FakeNewsThrowback: MSNBC goes full retard, predicts 363-175 for Hillary, possibility of 84 for DJT

[lecter]

Dude says with a straight face that he predicts a 363-175 landslide for Hillary and that it's 'not safe' but that there's the 'possibility' of Trump falling to 84 electoral votes.

How can anybody watch this and think they did provide neutral information to the American public to the best of their knowledge and believe? I didn't look it up but I guess Breitbart's prediction was more accurate lol. Clinton leads by 1-2 points in a state: That goes to Hillary yeah.
Trump leads by 5-6%: We really could see this state turning blue, possible disaster for Trump incoming.

 

[m52nickerson]

Not fake new...just a bad prediction.

 

[TheComebackKid]

Not fake new...just a bad prediction.

They were trying to shape public perception. Fake news.

 

[lecter]

Not fake new...just a bad prediction.

"Bad" prediction by design.

 

[Blackened]

They were trying to shape public perception. Fake news.

It goes beyond "fake news". Fake news is like the national enquirer.

This is blatant mind control.

 

[lecter]

 

[KONE]

Not fake new...just a bad prediction.

>being blatantly dishonest
>while on the news
>not fake news

 

[m52nickerson]

They were trying to shape public perception. Fake news.

All information shapes public perception. Still does not make this fake news. It was a prediction and understood to be that from the beginning.

 

[m52nickerson]

"Bad" prediction by design.

Really? Based on what?

 

[m52nickerson]

>being blatantly dishonest
>while on the news
>not fake news

Using the polling data at the time is being dishonest?

 

[lecter]

Using the polling data at the time is being dishonest?

Implying it's somehow more likely and should be mentioned that a +5% state could flip than it's likely that a +1% state flips or that this possibility should be mentioned is dishonest, yes.

 

[KONE]

Really? Based on what?

Using the polling data at the time is being dishonest?

Did you even watch the video? Look at you being just as dishonest LOL

He's clicking random states that had absolutely no chance of remotely going blue and talking about how Hillary can overtake them or be competitive, some of them weren't even backed by the polls (which Brexit proved didn't matter to begin with anyway)

Stay brainwashed

 

[TheComebackKid]

All information shapes public perception. Still does not make this fake news. It was a prediction and understood to be that from the beginning.

Right...both truth and lies shape public perception. Making ridiculous predictions they knew were false and skewing polls in order to demoralize Trump supporters is called shaping public perception through lies...or fake news in other words. And give the level of collusion between the MSM and DNC you can also call that blatant, state sponsored propaganda.

And I'll just take a moment to point out that there were many of us calling BS the entire election. Do we get any credit for that?

 

[m52nickerson]

Did you even watch the video? Look at you being just as dishonest LOL

He's clicking random states that had absolutely no chance of remotely going blue and talking about how Hillary can overtake them or be competitive, some of them weren't even backed by the polls (which Brexit proved didn't matter to begin with anyway)

Stay brainwashed

Yes, I watched the video. Did you miss when he talked about polls?

Right...both truth and lies shape public perception. Making ridiculous predictions they knew were false and skewing polls in order to demoralize Trump supporters is called shaping public perception through lies...or fake news in other words. And give the level of collusion between the MSM and DNC you can also call that blatant, state sponsored propaganda.

And I'll just take a moment to point out that there were many of us calling BS the entire election. Do we get any credit for that?

There is a vast difference between predictions and presenting things as facts. Oh, I forgot you have no idea what a fact is.

No, you don't get credit. Why, because most of you were not going by any type of critical analysis, just gut feelings.

 

[WiolentOne]

Read my sig.

Total nincompoop.

 

[KONE]

Yes, I watched the video. Did you miss when he talked about polls?

Yes, I did. He lost his shit about random polls and predicted states that had ZERO chance of flipping.

Did you keep watching when he started clicking random states and not even mention polls?

 

[KONE]

Read my sig.

Total nincompoop.

lol @Jack V Savage

>Hillary isn't corrupt, where's your proof?
>Russia hacked the election, some anonymous sources from the CIA said so

 

[m52nickerson]

Yes, I did. He lost his shit about random polls and predicted states that had ZERO chance of flipping.

Did you keep watching when he started clicking random states and not even mention polls?

At the very end he talks about state becoming competitive if a trend developed breaking heavily for Clinton. Not just clicking random states.

 

[Hard To Tell]

People unhappy with the status quo are actually more likely to not bother voting due to their overall apathy and there's a lot of these people out there. This is what we saw with Brexit where the main stream media put out a constant barrage of propaganda designed to convince people thinking of voting against the establishment that it was a foregone conclusion and a waste of their time.

 

[KONE]

At the very end he talks about state becoming competitive if a trend developed breaking heavily for Clinton. Not just clicking random states.

lol no, he says if "things continue like this, we could see other states get crazy" and clicks South Carolina and fucking Texas. "They could at LEAST become competitive." There was no chance of that happening. He's being dishonest.

Keep eating up that fake news