This message was self-deleted by its author

[BainsBane]

72. That isn't the primary

It's 2015, before the primary. And your original statement claimed to be about all networks, not just ABC. You said he got 10 minutes total coverage from all the networks, and you claimed the info was for the primary, only it turns out it's the year BEFORE the primary. Your own link proves your claims to be false.

Also, Bernie wasn't running against Trump. He was running against Clinton. So the media's hard on for Trump didn't have anything to do with Bernie's loss. The media was complicit in promoting Trump, but unless Bernie was also running for the GOP nomination, it isn't relevant to his whine. Bernie was running against Clinton, and he got far more favorable coverage and was NEVER vetted even minimally.

Here is an actual study done by a Harvard Scholar of communications. He demonstrates that Clinton got far more negative coverage than any of the other candidates. http://shorensteincenter.org/pre-primary-news-coverage-2016-trump-clinton-sanders/

I know that Trump was able to whine constantly and get elected anyway, but I find the quality exceedingly unattractive, particularly when the claims are so clearly false. it insults the intelligence of the voter, and I will not not allow a politician or his uncritical fan base to treat me that way.

We all saw him covered by the news everyday for months on end. To pretend otherwise is ludicrous. They even covered him for months after it was clear he had no chance of winning the nomination. And even this weekend he was on the Sunday news shows, as well as the prior weekend. And here you are trying to back up blatantly false claims about primary coverage by citing a list--not even a study--a list from the year BEFORE the primary.

I'm done here. I'm completely disgusted.