Americans divided on media treatment of Trump: Gallup

Source: Xinhua | Editor: huaxia

By Matthew Rusling

 

WASHINGTON, Feb. 6 (Xinhua) -- Two weeks since newly-elected U.S. President Donald Trump took office, Americans are split in their assessments of whether the U.S. news media is covering the Trump administration fairly, a new Gallup poll found.

 

Just over a third of Americans, at 36 percent, think the media has been too tough on Trump, while just under a third, or 31 percent, think it has been about right, according to the poll.

 

Twenty-eight percent say the media has not been tough enough. Republicans overwhelmingly believe the media has been too tough on Trump, the poll found.

 

However, this masks broad disapproval among Republicans, who mostly believe the media -- which Trump has declared "the opposition party" -- is being too hard on the new Republican president. Meanwhile, about half of Democrats think the media should be tougher on Trump, according to a Gallup poll released Friday.

 

Full story: http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2017-02/06/c_136033534.htm

 

-- Xinhua 2017-02-06

Rather a strange headline. I mean, unless you have a poll that shows 100% support or opposition, the results are always split. In this case the split seem to come down to 36 percent think the press is too hard and 59% think the press is being fair or not hard enough.

Considering the media has been tough on Trump, and for good reasons, then only 36% think it's been too tough.  With the rest, 64%, saying it is OK (i.e. tough) or needs to be tougher.  Fits in with his opinion polls.  Only 1/3 or so approve of what he's doing.

64% vs 36%? Seems accurate:

(Melissa McCarthy perhaps sums up the OP best;)
 

 

They just need to get on with it. We all saw how accurate the US polls are.

Polls polls and more polls I am starting to feel poll axed. I think I got that right oh well sounds similar maybe. 

64% vs 36%? Seems accurate:

A lot of rich lefties out there...

There would be protests supporting President Trump but all those people have jobs. If the MSM really wanted to do some unbiased reporting they'd be asking these asshats just how many times they have ever been invited to a mosque and just exactly who they are there supporting at the protests.

I saw on 1 news channel where they actually asked 1 woman why she was there and she rattled off her support for the poor immigrants, woman's rights, jobs, security, etc. and they finally just cut away from her. She was basically there as a fellow sheep.

5 minutes ago, mrwebb8825 said:

There would be protests supporting President Trump but all those people have jobs. If the MSM really wanted to do some unbiased reporting they'd be asking these asshats just how many times they have ever been invited to a mosque and just exactly who they are there supporting at the protests.

I saw on 1 news channel where they actually asked 1 woman why she was there and she rattled off her support for the poor immigrants, woman's rights, jobs, security, etc. and they finally just cut away from her. She was basically there as a fellow sheep.

I've spent months in various Muslim countries, and never been invited to a mosque.  I've been in many though.  Non-Muslims are not allowed in mosques during prayer time.

1 minute ago, craigt3365 said:

I've spent months in various Muslim countries, and never been invited to a mosque.  I've been in many though.  Non-Muslims are not allowed in mosques during prayer time.

Who mentioned anything about specific times?

the problem is that everything has to be Politically Correct.

Donald expects everything to be Politically Correct.  "PC" is what we call it.

PC means I Love Trump. 

so never say anything bad about Trump.  it's not PC.

and you gotta be PC nowadays. or else.

 

Edited February 7, 20179 yr by maewang99

20 hours ago, maewang99 said:

the problem is that everything has to be Politically Correct.

Donald expects everything to be Politically Correct.  "PC" is what we call it.

PC means I Love Trump. 

so never say anything bad about Trump.  it's not PC.

and you gotta be PC nowadays. or else.

 

You DO understand we're talking about the same man that called Rosie O'Donnell a pig, called Mexican immigrants r#@*ist and drug runners and made a claim to the size of his wiener on national TV, right? I don't think "PC" is of much concern to him.

 

Selective journalism is the issue here.

main stream media are totally biased. Half the time they are more like a talk show with their own agenda

Edited February 8, 20179 yr by skorp13

3 hours ago, skorp13 said:

main stream media are totally biased. Half the time they are more like a talk show with their own agenda

B.S. The big sites just report the news.  Commentaries are a different issue.  But a lot of what CNN/BBC/??? does is just report news events.  No bias.

B.S. The big sites just report the news.  Commentaries are a different issue.  But a lot of what CNN/BBC/??? does is just report news events.  No bias.

Another true believer, keep drinking the Koolaid brother.

2 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

Another true believer, keep drinking the Koolaid brother.

 

Seems some already have. 

On 2/5/2017 at 11:19 PM, sujoop said:

64% vs 36%? Seems accurate:

Really Poor logic to use GDP as a gauge for ruling a country.  If you have money, your vote is worth more?

So only NYC, LA, Chicago should be allow to vote to decide who should be President?

Those blue areas are also the areas with the highest number of psychologist and psychiatrist in the US.  So let the crazy lefties run the world?

Instead of the Electoral College, maybe each county in the US has 1 vote.  That way the politicians would have to pander to all groups.  

You could also show a red/blue map that shows that all the other areas, produce the food, clothing, cars, lumber, steel....etc for the people in those Blue Counties.  

 

2 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

B.S. The big sites just report the news.  Commentaries are a different issue.  But a lot of what CNN/BBC/??? does is just report news events.  No bias.

 

keep on believing that

1 hour ago, CableTV said:

Really Poor logic to use GDP as a gauge for ruling a country.  If you have money, your vote is worth more?

So only NYC, LA, Chicago should be allow to vote to decide who should be President?

Those blue areas are also the areas with the highest number of psychologist and psychiatrist in the US.  So let the crazy lefties run the world?

Instead of the Electoral College, maybe each county in the US has 1 vote.  That way the politicians would have to pander to all groups.  

You could also show a red/blue map that shows that all the other areas, produce the food, clothing, cars, lumber, steel....etc for the people in those Blue Counties.  

 

It's funny because it's the conservatives in the last election who started touting the notion of makers and takers.  It turns out it's the blue states that are overwhelmingly the makers and the red states are the takers.  The definition here being those state that take more  federal revenue than they contribute being the takers.

^  Here you go.  These are the states that get the most (dark blue) and the states that give the most (light blue):

 

 

Edited February 9, 20179 yr by otherstuff1957

19 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

B.S. The big sites just report the news.  Commentaries are a different issue.  But a lot of what CNN/BBC/??? does is just report news events.  No bias.

 

17 hours ago, skorp13 said:

 

keep on believing that

And that's the point!  The normally complicit electorate no longer trust those reporting the news.

 

If they did, Trump wouldn't have been elected and the UK referendum wouldn't have resulted in a brexit result.

 

Back on topic - the OP is based on yet another poll, and recent events have made many of us very sceptical about poll results.

2 hours ago, mogandave said:

 

 

The graph says nothing about what states take the most federal revenue, you just made that up.

Typical.
 

 

 

No, I didn't just make it up. I just didn't cite the source. But here's the source

https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-states-the-most-and-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government-2015-7

No, I didn't just make it up. I just didn't cite the source. But here's the source
https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-states-the-most-and-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government-2015-7

Posting up a new graph does not change what the original graph does or does not say.

That rich states get less from the fed than poor states does not surprise me, did it surprise you?

18 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

Posting up a new graph does not change what the original graph does or does not say.

That rich states get less from the fed than poor states does not surprise me, did it surprise you?

 

It's not just that the rich states that tend to vote democratic get less. But that they contribute more than they get back. Whereas the states that get more than they give tend to vote Republican. It does put the lie to the rightwing meme that it's mainly the takers who vote democratic and the makers who vote republican.

On 2/7/2017 at 8:24 PM, craigt3365 said:

I've spent months in various Muslim countries, and never been invited to a mosque.  I've been in many though.  Non-Muslims are not allowed in mosques during prayer time.

I was in India recently and I was NOT allowed in the mosque during prayer time.

12 minutes ago, Linzz said:

I was in India recently and I was NOT allowed in the mosque during prayer time.

You think that's bad?  Try to go into a Mormon temple if you're not a believer. 

I think people's impressions of "fairness" will be impacted by their initial preference, and their news sources.

 

Fox News is probably telling everyone that the Lame Stream Media is being unfair to the "so-called" President.

 

And the "lefty-liberal, failing" media is simply doing their job, providing a check on the administration.

 

I guess only Fox News is fair and balanced? OK, them and Breitbart and Alex Jones.

 

 

It's not just that the rich states that tend to vote democratic get less. But that they contribute more than they get back. Whereas the states that get more than they give tend to vote Republican. It does put the lie to the rightwing meme that it's mainly the takers who vote democratic and the makers who vote republican.

Kind of like the left always pretending the right are all rich and greedy when it seems to be the other way around.

About the survey, as is typical of surveys. I do not believe enough information was provided to be of any real value beyond promoting the intended taking points.

9 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

You think that's bad?  Try to go into a Mormon temple if you're not a believer. 

I wasn't objecting, entirely their call. I was answering Craig whom I thought said non believers were allowed in mosques at prayer time  but I misread his post. My mistake.