Trump is arguably the first since Gingrich to fight back, and when that happens we defeat them. When we don't we lose, like W did in '06. Reality is Dems have only controlled the WH and Congress at the same time 4 years of the last 25 and the GOP hasn't been much of an adversary for most of that.
I saw George W roll over and play dead back in the runup to 2006. I saw the media harping about something at the time, I forget now what it was, but I remember at the time that it was designed to get Democrats elected.
No pushback from Bush. No pushback from his Father either. I saw it coming in both 1992 and 2006.
Clinton and Obama both lost their congressional majorities they started with. Bush lost his because he put up no fight whatsoever, and still held it 6 years.
Exactly. Both Clinton and Obama horrified the public who then elected Republicans to hold them in check. Bush just let the media say all sorts of nasty things about him, and the media ginned up a false outrage against him, which of course resulted in Democrats taking back congress. (Was it the Housing loan meltdown crises they were blaming on Bush?)
Their censorship hasn't seemed to help their cause.
I completely disagree with that statement. If I sat down and spent a few hours looking up the details, I bet I could find dozens of examples where media censorship of news benefited Democrats.
The housing Crises for example. It was caused indirectly by Jimmy Carter (yes, his legacy of stupidity has lingered on long past his presidency) Directly by Bill Clinton, and allowed by people like Barney Frank And Chris Dodd.
The media did not report who caused it and why, they didn't report how prominent Democrats in congress enabled it to get so bad, and they did in fact blame it on George W Bush who tried to prevent it but was prevented by Democrats in congress.
As a result, they won a majority in Congress as a prelude to that butthole Obama getting elected.
You don't think censoring the truth helped them and hurt the country?
What about Benghazi? What about Fast and Furious? What about Lois Lerner targeting Republicans? I could go on and on and on.
They have always kept the truth about abortion off the networks. They have always kept the truth about homosexuality off the networks. They have always kept the racial disparity in crime statistics off the networks. They never cover the socialist experiment in Venezuela in the manner it deserves by linking it to socialism/communism. They always play this game of "Name the party" whenever a Democrat has done something wrong or illegal, though they are always quite prominent in pointing out any Republican affiliation, especially if they can find a "RACIST!" angle to pin on it.
Censoring the news is how they do the *MOST* damage, but it is not always evident that the damage has occurred as a result of them censoring the news at the time.
While they are big players, the internet is just too big for them to control it. Their political effect is pretty muted.
They seem to be doing a pretty fair job of it now. Every other day I read about someone they have kicked off of one of the major platforms out there. Google is always demonitizing people for political reasons.
