tuesday's presidential debate have numbers surging ahead of the first showdown between President Obama and Mitt Romney earlier this month -- and Fox News Channel is reaping the biggest benefits." My theory is that more people are recognizing the clear pro-democrat bias of the major "news" media: Polls on how Americans saw the mainstream media (TV and print) election coverage in 2008: -Rasmussen poll: 69% for Obama, 6% for McCain -Pew Research poll: 67% for Obama, 11% for McCain -Sacred Heart University poll: 68% for Obama, 9% for McCain -Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll: 67% for Obama, 11% for McCain University of Connecticut’s Department of Public Policy survey of journalists, nationwide, during the 2008 election: 52% supported Obama versus 19% for McCain. 9/2009 Sacred Heart University Polling Institute: 69.9% agreed the national news media are intent on promoting the Obama presidency while 26.5% disagreed. 9/23/10 Pew Research poll: 43% of those who perceive bias say it is liberal; 23% say they see conservative bias. 9/29/10 Gallup poll: Distrust of the media Edges Up to Record High Perceptions of liberal bias still far outnumber perceptions of conservative bias: 48% say the media are too liberal; 15% say they are too conservative. 9/22/11 Gallup poll: 60% perceive bias, with 47% saying the media are too liberal and 13% saying they are too conservative. 8/15/12 Rasmussen Poll: 59% of Likely U.S. Voters believe Obama has received the best treatment from the media so far; 18% think his Republican challenger has been treated better. 8/25/12 New York Times: Arthur Brisbane wrote: "Across the paper’s many departments, though, so many share a kind of political and cultural progressivism — for lack of a better term — that this worldview virtually bleeds through the fabric of The Times." “As a result, developments like the Occupy movement and gay marriage seem almost to erupt in The Times, overloved and undermanaged, more like causes than news subjects.” Who the New York Times endorsed for president, since 1960: 1960 Kennedy; 1964 Johnson;1968 Humphrey; 1972 McGovern; 1976 Carter; 1980 Carter; 1984 Mondale; 1988 Dukakis; 1992 Clinton; 1996 Clinton; 2000 Gore; 2004 Kerry; 2008 Obama. ALL DEMOCRATS. 9/21/12 http://cnsnews.com/news/article/gallup-only-8-americans-have-great-deal-trust-news-media-new-low: Gallup: Only 8% of Americans Have 'Great Deal' of Trust in News Media--a New Low Evidence of collusion between democrats and CNN during the presidential debate of 10/16/12: -10/17/12 http://freebeacon.com/candy-crowley-he-was-right/: ROMNEY: I want to make sure we get that for the record because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror. OBAMA: Get the transcript. CROWLEY: It — it — it — he did in fact, sir. OBAMA: Can you say that a little louder, Candy? -http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/10/obama-gots-more-time-138699.html: CNN says Obama got 9% more speaking time [194 seconds]. -2/3/11 http://money.cnn.com/2011/02/03/news/companies/super_bowl_ads/index.htm: Fox Network charges up to $100,000 a second for big sports events. [In other words, CNN gave Obama $19,400,000 worth of free campaign time -- $100,000/second times 194 seconds] The pro-democrat media has ten times more viewers than pro-Republican Fox News: 5/25/11 huffingtonpost.com: NBC Nightly News averaged 9.469 million viewers, ABC's World News 8.380 million; CBS Evening News 6.204 million; among cable networks, Fox News 2.556 million. And those figures don’t include the democrat shills MSNBC and CNN.

A: the coverage of msnbc is childish and immature. they describe romney as equivalent to satan and hitler. come on, everyone knows that's fake presentation. nobody buys that. at least do realistic coverage and consider Romney a tough opponent. Instead they act as if they have it all in the bag. Fox doesn't do that type of stuff. They take election very seriously

Will democrats ever admit that Fox News is awesome and their "news" is biased? by James Q: http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2012/10/12/fox-news-channel-beats-all-of-the-broadcastcable-networks-in-viewership-for-vice-presidential-debate-coverage/152746/: Fox News beats all the networks and cable news for the VP debate coverage. -------------- Of course Fox is pro-conservative, but this is ridiculous: Polls on how Americans saw the mainstream media (TV and print) election coverage in 2008: -Rasmussen poll: 69% for Obama, 6% for McCain -Pew Research poll: 67% for Obama, 11% for McCain -Sacred Heart University poll: 68% for Obama, 9% for McCain -Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll: 67% for Obama, 11% for McCain University of Connecticut’s Department of Public Policy survey of journalists, nationwide, during the 2008 election: 52% supported Obama versus 19% for McCain. 9/2009 Sacred Heart University Polling Institute: 69.9% agreed the national news media are intent on promoting the Obama presidency while 26.5% disagreed. 9/23/10 Pew Research poll: 43% of those who perceive bias say it is liberal; 23% say they see conservative bias. 9/29/10 Gallup poll: Distrust of the media Edges Up to Record High Perceptions of liberal bias still far outnumber perceptions of conservative bias: 48% say the media are too liberal; 15% say they are too conservative. 9/22/11 Gallup poll: 60% perceive bias, with 47% saying the media are too liberal and 13% saying they are too conservative. 8/15/12 Rasmussen Poll: 59% of Likely U.S. Voters believe Obama has received the best treatment from the media so far; 18% think his Republican challenger has been treated better. 8/25/12 New York Times: Arthur Brisbane wrote: "Across the paper’s many departments, though, so many share a kind of political and cultural progressivism — for lack of a better term — that this worldview virtually bleeds through the fabric of The Times." “As a result, developments like the Occupy movement and gay marriage seem almost to erupt in The Times, overloved and undermanaged, more like causes than news subjects.” Who the New York Times endorsed for president, since 1960: 1960 Kennedy 1964 Johnson 1968 Humphrey 1972 McGovern 1976 Carter 1980 Carter 1984 Mondale 1988 Dukakis 1992 Clinton 1996 Clinton 2000 Gore 2004 Kerry 2008 Obama Democrats – all of them. 9/21/12 http://cnsnews.com/news/article/gallup-only-8-americans-have-great-deal-trust-news-media-new-low: Gallup: Only 8% of Americans Have 'Great Deal' of Trust in News Media--a New Low The pro-democrat media has ten times more viewers than pro-Republican Fox News: 5/25/11 huffingtonpost.com: NBC Nightly News averaged 9.469 million viewers, ABC's World News 8.380 million; CBS Evening News 6.204 million; among cable networks, Fox News 2.556 million. And those figures don’t include the democrat shills MSNBC and CNN.

A: Probably not. Interestingly enough, though, most network owners tend to be conservative and a lot of the reporting staff tend to be liberal. I'm a journalism graduate but almost ashamed to admit it sometimes.

Will democrats ever admit that their liberal media is going bankrupt because...? by James Q: ...the Internet, talk radio and Fox News (all of which are thriving, BTW) has exposed it as a shill for the democrat party? http://www.deadline.com/2012/08/cnn-primetime-ratings-low-20-year-weekly/: "Primetime is not good news for CNN lately. Amidst having its least watched month in primetime in two decades in May and the lowest rated month in total viewers in 10-years in April, CNN has now hit a 20-year all time primetime weekly low. The latest fall came during the week of July 30 to August 5, 2012." Polls on how Americans saw the mainstream media (TV and print) election coverage in 2008: -Rasmussen poll: 69% for Obama, 6% for McCain -Pew Research poll: 67% for Obama, 11% for McCain -Sacred Heart University poll: 68% for Obama, 9% for McCain -Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll: 67% for Obama, 11% for McCain University of Connecticut’s Department of Public Policy survey of journalists, nationwide, during the 2008 election: 52% supported Obama versus 19% for McCain. 8/27/10 The Examiner: “Obama and Democrats got 88% of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters”: Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democratic candidates and campaign committees in 2008. Democratic total of $1,020,816 was given by 1,160 employees of the three major broadcast television networks, with an average contribution of $880. By contrast, only 193 of the employees contributed to Republican candidates and campaign committees, for a total of $142,863.

A: Of course not. For the same reason that liberal talk radio (remember Air America) failed dismally: facts, logic, and honest debate are foreign concepts to leftists.

What do you think the chances are for third parties in 2010/2012? by meowlax Q: In the 2008 election, Nader was polling between 6-8%. In New York, Palin endorsed a third party and they almost won. It seems to me that everyone is either dissatisfied with both parties or they feel that those parties no longer represent what they should. I think that if Nader can get that high without any news coverage, anyone, including Nader, Ron Paul, or anyone who isn't afraid to say what they think, could win major elections if only they were given coverage and allowed to debate with the major parties. What do you all think? Also, are you planning on voting for any third party candidates in the next election? obamasbro: Palin did endorse a third party in the New York 26th district race.

A: None really. Maybe if The Fair Elections Now Act (S. 752 and H.R. 1826) gets passed there could be a chance but I doubt it. Republicans will never let this go through, and neither would allot of Democrats in the Senate. They are all corporate puppets for the most part. Personally, I have a hard time voting for an independent simply because I usually don't vote for someone, but against someone, so I vote for who's most likely to win against the candidate I'm against. Sad but true.

Are we doomed as a country no matter who wins this election? by rhgizmo Q: Democrat President Wilson (1913-1918) said, “You are not here merely to make a living. You are here to enable the world to live more amply, with greater vision, and with a finer spirit of hope and achievement. You are here to enrich the world. You impoverish yourself if you forget this errand.” He may have been the first democrat to appreciate the potential use of multiculturalism (“If it’s white or American, trash it!”) in deconstructing the Constitution, saying, “No nation is fit to sit in judgment upon any other nation.” Obama put it this way: "Every nation is exceptional in its own way." Democrat President Roosevelt (1933-1945) “let it all hang out” in his speech before Congress on January 11, 1944: “We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights...” which included: -The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation -The right of every family to a decent home -The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health -The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment. Democrat President Johnson’s Great Society became the largest redistribution of wealth program in our history. Obama has thrust national healthcare upon us, the hallmark of all socialist and welfare states. 25 years ago none of the above was common knowledge. It is only because of the Internet, talk radio and Fox News (all non-existent 25 years ago!) that today we know that the democrat party has been gradually changing America into a European style welfare state. -2/4/10 Gallup poll: 61% of liberals have a positive view of socialism. -6/2/11 Gallup poll: 71% of democrats favor re-distributing wealth. -Now they have national health care, the foundation of all welfare and socialist states. The unions are rewarded for their support of democrats: -10/21/10 Wall Street Journal: The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees is now the biggest outside spender of the 2010 elections. It gave 0% to Republicans between 1989 and 2012 (http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php… -1/30/09, http://www.healthyhearing.com/content/ne… Federal Employees Health Benefits Program hearing aid insurance coverage plans went into effect on January 1, 2009 for potentially 8 million federal employees, retirees and their families. -7/8/11 U. S. News Report (usnews.com): The actual number of private sector jobs decreased since 2008. Government jobs increased. During the worst of the downturn, the private sector was hammered with massive job losses, while the public sector held fairly steady. -6/8/12 Investors Business Daily: “Private-sector jobs are still down by 4.6 million, or 4%, from January 2008, when overall employment peaked. Meanwhile government jobs are down just 407,000, or 1.8%. Federal employment actually is 225,000 jobs above its January 2008 level, an 11.4% increase.” -6/11/12 Cato Institute (http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/obama-vs-… ...teacher employment has exploded; the public school workforce has grown 11 times faster than student enrollment over the last 40 years; on a per pupil basis, the inflation-adjusted average cost of a K-12 education has gone from about $55,000 to about $150,000.” 8/15/12 USA Today/Gannet: -21,000+ retired federal workers receive lifetime government pensions of $100,000+. -Economist Veronique de Rugy (Mercatus Center): Average federal pensions, $32,824; state and local government pensions, $24,373; military, $22,492; ExxonMobilExxon Corporation (one of the best remaining private pensions), $18,250. -Pension payments cost $70 billion last year, plus $13 billion for retiree health care. Taxpayers face a future $2 trillion unfunded liability to cover those programs according to the government's audited financial statement. And as though that’s not enough: -Google search Obama saying, "Under my plan, energy prices would necessarily skyrocket" and watch him actually say that (in September, 2008). -11/3/08 LA Times: “So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it's just that it will bankrupt them because they're going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that's being emitted." -6/8/11 U. S. News: “Two new EPA pollution regulations will slam the coal industry so hard that hundreds of thousands of jobs will be lost, and electric rates will skyrocket 11 percent to over 23 percent, according to a new study based on government data.” -9/5/12 CNBC News http://www.cnbc.com/id/48905756: The World Economic Forum survey ranks nations by competitiveness: the US fell two positions to the 7th spot marking its fourth year of decline.

A: If AMERICA could elect a PRESIDENT who was NOT a Democrat & NOT a Republican then we have a chance to regain control of this great land.

Religiously speaking, are Republicans TRYING to lose the election? by SupaStar Q: Are Republicans TRYING to lose the election? What else could possibly be in their minds when they put out bills like this? "The Arizona Senate is considering a bill (already passed by the Arizona House) that would give all businesses the option to exclude contraceptives from health insurance coverage. The only exception is if a woman can prove she is taking the contraceptives for other medical reasons." bonus question! Is a Republican saying "I personally don't have a moral objection to contraceptives, but I respect the people that do," yet ALSO says "I have a personal moral objection to abortion, and I have no respect for people that don't", the DEFINITION of hypocrisy? http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/15/politics/arizona-contraception-controversy/index.html

A: No, they're just captive to the extreme wing of their party. This came about because Obama adopted so many Republican positions that Republicans must go to the extreme-right if they want to say there's a difference between them and the Republicans. Because the Republican position starts from "Obama is bad", when Obama started adopting their positions they had to abandon them. Here's a nice article about it by my favourite journalist, Glenn Greenwald: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/dec/27/vote-obama-centrist-republican I find it truly difficult to disagree in any way with Greenwald's analysis on most subjects. A very intelligent and logically consistent man who does a lot of hard work for his articles and always lays down the evidence for his case and makes it possible for the reader to independently verify it.

Will you vote in 2012? by nautica17 Q: From my point of view, I'm not going to. Not that there ever really was a point in voting in a presidential election as your votes doesn't count (look up electoral college and 2000 elections). But either way, why be forced to vote or even push representatives to vote for a candidate that is in the media? There is no real choice for most people. The smaller parties practically have no chance as most people don't even know that parties other than Democrats and Republicans even exist in the US! Those smaller parties (like them or not) don't even get mainstream media coverage (which obviously the majority of people watch and get brainwashed to either the left or the right). For me.. I don't like Republican beliefs, and I think the Democrats are simply no better either. Democrats speak well, but they cave in! Obama promised a public healthcare option during his campaign in 2008 and now look at what is happening. Nothing! We're screwed out of our word as citizens. (That goes for conservatives too who don't agree with liberal policy's, but since whatever you support also gets screwed over.) So I say this, why are we basically a single-party state (Democrats and Republicans being factions and the independents just simply disguising their indirect affiliation to either side). Think about it.. do you really have a choice? Disregard what the politicians say.. think about what change ever happens no matter who is in office. So my question: Will you vote in 2012, even though it's all just crap anyway. If there is to be change.. then you need a revolution. And that is clearly not happening in the US. Okay, for those who believe your vote counts, please prove it. Your vote means crap. If you want to have someone elected, then you tell it the people who vote in the electoral college. The proof that your votes doesn't count is simply the 2000 election. Popular vote chose Gore, and guess who won? Edit: I'm talking about presidential elections. Not state-wide elections. State elections are obviously more reasonable.

A: I have never voted, it doesn't matter who is in power they do what ever they want anyway and the people don't really have a say.

Can JESSE VENTURA win the White House in 2012? by Matt Q: Do you believe Jesse Ventura, a decorated Navy Seal, a former Minnessotta Governor with 4 years executive experience could run as an Independent and get elected to the Presidency depending on the following criteria? 1) He got ballot access in all 50 states 2)He was allowed full television coverage by the media, took his case to the internet, you tube, Americas youth, an was granted access to the 3 fall Presidential debates as are the Democratic nominee and Republican nominee making him a 3rd candidate on the stage as was Ross Perot in 1992. It seems to me as an American who participates in every election, that Jesse Ventura is the only one making any sense at all. He tells the complete truth as I have checked him out thoroughly and he walks the walk. I was a Ron Paul supporter and I am neither a Democrat or Republican. What amazes me, is both of the parties blame each other and want all the credit and only live in their own little kingdoms completely ignoring the people. When will people wake up and realize that special interest, lobbyists, corporate and industrial military are running this country? The national debt is at 10 trillion and they keep bailing out the corporate criminals on Wall street that are responsible for this mess we all have to endure. I can't see Obama changing much of anything, and the Republican brand is basically in the toilet probably for the next 20 years. How much more BS will the American people just sit and take before they vote in someone that is real and truly cares about the America we all once knew? I think we all take so much for granted and we as a people can do so much better than electing the same *#it that is shoveled us every 4 years. Its like choosing between Coke and Pepsi when you just want water. Are you ready to throw out these liars and vote in third party candidates that truly have a chance of winning? Have you had enough? Jesse Ventura said he is going to run if the people show him they have had enough. Would you cast your ballot for this Man in 2012? Obama will be up for re-election and the Republicans don't stand a chance no matter who they nominate, so if your 3rd choice was Jesse Ventura the Independent...would you vote for him and why????

A: BWAAAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

How would a person begin reforming the presidential election process? by Musicmaiden4 Q: First of all is it possible for someone to initiate the process if they do not hold a government office? If so, then what would be next ; where could I locate the information and/or instruction? I think there are a lot of people that may share my thoughts and feelings about the 2012 U.S. Presidential elections. For which I am > frustrated- with the negative campaign ads, and one-sided media coverage (The ads for each candidate say choose me and I promise that I will work to make America or these United States a prosperous great nation. They also say why I should not vote for the other guy and then media takes it from there and blows that part out of proportion). > confused- about electoral states, Pacs, and Super Pacs (after educating myself about these things I am no longer confused however, I am sure there are others that do not understand them and how they work). > angry- about the incumbents backward priorities (campaigning for another 4yrs and tends to Presidential duties in his spare time). Placing pressing issues demanding immediate attention after the elections. (it is my opinion the incumbent should not have to work that hard on his campaign if he performed well at his job as President of the these United States.

A: VOTE OMAMAMA AS 2012 CHICAGO COMMUNITY WORKER.. Yes, I will Vote Omamama as chicago community worker Omaamamama will make great chicken soup as "community worker""" 2012

Obama?Troops out by 2010? Or just 'blah blah'? bcuz August '10 starts new campaigning for 2012 elections? by rare2findd Q: Excerpt from AP "Let me say this as plainly as I can: By August 31, 2010, our combat mission in Iraq will end," President Obama said on Friday in a speech at Camp Lejeune, a Marine Corps base in North Carolina on Friday. Obama said that a transitional force of between 35,000 to 50,000 US troops would remain in the country after this deadline to help the "transition to full Iraqi responsibility". The transitional force would train Iraqi security forces, conduct targeted "anti-terror" missions and protect civilian efforts and leave at the end of 2011 as mandated in a previous Iraq-US agreement known as the Status of Forces Agreement (Sofa) forged by George Bush, Obama's predecessor, he said. "I intend to remove all US troops from Iraq by the end of 2011. We will complete this transition to Iraqi responsibility, and we will bring our troops home with the honour that they have earned," he said. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ And something else? Haven't US troops been 'training" Iraqi military/police for the last five years? How long does it take to 'train?" or is it that Iraqis prefer to 'train' ThEir way, rather than the way of the US? I don't have anything against Obama. But it has already been decided that there will be coverage of returning soldiers who have died. And yes, returning veterans deserve honor. But its a little late for those that didn't make it~~because of out of over four thousand of them, there were just those few - whose names and faces we only knew because a a select compassionate tv station or radio programming, chose to say their names, or show their faces....

A: Believe me, the campaign for 2012 has already started with Governor Jindal firing the first salvo..

Why has the media not covered the "other" historic election? by David P Q: Louisiana voters again elected into office someone who looks nothing even close to the majority of the voters: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Cao Why so little media coverage for his historic election? First, he's Republican, so being Republican negates being a minority to the left wing-controlled media Second, he was voted into office by southerners, and the "collective lie" cannot prevail if it's revealed that it's the people of France, NOT Louisiana, who have a difficult time electing people of color into office. I'm still waiting for the media to mention the Louisiana governor who is poised to run for president possibly in 2012 or 2016: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bobby_Jindal

A: Louisiana is the compass to victory in 2012!

1. There are major differences between presidential primary debates and general election debates. One is the? by mike Q: 1.There are major differences between presidential primary debates and general election debates. One is the timing of the debates – when in the nomination process are the debates typically held in the primary election campaign? When during campaign season are the general election debates usually held? 2.Candidates in a primary debate often take different positions on issues than they do in a general election debate. This is because the candidates are seeking support from different kinds of voters in the two elections. Which voters are primary election candidates courting, and which voters are general election candidates seeking to attract? [different types of voters: liberal, conservative, moderate; strong partisan, weak partisan, Independent; or undecided voters). 3.How many Republican primary debates have been scheduled for the 2012 presidential campaign? When was the first debate held? On what date is the last debate scheduled? 4.How many candidates participated in the OU-sponsored debate? List each of them. 5.What was the major topic or issue that was discussed the most during the OU-sponsored debate? 6.Some candidates seem to dominate the debates more than others, In terms of the amount of time they spoke and the attention they received from the other candidates or moderators. Based on your viewing of the debate on November 9, which candidate was the most dominant? 7.Voters often evaluate presidential candidates based on factors such as perceived “trustworthiness” or “likeability.” Which candidate appeared to be most trustworthy, in your opinion, and which was seemed most likeable? Why? 8.How did the local media cover this story? (WDIV Channel 4 probably will have the most coverage because it is an NBC affiliate). Did it appear that the news coverage of this debate favored one candidate over the others? If so, which candidate was favored? 9.As of November 1, 2011, which Republican candidate had the highest “positive intensity score” according to the Gallup Poll? Who had the second highest score? What does the “positive intensity score” measure? 10.Who do you think won the OU-sponsored debate? Why

A: hahaha, i have got to be in your class. no one is going to give you all of these answers haha.

Why do the Communist Party and the National Education Association (the “teachers'” union) endorse Obama? by majordundee Q: -8/4/11 Fox News: “It may be early in the 2012 election but the Communist Party has seen fit to endorse Obama.” -7/5/11 UPI: “The National Education Association endorsed President Barack Obama for re-election, with leaders saying Obama shares the union's vision for a strong America.” [And note that this is even before the Republican nominee is chosen] We know what the liars will say about Fox News, not withstanding: 11/21/08 Zogby poll: Fox News most trusted TV news source: approval 39%; CNN approval 16%; MSNBC 15%. A majority think the media is biased: the web is the most trusted news medium (over TV and print combined). And the fact that the democrat major media is totally biased in favor of democrats makes no impression on the “brains” of democrats or government union “teachers”: Polls on how Americans saw the mainstream media (TV and print) election coverage in 2008: -Rasmussen poll: 69% for Obama, 6% for McCain -Pew Research poll: 67% for Obama, 11% for McCain -Sacred Heart University poll: 68% for Obama, 9% for McCain -Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll: 67% for Obama, 11% for McCain -University of Connecticut’s Department of Public Policy survey of journalists, nationwide, during the 2008 election: 52% supported Kerry, versus 19% for Bush. -8/27/10 The Examiner: “Obama and Democrats got 88% of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters”: Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democratic candidates and campaign committees in 2008. Democratic total of $1,020,816 was given by 1,160 employees of the three major broadcast television networks, with an average contribution of $880. By contrast, only 193 of the employees contributed to Republican candidates and campaign committees, for a total of $142,863. And what is Obama’s vision for America? What it’s been, for a very long time: -1/11/44, democrat FDR’s Address to Congress: “We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights...” His new “rights” list included: -The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation -The right of every family to a decent home -The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health -The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment. Democrat Woodrow Wilson: “You are not here merely to make a living. You are here to enable the world to live more amply, with greater vision, and with a finer spirit of hope and achievement. You are here to enrich the world. You impoverish yourself if you forget this errand.” Wilson may have been the first socialist to realize the potential of multiculturalism in deconstructing America, saying: “No nation is fit to sit in judgment upon any other nation.” And today the democrats and unionized government “teachers” can trumpet their successes: -2/4/10 Gallup poll: 61% of liberals have a positive view of socialism. -6/2/11 Gallup poll: 71% of democrats favor re-distributing wealth. -They finally got national health care (Obamacare), the hallmark of all socialist nations.

A: Apparently Obama's still a member of the New Party, a far left Marxist party. So it make sense that the communists support him. Heck, even the terrorists support Obama. And the NEA is a bunch of leeches sponging off the teachers and tax payers, so they naturally would support Obama too. Now we know the Russians support his re-election. He promised he'd disarm once the election is over. We're so screwed if he gets in office 4 more years. The damage he's done just the last 4 was nothing compared to what he'll do with 4 more.

Plausible?: "occupy" loses much support, media coverage, "protests" turn violent, ? by Captain Crackbarry Q: cities declare "state of emergency", call for feds to declare martial law, which happens just in time to keep the 2012 election from happening.

A: This is not surprising. Anyone with half a brain cell saw this coming weeks ago.

Are Republicans TRYING to lose the election? by SupaStar Q: What else could possibly be in their minds when they put out bills like this? "The Arizona Senate is considering a bill (already passed by the Arizona House) that would give all businesses the option to exclude contraceptives from health insurance coverage. The only exception is if a woman can prove she is taking the contraceptives for other medical reasons." bonus question! Is a Republican saying "I personally don't have a moral objection to contraceptives, but I respect the people that do," yet ALSO says "I have a personal moral objection to abortion, and I have no respect for people that don't", the DEFINITION of hypocrisy? http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/15/politics/arizona-contraception-controversy/index.html

A: HIPPA laws prevent anyone else besides a doctor from seeing one's medical history, unless there is a lawsuit-in which case the records could be subpoenaed-so I don't think any employer will be able to ask their employees for 'proof' about anything, except whether or not they were actually ill when they took a sick day

Have you seen this list of vulnerable Democrat Senators for 2012? by Trader Will Q: 1. Jon Tester (D-MT) 2. Ben Nelson (D-NE) 3. Bill Nelson (D-FL) 4. John Ensign (R-NV) 5. Scott Brown (R-MA) 6. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) 7. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) 8. Kent Conrad (D-ND) 9. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) 10. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) Let’s take a look at a few of them. Jon Tester: Most readers know that Jon Tester was elected in November 2006 by just a few (3562) votes and failed to even win the county where he resides. He won the race when a third-party libertarian candidate took about 10,377 (mostly conservative) votes from the GOP candidate. Tester has voted for most of President Obama’s ideas and he has had hard time trying to be even a moderate democrat. During his watch, one-fourth of the missile mission at Malmstrom AFB was lost and the Air Guard’s fighter jets are scheduled to leave. Unemployment is up about six points since his election and Tester pledged to control spending which has skyrocketed. He voted for Obama care. The campaign plan to take on Tester basically writes itself. I doubt if President Obama will make a trip to Montana to campaign for Tester – if fact, Tester may act like he never met the President… John Ensign: Ensign is not a poster boy for the conservatives. Caught having an extramarital affair, he’s very vulnerable. The best thing Nevada Republicans could do is find someone else, but then again, David Vitter was caught being dirty and he won re-election in Louisiana by about 19 points. Claire McCaskill: McCaskill won her 2006 race in Missouri by about 2 points against Jim Talent. Some rumors are floating around the “Show Me State” that Talent may come back for a rematch. If so, it would be an easy campaign tool to say “are you better off now than you were six years ago” and the answer for Missourians would be an easy “No.” McCaskill was on a cable news channel today saying she hoped people would concentrate on getting something done for a couple of months instead of looking at the 2012 elections. Fat chance, Claire. Fat chance. Orrin Hatch: Hatch remembers what happened to long-time Utah Senator Bob Bennett earlier this year. Hatch must align himself and drink lots of “tea” to even be able to get into the general election. Ben Nelson: Nelson is a moderate Democrat that is caught in the Obama trap. Voters in Nebraska will be reminded of the “Cornhusker kick-back” several times in the next two years and Obama care will be one of the major issues. Over 60% of Nebraskans are against it. Scott Brown: In Massachusetts, Brown is finishing out Senator Ted Kennedy’s term and 2012 is where he will run for a full six-year term. His win over Democrat Martha Coakley sent shockwaves through the political world – especially in Massachusetts and it gave the Tea Party some credibility. Brown is walking a fine-line in that he needs to be a moderate to win re-election and also trying to keep the Tea Party happy. Kent Conrad: In North Dakota, with Democrat Earl Pomeroy losing a bid for a 10th term in U.S. House and Republican John Hoeven easily winning the open U.S Senate seat currently held by Byron Dorgan, Kent Conrad should be on the endangered species list. Five Republican state-wide office holders won re-election on Tuesday garnering over 60% of the vote in each race. In Closing: No matter what these officeholders say, they are prepping for 2012 by raising money, launching campaign websites, and being out and about more. They will hound the media for coverage of ribbon cuttings and kissing babies. Every vote they take in the next couple of years will be dissected. Some will be used against them. Of course, the economy could improve. Unemployment could go down. Spending could be cut. The tooth fairy will leave $500 under your pillow tonight, too. If there’s a vote in the U.S. Senate to kill Obama care, that could make or break these senators’ chances of reelection. According to a MSU-Billings Poll (PDF) taken in Montana, 59% of the people disapprove of the job President Obama is doing and 61% oppose the healthcare legislation (Obama care) passed by Congress this year. As The Western Word hears rumors or reads stories about possible opponents for these 10 most vulnerable Senators, we’ll be sure to let our readers know. You can always e-mail me with tips, information, or rumors at the e-mail address on the top right side of this screen. http://thewesternword.com/2010/11/04/politics-2012-10-most-vulnerable-senators-2/

A: What's the question here? You've seemed to answer it all on your own. It's as if... You were trying to make a point... Of some sort... Of wit-filled sources... Nah.

Should the Commonwealth of Nations be considered a "Potential Superpower" itselfs? by SecrecyMaster24 Q: In political corectness, America is the cirrent superpower, and there are a few potential superpowers like China, the EU (shockingly), Brazil, India, and Russia. All the potential superpowers have great economic strength, a significantly sized military, and high populations. It's inevitable that America will remain a superpower for decades at least. It has the largest military, largest economy, and a 300 million+ population. Whether or not we buy into the fact that China could rival America in economic power, it still has the world's highest population and, I believe, the second largest military. I could go on about Brazil being the South American powerhouse, Russia's economy growing at a rate reportedly higher than China, or India growing to be the most populated country. Then we have the EU, the so-called "United States of Europe," which is falling faster than a hailstone. But we're leaving out a major player, the Commonwealth of Nations (CN). The CN is set to triple the EU's economic growth this year, it has over 1/3 of the world's population (mainly from India, Pakistan, and Nigeria), and has the advantage of being over some of the most resource-rich countries. Think oil, coal, bauxtite, iron, gold. The CN also houses the Cayman Islands (home to hundreds of thousands of global companies), which you've probably heard plenty about in the 2012 election coverage. If you're a history fanatic, you'll know the CN is really what the British Empire was intended to be, a strong trading assosciation and controller of key naval areas. The CN pushes for free trade, humane treatment, rights, and democracy and a huge percntage of its population is under 25. While China, America, and Russia are all trying to slaughter each other for economic dominance, we have the CN sitting back and can almost in our minds imagine a cocensus of people shouting, "We are not amused!"

A: The Commonwealth has a few military agreements, a few trading agreements, and every four years we get together for a third rate Olympic Games knock-off. That's as far as it goes. The idea of 'super powers' is so 1950s.

LGBT: new year's 2012 survey??????????????????? by Timmy Q: 1. in 2012 do you hope to weigh more or less than you did in 2011? 2. in 2012 do you think you will have a new sexual partner? or more than one? 3. despite it being in November are you already tired of election coverage? 4. your biggest resolution for 2012? 5. do you think 2012 is going to be better or worse than 2011? 6. do you have any big plans or trips coming up in 2012? 7. did you kiss anyone at midnight new year's eve? 8. do you think you'll be using yahoo answers in a year from now? 1. less 2. maybe 3. YES!~ 4. to eat healthier & exercise more 5. I sure hope so 6. not yet 7. my 2 cats-I was home sick 8. I'm a lifer LOL

A: 1. In 2012 do you hope to weigh more or less than you did in 2011? Probably a little less, lack of excercise and the Lindor truffles have been getting to me lately... 2. In 2012 do you think you will have a new sexual partner? or more than one? I hope so! Preferably a significant other. Otherwise the current ones will just have to do. 3. Despite it being in November are you already tired of election coverage? I rarely watch TV so I don't care lol. 4. Your biggest resolution for 2012? I'm ready to find a decent job and finally move out. And try to come out to my parents before I'm 21 and my dad takes me to that titty bar he promised to bring me to on my birthday. 5. Do you think 2012 is going to be better or worse than 2011? Better, 2011 was kinda depressing :p 6. Do you have any big plans or trips coming up in 2012? Not really...I wanted to go to London for the Olympics but probably won't get the chance. 7. Did you kiss anyone at midnight new year's eve? Does my tear-soaked piano count? 8. Do you think you'll be using yahoo answers in a year from now? Of course! I love giving advice to people, cause nobody listens to me in real life lol.

Is Ralph Nader spot on in this article about the Democratic party and the coming election in 2012? by In Defense of ☭Marxism Q: Anyway the actual title is 'the left has nowhere to go', but we all know that the democrats aren't left. link: http://www.indypendent.org/2011/01/03/ralph-nader-the-left-has-nowhere-to-go/ “The more outrageous the Republicans become, the weaker the left becomes,” Nader said when I reached him at his home in Connecticut on Sunday. “The more outrageous they become, the more the left has to accept the slightly less outrageous corporate Democrats.” Nader fears a repeat of the left’s cowardice in the next election, a cowardice that has further empowered the lunatic fringe of the Republican Party, maintained the role of the Democratic Party as a lackey for corporations, and accelerated the reconfiguration of the country into a neo-feudalist state. “The left has nowhere to go,” Nader said. “Obama knows it. The corporate Democrats know it. There will be criticism by the left of Obama this year and then next year they will all close ranks and say ‘Do you want Mitt Romney? Do you want Sarah Palin? Do you want Newt Gingrich?’ It’s very predictable. There will be a year of criticism and then it will all be muted. They don’t understand that even if they do not have any place to go, they ought to fake it. They should fake going somewhere else or staying home to increase the receptivity to their demands. But because they do not make any demands, they are complicit with corporate power. "Corporate power makes demands all the time,” Nader went on. “It pulls on the Democrats and the Republicans in one direction. By having this nowhere-to-go mentality and without insisting on demands as the price of your vote, or energy to get out the vote, they have reduced themselves to a cipher. They vote. The vote totals up. But it means nothing.” “The so-called liberal media, along with Fox, is touting the tea party and publicizing Palin,” Nader said. “There was an editorial on Dec. 27 in The New York Times on the Repeal Amendment, the right-wing constitutional amendment to allow states to overturn federal law. The editorial writer at the end had the nerve to say there is no progressive champion. The editorial said that the liberals and progressives have faded out to let the tea party make history. And yet, for months, all The New York Times has done is promote Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck. They promote Newt Gingrich and the neocons on the Op-Ed pages. The book pages of the newspaper ignore progressive authors and pump all the right-wing authors. “If we don’t raise hell, we won’t get any media,” Nader said. “If we don’t get any media, the perception will be that the tea party is the big deal. “They are afraid of the right-wing because the right-wing bellows, and they have become right-wing,” Nader said of the commercial press. “They have become fascinated by the bias of Fox. And they publicize what Fox is biased on. The coverage of O’Reilly and Beck and their fights is insane. “Every major movement starts with field organizers, the farmers, unions, and the civil rights movement,” Nader said. “But there is nothing out there. We need to start learning from what was done in the past. All over the country people are pissed off. They hate Wall Street. They know they are being gouged. They know they are slipping behind. They know their kids will not be as well off as they were, and they were not that well off. But no one is putting it together. Who could put a thousand organizers in the field, besides George Soros? The labor unions. They have the money. They have a lot of cash. These idiots are going down. “It is amazing that it hasn’t happened in any pockets of the country. How much more can the oppressed take before they revolt? And can they revolt without organizers? These are the two important questions. You have got to have organizers, and as of now we don’t.”

A: I haven't found Nader to be a fount of wisdom, so I just dismiss what he says.

Which candidate is right for me? (2012 election)? by Anonymous Q: I took a quiz on ontheissues.com about my political views, they said i was a "Moderate Libertarian Liberal". They also said that Ron Paul was my top candidate but its not looking good for him from what i see on tv. ill turn 18 in august so il be able to vote in the presidential election but not the primaries... Okay so here r my answers: Abortion is a woman's right: Disagree. I do think its okay in the case of rape or incest though. Sexual Orientation Protected by Civil Rights Law: STRONGLY agree. I'm all for gay marriage & equal protection. Permit Prayer in Public Schools: Oppose. Death Penalty: Support, some ppl are just so cruel they need to be put to death. Drug Use: Legalize marijuana! And not just for medical uses... Its a victimless crime. Allow Churches to Provide Welfare Services: Yes, it would help keep taxes in check. Require Companies to Hire More Minorities/Women: Definitely not. That would be just as discriminatory as not hiring them. More Federal Funding for Health Care Coverage: Strongly support. Privatize Social Security: Seems like a good enough way to keep taxes in check. Support. Decrease Overall Taxation of the Wealthy: Support as much as it is practical. Taxes should be flatter then they are now. Its not fair to make ppl who worked hard their whole life have to pay more than a lazy bum mcdonalds worker Support Free Trade: Yes. Absolute right to gun ownership: Absolute, no. But loosen restrictions as much as it is safe. But violent felons deff dont need guns Parents Choose Schools Via Vouchers: I guess... More spending on armed forces: No, waste of money.

A: REPUBLICAN

who is winning the 2012 democratic presidential election? by alejandro Q: There is no media coverage on the democratic side and which democrat is sweeping the most votes/support

A: Geez are all of you new to life and politics in America and on Y/A there usually arent primaries for parties with a standing president. DUH

How much positive news coverage will Obama get in 2012 from the big 3? by Bethy Q: in 2008 during the election it was reported that almost 70% of news stories on Obama on the big 3 (NBC, CBS, ABC) were positive. Has Obama mania been tarnished? Will fair unbiased journalism return to the election? I didnt know that George Mason and Chapman universities was a biased partisan source Wow

A: How interesting the "Major 3" TV networks are treating Obama today, as compared to 3 years ago!! Even CNN, a snuggly pro-Obama network, is now finding it challenging to positively report current news on an Obama administration that's sharply fallen short of anything positively productive w/out crossing propaganda lines that could expose them. Even once aggressive pro-Obama supporter Oprah Winfrey ( HARPO and OWN Productions ) today has distanced herself from Obama---and that alone speaks volumes on what is ahead in 2012. In my perspective: Obama mania indeed has been tarnished, as I knew it'd be, by Obama and his entrusted; they only have themselves to blame.

Will the constant (front page)MSM coverage of the Occupy Protesters effect your decision in the 2012 election? by Dave Keller Q:

A: No, I will still vote for anyone ANYONE but obama

What national news channels provides THE BEST 2012 U.S. Election coverage? by X-Raver Ultima Q: FOX NEWS? MSNBC? CNN? YOUR LOCAL NEWS STATION? C-SPAN? THE DAILY SHOW W/ JOHN STEWART? ONN? Retarded Politics Network for Anti-Americans?

Any objective media coverage for the 2012 election process? by super g Q:

A: As opposed to subjective?

Fake Election Coverage with your own name in the coverage? by Rhonda Q: Looking for funny internet video with fake 2012 Election coverage showing signs with your own name? It's so cute and I gotta have it. It will show your name on billboards and it somewhat looks like real coverage.

A: This is my first time hearing of this, but i have no doubt that if it's out there, then Google will help you to find it.

Can I get full story Coverage of Election 2012? by Haley Q: I need a full story coverage on what happened in election 2012. Send me links or just give me it in the description.

A: Real Clear Politics is my favorite source. http://realclearpolitics.com/elections/ .

Images
Videos
Obama Wins the 2012 Election: Obama's Complete Presidential Victory Speech Swing State Outlook for 2012 Presidential Election; 'This Week' Roundtable Discussion Redneck Election Coverage 2012! Secrets of 2012 Election Revealed Presidential Debate 2012 (Complete) Romney vs.Obama - 10/3/2012 - Elections 2012 RNC Convention Coverage 8/28 (7pm) - Election 2012 Complete Third Presidential Debate on Foreign Policy 2012: Barack Obama vs. Mitt Romney Oct 22, 2012 Election Night 2012 Live - Your Voice, Your Vote - from ABC News and Yahoo News Election 2012: The End Of America? Complete Second Presidential Town Hall Debate 2012: Barack Obama vs. Mitt Romney - Oct 16, 2012 Staged Riots & Election 2012's Dog and Pony Show WAR FOR THE WHITE HOUSE!!! Diebold accidently leaks 2012 election results Bill Clinton's Full DNC Speech - Elections 2012 Complete Vice Presidential Debate 2012: Joe Biden vs. Paul Ryan - Oct 11, 2012 - Elections 2012 Campaign Heats Up in Ohio: Election 2012 Election Results 2012: Nate Silver on How He Got It Right Michelle Obama's DNC Speech - Elections 2012 2012 Presidential Election: Mitt Romney, President Obama's Closing Arguments: 'This Week' Roundtable Full 2012 First US Presidential Debate Shields and Brooks on How the 2012 Election Looks Like 2004 Teens/Elders React to Election 2012 Shields and Brooks on How the 2012 Election Looks Like 2004 State of the 2012 Presidential Election Race: 'This Week' Roundtable Discussion Hougang By-Election 2012: WP Rally, May 19 - Low Thia Khiang, WP Secretary General Predicting the 2012 Election Results ‪Hougang By-Election 2012: WP Rally, May 2‬4‪ -‬ Low Thia Khiang InfoWars-Election-Coverage-2012--PREVIEW- LIVE- Footage Penn Jillette: An Atheist's Guide to the 2012 Election KIDS REACT TO ELECTION 2012 Election 2012: Elizabeth Warren Wins Massachusetts Senate Race State of 2012 Presidential Election, Romney Vs. Obama; 'This Week' Roundtable Discussion President Barack Obama's Full DNC Speech - Elections 2012 Scarlett Johansson's Full DNC Speech - Elections 2012 Judge Napolitano on the 2012 Election, Obamacare, and The Future of Liberty Romney Punctures Campaign With '47%' Comment With First Debate, Can Romney Win Over the 47%? Hougang By-Election 2012: WP Rally, May 22 - Pritam Singh, MP. Jesse Ventura on Romney's Mormonism, 2012 Election, Ron Paul Second Presidential Debate and Town Hall Coverage - Oct 16, 2012 - Elections 2012 Barack Obama's Victory Speech Full - Election 2012 Michael Savage: How Obama fixed 2012 election First Presidential Debate: Obama vs. Romney (Complete HD - Quality Audio) Gov. Chris Christie's RNC Speech - Election 2012 Paul Ryan's RNC Speech - Elections 2012 Election 2012 - The Pundits are Stumped EXTENDED - Teens/Elders React to Election 2012 2012 Election RIGGED - This is going Viral Third Presidential Debate - Middle East Policy is Discussed RNC Convention Coverage 8/28 (2pm) - Election 2012 2012 Presidential Election Predictions; 'This Week' Roundtable Discussion
© OpinionCenter.li - Privacy Policy - Terms of Service - Help & Contact Last update : 2016-05-03 11:42:18