Nov 24, 2016

The Media Against Trump and Against Reality – Coverage of the US 2016 Election Confirmed That Reliance on the Information Provided by the Media Results in a Distorted World Image and Even in Loss of Contact with Reality

The main media in the U.S., but also around the world, acted with vehemence and with strong negative emotions against the Republican president candidate, Donald Trump, as if organized, but surely spontaneously as in other cases, when people react according to their opinions and instincts, without need to coordinate their activity; in case of the predominantly leftist media, the reaction was predictable. Nevertheless, the extremely unrealistic results of the pre-election polls again corroborated that reliance on the information from the media must result in an entirely distorted perception of the world.       

Nearly all commentators and analysts are apparently surprised by the Trump’s victory, but who knows something about his election rival, Hillary Clinton, can only be surprised by their surprise. It is a question why such a corrupted person as Hillary Clinton could have obtained so many votes. Several facts, controversial according to their opponents, are presented below about both candidate.
Hillary Clinton:
·        In 1992, Hillary was involved in a financial scandal, Whitewater, together with Bill Clinton, Arkansas governor by then; some of their associates were imprisoned and one committed suicide.
·        Between 1993 and 2001, Hillary was president’s wife. She defended her husband against the accusations that he had sex with an intern, Monica Lewinski, in the Oval Office of the White House, and she accused president’s opponents of conspiracy.
·        In 1998, Bill Clinton paid $850,000 to Ms. Jones in an out-of-court settlement. She had accused him in 1994 that he asked her, without their previous acquaintance, to kiss his penis. Hillary, although being an active feminist and fighting for women’s rights and dignity, again did not divorce with Bill.
·        In 1999, in an NBC interview, Juanita Broaddrick described how Bill Clinton raped her in 1978, when he was Arkansas Attorney General. According to Broaddrick, Hillary later threatened her.
·        Between 2009 and 2013, Hillary served as State Secretary and contributed to the loss of respect for the U.S. in the world, to the increased chaos in the Arab world and to the formation of strong ISIS. In 2012, US ambassador Christopher Stevens was killed and according to the Arab sources also raped in the streets of Benghazi; a drastic film showing his terrible end was published in the YouTube, a part of which can be seen even now. Hillary’s administration alleged, in one version, that the mob dragging the ambassador’s body in fact tried to help to him, and in another version, they explained that the mob was justifiably angered by a film insulting to the prophet Mohammad.
·        In 2015 it became known that Hillary had used her private email server for classified information which had been accessible to hackers, thus gravely compromising the U.S. security.
·        With active assistance of Hillary and Bill Clinton, Russians assumed control of Uranium One, one of the world biggest uranium mining company, between 2009 and 2013, while a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock, and Vladimir Putin personally called Clinton to thank him. Russia acquired control over about 20 percent of U.S. uranium, and Clintons accumulated $250 million in assets.
·        In 2013, Hillary started to collect money from donors to the their private Clinton Foundation, allegedly to help children. Hillary collected money even when she served as State Secretary, from Qatar and other countries supporting terrorism. 
Donald Trump:
·        Donald promised to restrict the infiltration of illegals and criminals from Mexico.
·        He planned to act against the Chinese economic hegemony.  
·        He considered to make the US allies financially participate on the US expenditures for defending them.
·        He announced he would stop financing the fight against global warming.
·        Donald talked impolitely about woman.
So why so many commentators and analysts were surprised ? Probably, because they mostly work for the main media, which are powerful and have a great influence on thinking of the people and on the running of the world, and therefore the media expect the world to go along with their wishes and predictions.

The media polls unanimously predicted victory of Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump. The predicted margin of victory was in average about 5 points (=5%), but the real difference was about 1 point [2 points after final count]. The difference of about four points [finally three] between the prediction and the real result would be in the ambit of an expected error for a single poll, but it is too much for an average of hundreds of polls. It is evident that a great part of the polls has employed an incorrect method or has been rigged. 

From hundreds of published polls performed between January and November 2016, I have selected those which were organized by the respected sources of information in the U.S., including the biggest press agencies (Reuters, AP, Bloomberg), biggest TV stations (NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, Fox), and the biggest newspapers (NYT, USA Today, WSJ, Washington Post) – 151 polls together. I have also included the polls performed by Universities (21 polls), and by Rasmussen Reports – an American polling company (32 polls). I have averaged the polls over the whole pre-election period for each of the sources, the universities being combined together. The results are presented in the following table (Wall Street Journal organized the polls together with NBC, and Washington Post together with ABC), arranged according to the decreasing margin of victory for Clinton. Beside the averaged predicted difference between the %votes for Hillary and %votes for Donald, the table contains the minimal and the maximal result among the polls of each source (giving some intimation of the results dispersion).

Predicted margin of Clinton’s victory over Trump

Associated Press
USA Today
New York Times
Fox News
Rasmussen Reports

The world press agencies (AP, Bloomberg, Reuters) have erred the most – and they take the upper three lines in the table, followed by the mixture of the prestigious papers, TV stations, and universities. The table shows that it was possible to predict the election results more accurately: a nonpolitical polling company did it. Averaged 32 polls of Rasmussen Reports provided a margin for Clinton of 0.6 points and differed from the real result of about 1 point [finally 2 points] insignificantly. Mathematics cannot explain how the press agencies could have predicted a margin of 8 points for Clinton, whereas they even provided predictions of 14 or even 18 points in several polls. Press agencies prepare – manufacture – the news for other media, and common sense would expect that this is a technical activity without bias or political agenda. However, in the case of the 2016 election the agencies manufactured the most distorted of all “predictions” – differing from the real results by about 6 points. The famous newspapers and universities followed with an error of 2 to 5 points – strangely all errors into one direction, i.e. predicting Clinton’s victory. The results of the repeated polls oscillated in a range of about +6 points around the average (it can be noted that half of the difference between the maximal and minimal values in the table is between 5 and 9). Of course that manifold repetition of the measurement would have to provide an average much closer to the real value than +6, sometimes positive and sometimes negative (somebody would have to predict also Trump’s victory). The minimal error was provided by Fox News, known as being free of the left bias. From the polls organized by less famous papers, Los Angeles Times repeatedly predicted Trump’s victory. 

Surely, all the mentioned media giants, or the universities, could have afforded to buy an accurate poll having a good standard, such as the Rasmussen polls. They did it in the past, as proven by their accurate predictions in the 2012 election: universities and 7 out of 10 media sources in the above table differed only by 0.7 points form the real result (averaged from 50 polls I have found). Obama won by 3.9 points over Romney, and the mentioned sources predicted in average 4.6, wherein the minimal result was 2.5 points for Obama (ABC) and the highest was 6 points for Obama (Bloomberg), without any extreme results. The only possible conclusion is that the media and universities have not wished to find and publish the real situation in the 2016 election, in contrast with the 2012 election. They were consistently publishing erroneous polls, i.e., they were lying throughout the whole period of ten months before the election. A closer look at the information manufacturers helps to understand their motives; mostly they are organizations having openly leftist and politically correct agenda (except for Fox News). For example, in their manufacturing activities, AP abolished the term “illegal immigrant” as dehumanizing, and Reuters abolished the term “terrorist” as too emotional; both of these agencies are biased against Israel and were so accused even by their own employees. The founder and owner of Bloomberg concern, Michael Bloomberg, is an enthusiastic supporter of illegal immigrants and of the fight against the global warming.

The information manufacturers see everything as relative: everybody is right, to some degree at least, including charlatans, dangerously mentally ill, and terrorists. Only their political opponents are never right, and they are marked for liquidation. These manufacturers also invent alternative values to the existing values: alternative medicine, alternative science, alternative religion, alternative IQ, alternative love – and there is an alternative reality. They live in an alternative world in which all is allowed – except for the truth. The more states there are in which cannabis is allowed, the more words there are in the vocabulary which are forbidden. The commentators analyze why “populist Trump” has won, but they ignore the fact that the Western society loses contact with reality. The struggle against barbarians cannot be won if half of the people are drugged. According to the polls (provided by the information makers) more than half or the US population supports cannabis legalization. I cannot verify that, but the fact is that out of 8 US states in which cannabis has been legalized so far, 7 voted for Hillary Clinton in this election (Alaska is pro cannabis, but voted against Clinton, probably as they wish to develop their oil reserves).

Many of the analysts state that they have not voted for either of the candidates – they merely wish to analyze and comment. They dislike Trump’s alleged rudeness and populism, and they believe that the voters have failed and let in the uneducated whites. A few of rather right-inclined comments suppose that the white worker showed his anger. Nothing so dramatic has probably occurred, simply a few of the democratic voters could not put up with their corrupted candidate and stayed at home, as well as a few of the colored people, who do not care for white women in politics. And so it has happened that the descendants of those, who created the great America, got another chance – possibly the last one. Only few of those analyses and comments mention that “the cowboy entered the town alone on his horse”, against the opponents’ money, against the Democratic Party, against the Republican Party, against the “intellectuals” led by Lady Gaga, against the theoreticians of the transgender toilets, and against the manufacturers of the alternative reality. Not many mention that the primitives who have now won are real representatives of America – the best state ever. The commentators in the U.S. and in the world are not much worried by the fact that nobody will be able to save the world from African chaos, Islamic terror and Chinese-Russian hegemony in the oncoming post-American era.

We all witnessed systematic vilifying of the republican presidential candidate this year and also in 2012. In the last election, they have added falsified polls to the insults, hoping to influence the results in the desired direction. Similar situations occur repeatedly in the democratic countries. By delegitimizing Bibi Netanyahu and by falsifying polls in 1996 and again in 2013, the Israeli media and Left establishment unsuccessfully tried to prevent Netanyahu from becoming prime minister; by lying and falsifying, the European Left tried to stop the Brexit. The news manufacturers rudely attacked the voters, when the reactionary reality deviated from their virtual reality. According to the slogan “workers of the world, unite”, the Left elements around the whole democratic world are coordinated in their opinions about everything, including Bibi, Brexit, and Trump. The one-sidedness and mendacity of the Left have unfortunately become the attributes of most media in the democratic countries (at least in the USA, Europe and Israel). If the media lie in the election polls so grossly and exhibit such an irrational and histrionic support for one side (always the left one), one cannot help concluding that their “news” cannot be relied on, whatever they relate to. One cannot rely on what they pump into the people’s heads around the world and around the clock. One cannot rely that spinach is rich in iron, that trans-fats shorten our lives, that IQ is not related to smartness and that there is an alternative smartness, that all groups of people have the same IQ, that the criminality is not related to genetics, that serial killers can be rehabilitated, that drugs legalization will reduce their abuse, that conflicts with terrorists can be solved peacefully, that conflicts with political opponents must be solved only violently (bombing Serbia by beatniks admirers – Clinton, Solana and Havel), that supporting dictatorship will moderate them (Chinese and Moslem dictatorships), that climate warming makes more deserts, that farting cows warm the planet, that building new apartments in Israeli Judea is detrimental to world peace, that there is no connection between Jerusalem and Jews, and that the manufactured news are true. People around the world believe many superstitions, incorrect data, unfounded hypotheses, and fabricated facts, because they were obtained from the respectable sources – from the world media. However, these media stated that it was scientifically impossible for Donald Trump to win the election.

The uniformly rigged coverage of the US 2016 election and entirely false predictions again corroborated unreliability and fraudulency of the media. The only logical and mathematically founded conclusion of the polls analysis is that the media are corrupted. He who constructs the world picture on information from the media, without applying healthy experience, classical ethics and exact sciences, will cease to perceive reality and will become a puppet in an alternative world of the politically correct Left.