Yeah, there's no bias here!

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Yeah, there's no bias here!

Posted: 11/3/2004 5:35:45 AM EDT

This is my math... this is my logic.
I only looked at CNN and listened to Glenn Beck's "election coverage that wouldn't make my head explode."

Every station, even CNN called New Jersey for Kerry when it was only 90% in, and the lead was .51%, but they won't call Ohio for Bush and it's 100% in with 1.3% lead for Bush.
They all called Wisconsin blue with a .23% lead, but won't call New Mexico with a .88% lead for Bush, nor Iowa for Bush with a .53% lead.

Yeah, CNN sure is balanced... give me a break!

I haven't gone further, but I'm sure it was even worse than that if I were paying attention more.

Posted: 11/3/2004 5:40:21 AM EDT

[#1]

Dude - CNN is a joke.

I was at the Rep Election Party here last night. We had a bigscreen in each of two corners of the ballroom. CNN on one Fox on the other. The short people who couldn't see the Fox screen because of the crowd in front of them were the only ones watching CNN.

Someone tried to change the channel from Fox to MSNBC and got booed like Santa at an Iggles game.

Posted: 11/3/2004 5:44:08 AM EDT

[#2]

Damn right it's a joke, but I wanted the worst projection I could get... if the libs say we won, we KNOW we won.
They're all going to have the same numbers, but the way they interperate them is just sickening.

Posted: 11/3/2004 5:45:31 AM EDT

[#3]

There's a reason that CNN has such extensive world coverage. It's the same reason that they were the only station allowed to broadcast from Baghdad in the first Gulf war. It's not because they courted governments and remained neutral in their coverage.

It's because they bowed down to every anti-American government and organization with which they came in contact.

They are not called the communist news network for nothing.

Posted: 11/3/2004 5:46:44 AM EDT

[#4]

Remember that CNN is still the Clinton News Network. And they have no balls.

Posted: 11/3/2004 5:47:36 AM EDT

[#5]

it's called a "socialist agenda".

Posted: 11/3/2004 5:47:37 AM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
This is my math... this is my logic.
I only looked at CNN and listened to Glenn Beck's "election coverage that wouldn't make my head explode."

Every station, even CNN called New Jersey for Kerry when it was only 90% in, and the lead was .51%, but they won't call Ohio for Bush and it's 100% in with 1.3% lead for Bush.
They all called Wisconsin blue with a .23% lead, but won't call New Mexico with a .88% lead for Bush, nor Iowa for Bush with a .53% lead.

Yeah, CNN sure is balanced... give me a break!

I haven't gone further, but I'm sure it was even worse than that if I were paying attention more.

Don't jump to conclusions. CNN is biased, but this one is probably innocent. It really depends on where the missing precincts are located. In NJ, if Kerry is ahead by a little, and only Newark is left, it's pretty safe to call it for Kerry...

Posted: 11/3/2004 5:51:31 AM EDT

[#7]

Yeah... and when Bush is up 1.3% in Ohio with 100% in, that's an unsafe call.

Posted: 11/3/2004 5:51:44 AM EDT

[#8]

That is why I watched CNN and CBS and NBC last night. I knew that they would lean toward kerry the whole time so when I switched to fox I was pleasently surprised.

Posted: 11/3/2004 5:52:25 AM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
Yeah... and when Bush is up 1.3% in Ohio with 100% in, that's an unsafe call.

True... That one is bogus.

Posted: 11/3/2004 5:53:48 AM EDT

[#10]

hell, they called washington, with 6% in, and a 10% lead...

Posted: 11/3/2004 5:55:40 AM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
Quoted:
This is my math... this is my logic.
I only looked at CNN and listened to Glenn Beck's "election coverage that wouldn't make my head explode."

Every station, even CNN called New Jersey for Kerry when it was only 90% in, and the lead was .51%, but they won't call Ohio for Bush and it's 100% in with 1.3% lead for Bush.
They all called Wisconsin blue with a .23% lead, but won't call New Mexico with a .88% lead for Bush, nor Iowa for Bush with a .53% lead.

Yeah, CNN sure is balanced... give me a break!

I haven't gone further, but I'm sure it was even worse than that if I were paying attention more.

Don't jump to conclusions. CNN is biased, but this one is probably innocent. It really depends on where the missing precincts are located. In NJ, if Kerry is ahead by a little, and only Newark is left, it's pretty safe to call it for Kerry...

Cuyahoga County has reported 100% of its vote. That is Ohio's Newark (sorry Ohio, only a figure of speech). This one is done.

Posted: 11/3/2004 6:01:18 AM EDT

[#12]

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/IL/P/00/index.html

That's a blue state?
Honestly, how would you like to be a republican in Illinois?
That would suck like being a lib in Alaska... they didn't even pass their pot thing... I guess they just couldn't remember to get out and vote.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Yeah, there's no bias here!

General » General Discussion

Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us