As a Democrat, I feel this election is rigged.

[Kalimantan]

When it comes to the general election, I feel the majority of media sources have decided that they want Clinton to win and will bend over backwards to make Trump look ridiculous even when he says something that does make sense (which admittedly is rare, but it does happen).

Isn't that just the truth of the way media operates in the States - each media source DOES have a favourite, and the majority probably do want Clinton to win, but there are also clearly many that, would, under normal circumstances, want the Republican to win. Until and unless you get laws demanding neutral political coverage, this will be the way it is. I've always been amazed that you can turn on FoxNews and see such a bias in their coverage, but I'm sure the same is true from the left-leaning media, although perhaps a bit more subtle.

Of course the alternative isn't great, in the UK in the Brexit debate the BBC got so tied up with having to be neutral that its coverage ended up being "The Remain side say this, the Leave side say this" - and this claim and counter-claim was all we had to go on, there was next to no analysis of who was right, very little fact-checking, and we ended up with the cluster that is Brexit.

Does this mean the election is rigged? Only if you believe the only way that voters can get their information is via the lens of the media. Perhaps if people listened to the speeches, read the campaign material, properly got things fact-checked, and made their own minds up without succumbing to the echo-chambers of media pundits, then this wouldn't be a concern. Of course, I'm minded that if people really did this in this election, Clinton would win by a much larger amount than she actually will.

[Orser67]

Lets talk about the primaries first.I feel that the Democrat party's electoral process was stacked to make sure Clinton got the nomination instead of Sanders. I think in a straight first past the post electoral system without SuperPACs Sanders would have had a much better chance of clinching the nomination.

Clinton faced the same primary system in 2008 when she lost to Obama. It's not like there were a bunch of rules changed to hurt Sanders.

[Virginiá]

The essential problem is that the media has placed the same expectations on Trump as they would any seasoned politician running for the Presidency - as they should. It's Trump's amateurishness and refusal to learn even the most basic rules of civil political engagement that have drawn the media's ire. But it's also these very political deficits Trump has that endeared him to millions of Americans as a "fresh voice." Unfortunately for Trump and his core supporters, he came with a ton of personal baggage and a penchant for saying things that transgress not only political decorum, but the values of most Americans.

Basically, Trump had a real opportunity here, regardless of what the media said, to be a populist figure who could change Washington and bring some plain speak to politics. Regardless of what the media nitpicked about him he would've been far ahead by now if he didn't keep getting in his own way. So no, this election isn't rigged by the media or by anyone. Trump was not only an amateur, but a morally corrupt demagogue who was unwilling to learn even the basics of political discourse. That he loses will be 100% his own fault as he had all the perfect conditions for a landslide win and he sabotaged his own campaign by being so narcissistic and egotistical.

This, but:

-------------

Also, OP, last I recall Priorities USA (her Super PAC) didn't really spend much during the primaries. She used campaign dollars on that. Second, nothing was really 'stacked' against Bernie. Yes, members of the DNC didn't see him as a viable choice and denigrated him from time to time, but that's NOT the same as "stacking it against him." It just isn't. Bernie had plenty of debates to try and win over older voters, but in the end, all he could attract was younger voters. It wasn't enough.

Second, if the media is rigged against Trump, why is it just being complained about now? The "rigged" media got Trump to where he is with their non-stop coverage. It's not anyone else's fault that Trump can't act presidential. It's not their fault he's a fking sexual predator. It's not their fault he bullies and insults anyone who challenges him. He's an awful person and he has a lot of skeletons in his closet. And for Super PACs - Trump has Super PACs himself. So that's a non-issue here.

So no. Trump brought this on himself. He knew what the media was going into this election and he could have adapted, but no, he either couldn't or wouldn't and that is on him.

[136or142]

I don't think the issue is the poor treatment of Trump so much as it is the bend over backwards approach with Clinton. Trump sucks, and that will show through. Of course, they feel a need to push out stupid things that are not a real issue as well. However, there is zero accountability with Clinton, just like there was zero accountability of either Clinton or Trump, during the primaries.

Which media outlets have a 'bend over backwards approach with Clinton'?

[Zarn]

I don't think the issue is the poor treatment of Trump so much as it is the bend over backwards approach with Clinton. Trump sucks, and that will show through. Of course, they feel a need to push out stupid things that are not a real issue as well. However, there is zero accountability with Clinton, just like there was zero accountability of either Clinton or Trump, during the primaries.

Which media outlets have a 'bend over backwards approach with Clinton'?

Which ones don't?

[HAnnA MArin County]

I'm really tired of this argument about how outside forces are stopping Trump, especially when it comes from those who claim to be the party of personal responsibility. Crying foul and blaming the left-wing liberal lamestream media elite is a cliched cry from the right (why else do you think they have Fox News?). If anything, the media HELPED Donald Trump by giving him all that airtime during the primary while he was saying all of his controversial crap while the other candidates were out actually proposing their ideas and positions on the issues. Furthermore, it's the media's job to fact check and hold politicians accountable. When Trump makes all of these blatantly untrue assertions like how the election is rigged and when he contradicts his past statements, it's the media's job to call him out on that. Americans deserve to know the truth.

[136or142]

I don't think the issue is the poor treatment of Trump so much as it is the bend over backwards approach with Clinton. Trump sucks, and that will show through. Of course, they feel a need to push out stupid things that are not a real issue as well. However, there is zero accountability with Clinton, just like there was zero accountability of either Clinton or Trump, during the primaries.

Which media outlets have a 'bend over backwards approach with Clinton'?

Which ones don't?

None that I know of.  Now, answer the question this time.

[Sir Mohamed]

All this talk the media is biased against Mr. Drumpf is nonsense in my mind. I’m talking about the standard newspapers and TV stations like NY Times, LA Times, CNN, CBS, WaPo etc. They just report what the Trumpster is saying or doing, and this has been quite disgraceful over the last 16 months. They also reported Hillary’s shortcomings. But we have to acknowledge, that there are much much worse things about Mr. Drumpf. Writing and broadcasting this is the media’s obligation. And exposing lies and false facts by the GOP candidate is also their obligation. There is nothing wrong with the media. The only media not neutral are laughingstocks like Fox “News” and sites like Breitbart. They’re living in a fantasy world: All that comes from Obama and Clinton is evil and all the GOP is doing is just fine.

[Zarn]

I don't think the issue is the poor treatment of Trump so much as it is the bend over backwards approach with Clinton. Trump sucks, and that will show through. Of course, they feel a need to push out stupid things that are not a real issue as well. However, there is zero accountability with Clinton, just like there was zero accountability of either Clinton or Trump, during the primaries.

Which media outlets have a 'bend over backwards approach with Clinton'?

Which ones don't?

None that I know of.  Now, answer the question this time.

I did, just not in the way you wanted me to answer it. I also don't take marching orders.

I'm glad you admitted that you believe they all favor Clinton, although I'm not quite sure Drudge does... they seem to favor Trump.

[136or142]

All this talk the media is biased against Mr. Drumpf is nonsense in my mind. I’m talking about the standard newspapers and TV stations like NY Times, LA Times, CNN, CBS, WaPo etc. They just report what the Trumpster is saying or doing, and this has been quite disgraceful over the last 16 months. They also reported Hillary’s shortcomings. But we have to acknowledge, that there are much much worse things about Mr. Drumpf. Writing and broadcasting this is the media’s obligation. And exposing lies and false facts by the GOP candidate is also their obligation. There is nothing wrong with the media. The only media not neutral are laughingstocks like Fox “News” and sites like Breitbart. They’re living in a fantasy world: All that comes from Obama and Clinton is evil and all the GOP is doing is just fine.

I think there is a lot wrong with the media, but intentional bias is something they usually avoid.

[HAnnA MArin County]

All this talk the media is biased against Mr. Drumpf is nonsense in my mind. I’m talking about the standard newspapers and TV stations like NY Times, LA Times, CNN, CBS, WaPo etc. They just report what the Trumpster is saying or doing, and this has been quite disgraceful over the last 16 months. They also reported Hillary’s shortcomings. But we have to acknowledge, that there are much much worse things about Mr. Drumpf. Writing and broadcasting this is the media’s obligation. And exposing lies and false facts by the GOP candidate is also their obligation. There is nothing wrong with the media. The only media not neutral are laughingstocks like Fox “News” and sites like Breitbart. They’re living in a fantasy world: All that comes from Obama and Clinton is evil and all the GOP is doing is just fine.

Yes. Somehow those on the right seem to think that the media doing its job is "bias." The fact that so many Republicans always run to Fox News first because they know they'll spoon feed them through their "interviews" is pretty telling. All the crap that Trump is spewing is so extreme and so factually incorrect that the media would be derelict in its duties if they just turned a blind eye to it. Trump has brought this upon himself. Nothing is rigged about this election except for the ship that Trump is captaining into the inevitable iceberg in 18 days.

[BoAtlantis]

So in Republicans' minds, it's media's fault that Trump:

-has sexual allegations against him
-mocks a disabled reporter
-calls women slobs, pigs and unattractive
-comes to debates unprepared
-can't speak better than a 5th grader
-offers no serious policy proposals
-gets fact-checked for outrageous lies like "I saw thousands cheering at WTC" or "42% unemployment rate"
-gets un-endorsements from his own party members
-has even conservative newspapers endorsing Gary Johnson
-gets no support from any former Economic Adviser to presidents

No, it's not rigged and it's not just media.

Intellectuals in America are in consensus that Trump from top to bottom does not have any half-decent qualities in him, whether it be morals, intelligence or fitness. And he should be thankful that his uneducated base is giving him frighteningly YUGE support.

[Democratic Hawk]

The media aren't making Trump look ridiculous. Trump is making Trump look ridiculous.

[HAnnA MArin County]

So in Republicans' minds, it's media's fault that Trump:

-has sexual allegations against him
-mocks a disabled reporter
-calls women slobs, pigs and unattractive
-comes to debates unprepared
-can't speak better than a 5th grader
-offers no serious policy proposals
-gets fact-checked for outrageous lies like "I saw thousands cheering at WTC" or "42% unemployment rate"
-gets un-endorsements from his own party members
-has even conservative newspapers endorsing Gary Johnson
-gets no support from any former Economic Adviser to presidents

No, it's not rigged and it's not just media.

Intellectuals in America are in consensus that Trump from top to bottom does not have any half-decent qualities in him, whether it be morals, intelligence or fitness. And he should be thankful that his uneducated base is giving him frighteningly YUGE support.

Preach! Expanding on your list, it's also the media's fault that Trump:
*Attacked the Kahn family
*Questioned a federal judge's impartiality to try a case brought against him due to the judge's Mexican heritage
*Didn't immediately disavow David Duke
*Behaves like a teenage girl and tweets his petty frustrations out on social media
*Retweets white supremacists
*Called Mexicans murderers and rapists and druggies
*Wants to (unconstitutionally) ban Muslims from entering the country
*When pressed, said that there has to be some kind of punishment for women exercising their constitutional right to have an abortion
*Lies and makes up hypothetical nonexistent polls "showing" that he won the debate and is leading in X-state

The nerve of that wretched left-wing liberal lamestream media elite not believing Trump when he tells them to believe him!

As BoAtlantis correctly indicated, educated people are smart enough to see through his lies. It's sad that he's playing on the frustrations of the "poorly educated" and convincing them that reality is rigged. Facts do have a liberal bias, as we all know.

[RINO Tom]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Because he is a ridiculous option

So was  Boris Johnson, but he was treated with respect because he was part of the Conservative party.

The asinine things Brits do is none of our concern.

You're sounding awfully NATIONALISTIC, which is not accepted here because LINES ON DUH MAPP.

[hopper]

Let me try putting it this way. I don't think Ted Cruz is all that different from Donald Trump, but if Cruz had gotten the nomination he would have been taken more seriously by the media, and his racist, xenophobic, policies would have been discussed like they were serious policy positions.

Cruz is a lot of things but racist and xenophobic aren't 2 of those things. His hard-right wing idealogy I think would have been a focus of the media which is fair in my opinion.

[hopper]

The media presents him this way because it gets them the best ratings

Well early on they did focus on Trump in the primary for the best TV ratings. The Billy Bush Tape clearly was a biased move by the media.

[Yank2133]

I don't think the issue is the poor treatment of Trump so much as it is the bend over backwards approach with Clinton. Trump sucks, and that will show through. Of course, they feel a need to push out stupid things that are not a real issue as well. However, there is zero accountability with Clinton, just like there was zero accountability of either Clinton or Trump, during the primaries.

What a load of bull****.

No candidate in recent memory has gotten vetted as much as HRC has. Just take the emails, we have story after story about the emails when the vast majority of them are non-stories, especially the Podesta emails.

People need to stop this false equivalence nonsense, because it makes them look incredibly dumb. Clinton has provided more information then any candidate in recent memory, Trump wouldn't even provide his tax returns.

This is no comparison.

[Skye]

Trump's unusual behavior and outlandish comments make him far more unacceptable to the media than any other candidate in recent memory, so it makes sense he doesn't get treated well by them.

[Hammy]

Lets talk about the primaries first.I feel that the Democrat party's electoral process was stacked to make sure Clinton got the nomination instead of Sanders. I think in a straight first past the post electoral system without SuperPACs Sanders would have had a much better chance of clinching the nomination.

Concerning the nominating process, why do so many people who cry about the superdelegates completely ignore the fact that Clinton had 57% of the actual vote totals, and the superdelegates tend to side with whoever won this. Sanders could've very well won, but his campaign failed to make it's case early enough and largely ignored the southern states, where Clinton won in crushing margins--had he focused there early on, he would've won or at least come close in several states, would've had the opportunity to make up 200-300 delegates, and would've gone into later states with more momentum and higher visibility.

[Rules for me, but not for thee]

Seems like what the media was ready to gloss over or people were willing to ignore in the primaries has moved from Trump to Clinton in the GE.  She's got Wikileaks/Podesta (and called it a Russian front), she lied about her foundation.  Something wrong with Hillary? It must be Russia's fault.  Donald at least has some standing to say it's rigged.

Problem is Fox News lobbed up softballs for Trump to really drill Hillary on these points and ISIS but he couldn't do it.  He just goes back to his rambling interruptions.

[Yank2133]

Seems like what the media was ready to gloss over or people were willing to ignore in the primaries has moved from Trump to Clinton in the GE.  She's got Wikileaks/Podesta (and called it a Russian front), she lied about her foundation.  Something wrong with Hillary? It must be Russia's fault.  Donald at least has some standing to say it's rigged.

Problem is Fox News lobbed up softballs for Trump to really drill Hillary on these points and ISIS but he couldn't do it.  He just goes back to his rambling interruptions.

What is particularly damaging in the wikileaks/Podesta emails? There is nothing there, which is why the press have moved on. And she is right about the Russians, the intelligence community pretty much all agree that they are behind the hacking.

As for a her foundation, if anything the press has been far tougher on it, then need to be. Especially compared to the coverage the Trump foundation has received.

[Andrew]

The debates were definitely rigged.  Clinton got to go up against an idiot three times, and Trump never did.  That doesn't seem fair to me.

[Oakvale]

Delete your account.

[bore]

I'm not a Trump supporter, in fact I've supported every Democrat that's run for president since 1988, but I do think there is a little bit of merit to Trump's accusations of this election being rigged.

Now, I don't think the electoral commission is actively trying to sabotage the Republican party or any other candidates, but let me try to explain how I think the election is rigged.

Lets talk about the primaries first.I feel that the Democrat party's electoral process was stacked to make sure Clinton got the nomination instead of Sanders. I think in a straight first past the post electoral system without SuperPACs Sanders would have had a much better chance of clinching the nomination.

When it comes to the general election, I feel the majority of media sources have decided that they want Clinton to win and will bend over backwards to make Trump look ridiculous even when he says something that does make sense (which admittedly is rare, but it does happen). Some weeks ago Donald Trump Jr. made the statement about how the media "would be warming up the gas chamber" if the GOP would have carried out some of the tactics the Democrats had carried out. The outrage on CNN and other Democrat leaning channels almost made me think like they have vindicated Trump Jr's statement.

Every debate is covered as a maniac bullying a poor defenseless woman. Now, Trump's actions are unacceptable, and I don't think he's done a good job at all in the debates, but a few of his answers do carry merit. However those are ignored in favor of covering how many times Trump interrupted the moderator, or how much he sniffed. They also tend to gloss over some of the, frankly, stupid answers Clinton gives during the debates.

So, in conclusion, I don't think there's a political conspiracy involving the parties directly but there might be some merit in looking into how the media has portrayed Trump as a ridiculous option and an un-electable candidate since the day he announced his nomination.

Once again, I would like to point out, I am a Democrat.

lol