What the hell happened in Michigan?

[This account no longer in use.]

Possibly the debate caused heightened attention to the Democratic primary, which caused some voters to learn more about Sanders and change their minds.

[This account no longer in use.]

They say that the problem was the companies stopped polling before Sunday's debate but I can't take this excuse seriously. Almost everybody, even foreign media, said that Clinton had a strong performance.

Did you watch the debate, though?  Sanders did quite well in it and Clinton's performance was below average, with several poor answers that highlight her inability to give straightforward responses.  With the debate in mind, the numbers in Flint make a lot of sense.

It's Landslide Lyndon. Clinton could quite literally say that Hitler was right on the debate stage, and Landslide Lyndon would still praise it as an 'excellent performance by Clinton'.

[This account no longer in use.]

What a joke!

Yes, you are.

Are you seriously trying to deny that the Washington Post ran 16 negative Sanders stories in sixteen hours? Because there's proof right here.

[This account no longer in use.]

What a joke!

Yes, you are.

Are you seriously trying to deny that the Washington Post ran 16 negative Sanders stories in sixteen hours? Because there's proof right here.

Oh no! Our candidate is being covered like any other candidate would be! #conspiracy #Illuminati

Give me an example of the Washington Post running 16 negative stories on another candidate, or for that matter, anybody else in as many hours.

[This account no longer in use.]

Fair enough. But in my opinion, their "response" only makes it worse.

[This account no longer in use.]

I beg to differ. Whether you want to admit it or not, the Washington Post did run such classic stories as "Clinton Is Running For President. Sanders Is Doing Something Else," "This Is Huge: Trump, Sanders Both Using Same Catchphrase," "'Excuse Me, I'm Talking': Bernie Sanders Shuts Down Hillary Clinton, Repeatedly," "Five Reasons Bernie Sanders Lost Last Night's Democratic Debate," "Here’s Something Ted Cruz and Bernie Sanders Have in Common: And the Piece of the Argument That Bernie Doesn’t Get Quite Right," and "Why Obama Says Bank Reform Is a Success but Bernie Sanders Says It’s a Failure," not to mention many more, all in the span of 16 hours.

[This account no longer in use.]

I beg to differ. Whether you want to admit it or not, the Washington Post did run such classic stories as "Clinton Is Running For President. Sanders Is Doing Something Else," "This Is Huge: Trump, Sanders Both Using Same Catchphrase," "'Excuse Me, I'm Talking': Bernie Sanders Shuts Down Hillary Clinton, Repeatedly," "Five Reasons Bernie Sanders Lost Last Night's Democratic Debate," "Here’s Something Ted Cruz and Bernie Sanders Have in Common: And the Piece of the Argument That Bernie Doesn’t Get Quite Right," and "Why Obama Says Bank Reform Is a Success but Bernie Sanders Says It’s a Failure," not to mention many more, all in the span of 16 hours.

Seriously?

The first is blatantly not a hit piece, the second is just dumb horseshoe clickbait, the third is literally just facts, the fourth is a journalist editorialising who won the debate (and the same journalist penned an article later about Donald Trump winning, and it's not like Wapo are in the tank for Trump), the fourth I give you is a bit dumb and the fifth is definitely not a hit piece at all. What weak arguments!

That's true. Individually, the first is completely correct indeed, the second is ridiculously stretching, and the fourth is just an attempt at clickbait for the same people that use Buzzfeed. But when you put all of these headlines in a span of 16 hours, that's a bit odd. It doesn't help that there were ten other stories as well.