I want to see how many truly objective watchers of these channels and what they have say about cable news in the age of Trump.
First off, I'm far from a conservative ideologue however I watch all 3 channels pretty much every day. In the age of Trump all 3 have been labeled as 'pro' or 'anti' this or that for whatever reason. There is no doubt that CNN/MSNBC can be lumped into the same group of calling out this administration. Their coverage is more dedicated to the misdeeds/wrongs this administration does then anything else. However when something perceived as good happens they cover it but not ad nauseam like Fox. Fox on the other hand are what you call sunshine pumpers to the 9th degree. When something good happens it's covered from sun up to sun down with only positive spin. I liken it to hearing about a drug that has plenty of side effects, but only talking about the 1 positive thing it does. Does CNN/MSNBC harp on the negative, sure but there is soo much of it. For instance, AG Barr is shooting off at the mouth about lock downs and comparing to slavery. Not one mention on Fox. Trump continues to speak in this rhetoric of red v. blue states, no mention on Fox. Trump says the CDC director is confused not once, but twice no air play on Fox.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
Only the stupidest of the stupid who buy what Donald is selling will be hurt.
Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xzN6FM5x_E
Meanwhile Fox has Juan Williams, Donna Brazile, Marie Harf, had Shep Smith forever, had the great Alan Colmes who I loved though disagreed with, Jim Carville, Tamara Holder, Kirsten Powers, NeverTrumper Neil Cavuto, and had NeverTrumper Megyn Kelly. Those are just the few I can think of. They are legit commentators/voices on Fox. CNN/MSNBC do not even come close to matching talent-for-talent in this regard.
And please don't tell me Scarborough is a conservative. Please.
But more directly MSNBC is definitely on the anti-Trump side of things. However, none of their personalities/pundits speak in rhetoric like Greg Gutfeld, Jesse Watters, Jeanine Pirro, Lou Dobbs, Fox and Friends, etc.
The Fox "Dems" are just there to be over talked and beat up on. You see it.
But once again who does CNN or MSNBC have?
Much like Joe you failed to answer the actual question but instead twisted your response
But I'll provide more context. MSNBC does not have current conservatives on their shows. They have folks who are not liberal but they don't like Trump, hence why I said concentrate on the negative. I didn't realize I had to spell that out.
CNN has plenty of conservatives on their airwaves. Rick Sanatorium, Scott Jennings, etc. CNN also has a different format then Fox. They don't invite guests on to be shouted down (a la Tucker) and cut off if they are making valid points. The other issue is Trump Republicans do not like going on CNN and they stay away from coming on. I'd like to see more people on the right go on CNN without spewing lying rhetoric.
or the "I have Trump's tax return" bombshell, smart people wouldn't either.
I go to Fox for Tucker, and maybe a little Hannity depending on the guest. That's it. I can't comment on the rest.
because Donald was going to undo them?
Bow tie wearing Tucker who was somewhat normal until he got his 8pm slot has taken the mantel from Hannity (although he's swinging wildly to get back). Mr. Tucker is one of the elites and tell his audiences the elites are the bad guys.
Only on Fox do you see this crazy kind of nonsense. What I find weird is the audience they speak to will vote for Trump anyway.
Just because Trump didn't get removed I'd stop short on calling Russia a hoax. That's like saying OJ killing Nicole was a 'hoax', umm no he just didn't get caught with enough evidence.
Hoax thing. Yr opinion on message board vs his report ? Nice try, spin all u want, does not change result.
Also, collusion is a behavior (not a crime) but exists.
Conspiracy is a crime that must have technical facts (no opinion) to back up.
(no message)
arbiter that you think you are.
Also, it is pointless to argue with someone who can read a fact and still opine about it.