Tag: mainstream media

News Outlet Caves to Democratic Senate Candidate, Kills Poll That Makes Her Look Bad

The already-dramatic Democratic primary contest in Michigan just got a new plot twist.

A poll run on behalf of a news outlet ended up getting killed from coverage after complaints from the third-place candidate’s campaign, according to Politico.

And one of the nation’s best-known pollsters has gone public with his contempt for the decision.

Washington Beltway-based Politico reported Wednesday that state Sen. Mallory McMorrow’s campaign raised serious questions about the poll’s results with Michigan Information & Research Service, a news outlet that covers the state’s lawmakers in Lansing.

It’s understandable that any campaign might object to a poll that shows its candidates with single-digit support — and the poll in question had McMorrow at only 6 percent.

The race’s two leaders, meanwhile, were “Dr.” Abdul El-Sayed — a far-left progressive endorsed by socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders and a candidate who has made potentially questionable claims to being a physician — and U.S. Rep. Haley Stephens, a more establishment pick who has been endorsed by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.

El-Sayed had 42 percent support, according to the poll. Stevens had 33 percent.

With the Aug. 4 state primary date fast approaching, the McMorrow team hit back hard.

According to Politico, the campaign approached Michigan Information & Research Service with serious questions about the poll’s findings — beyond the dismal showing of the candidate herself — the only Caucasian among the three serious contenders.

For instance, Politico reported, the poll found zero percent of black voters saying they were undecided. Stevens, a black woman, dominated in that demographic with 69 percent, according to the poll, while El-Sayed, the son of Egyptian immigrants, brought in 31 percent.

It also found Stevens with only 5 percent support in Oakland County, her home base, according to Politico.

Kyle Melinn, a news editor with Michigan Information & Research Service, told Politico the news outlet abandoned coverage of the poll after hearing from McMorrow’s campaign.

However, he said he first talked to other pollsters about concerns about the poll’s findings. He said they agreed there was a problem.

MIRS didn’t run with the poll, Melinn told Politico, “because I didn’t feel comfortable with it.”

The pollster behind the survey, Steve Mitchell of Mitchell Research & Communications, told Politico that McMorrow’s campaign put “intense pressure” on MIRS not to run with the poll.

“The poll, in the eyes of the McMorrow campaign, understated their support,” Mitchell, whose firm Mitchell Research & Communications conducted and paid for the poll, told Politico. “And they put intense pressure on MIRS, and therefore MIRS decided that they weren’t going to run the survey. That’s their decision, and I support their decision.”

One potential area of concern was the method used to solicit responses. According to Politico, the poll relied on the technique known as “text to web,” in which potential respondents are contacted by text. If they are participating in the survey, they go to a link included in the text to fill out their answers.

According to Politico, McMorrow’s campaign said that it opened the door to text recipients abusing the link, either by participating in the poll numerous times or passing the link on to others who aren’t part of the initial polling survey. That could have polluted the results.

However, Nate Silver, founder of the polling website FiveThirtyEight and a national voice when it comes to political polling, published a post on the social media platform X Wednesday, excoriating the MIRS decision.

Keep reading

How Many Ways Can You Avoid Reporting That Cops Killed a Baby?

“One-Year-Old Boy Killed After Officer Fires at Vehicle in Mississippi,” said the New York Times headline (6/16/26). So, a “one-year-old boy”—what most people would call a baby—was “killed after” a police officer fired at a vehicle, but there’s no verb you could use to connect those two things?

The Times subhed continued that pacifying work:

It is not entirely clear what led up to the shooting, but the Mississippi Bureau of Investigation said that police officers were responding to a shoplifting call.

“Ohh, shoplifting…!” we’re evidently supposed to say, before turning the page; that might make the baby murder make sense. I don’t need to say that baby was Black.

There will be more coverage of this heartbreaking, infuriating news about cops in Senatobia, Mississippi, called to the five-alarm crisis of someone purportedly shoplifting diapers, opening fire into a car whose driver “allegedly drove toward them.”

But in the meantime, please think hard about reporting that tells you to calm down, that suggests that, just maybe, nothing wrong happened at all. As ABC News (6/18/26) put it in a piece on how the “officer involved in shooting outside Walmart that killed 1-year-old boy” has been placed on leave: “One-year-old Kohen Wiley was killed, according to the family’s attorney.”

So maybe he’s not dead? Or he died from something other than the gun of the “involved officer”? Caution in reporting is valuable, but when it’s mainly deployed to protect the inflicters of state violence (FAIR.org, 7/11/16), you have to ask if it’s really a principle at all.

Keep reading

NY Times Says Christian MLB Players Wearing Bible Verses Will Cause Mass ‘Abuse’ Of Gay People

During a Friday pride night game, several San Francisco Giants pitchers wrote Bible verses on their gay-ified hats. One player made clear there was “no hate at all. It’s just what I stand for, and what I stand on: I believe in God.” The same player added that the rainbow is a symbol of God’s covenant and promise and that he’s ultimately thankful to live in a country where free expression and speech are protected.

But apparently writing a Bible verse on his baseball cap will actually cause gay people to be abused and even incite gays to kill themselves — so says The New York Times’ subsidiary, The Athletic.

Grant Brisbee said the Bible verse inscriptions on the hat were “tone-deaf” and “made the night about ‘us versus them.’”

Brisbee then made the fantastical claim that, apparently, writing a Bible verse on your ball cap will cause gay people to suffer actual harm.

“Without the support of their community at large, LGBTQIA+ individuals are much more likely to be told that they are without value,” Brisbee wrote. “They are likelier to be abused, to self-harm, to get kicked out of their homes, to be bullied, to be assaulted. They are at risk because of a society that still doesn’t always accept them, even after decades of progress.”

There is legitimately zero evidence that baseball players writing Bible inscriptions on their hats will cause any harm, abuse, or the assault of gay persons (or anyone for that matter).

What Brisbee is arguing is that if a player expresses religious beliefs that diverge from the left-wing LGBTQ orthodoxy, then real people could be harmed. At that point the argument is that Christianity causes violence and therefore Christianity is bad unless of course you practice your faith in a way that Brisbee deems fit (he waxes poetic about how the right type of Christianity apparently demands affirming the sexual preferences of others). His argument also becomes: if fans don’t enthusiastically celebrate pride night, they’re contributing to suffering. If someone doesn’t affirm the mental illness of a man thinking he’s a woman, they’re creating a dangerous environment.

Keep reading

Joe Biden Brags About Killing Oil Industry During Appearance on ‘Jay Leno’s Garage’

Joe Biden bragged about killing the oil industry during an appearance on ‘Jay Leno’s Garage.’

In January 2025, in one of his last acts as president, Joe Biden permanently banned offshore drilling across 625 million acres of US ocean.

This is after Biden blocked oil drilling on 10 million acres in Alaska in 2023.

Joe Biden also canceled the Keystone XL pipeline his first day in office.

President Trump overturned Biden’s ban on Arctic drilling, but he is facing legal hurdles.

Biden boasted about his unprecedented power grab and attack on domestic drilling as he flew down the highway in a vintage car.

“The other thing I was able to do, I made sure there could be no oil drilling off the East Coast, the West Coast and 150 miles off the Gulf of Mexico [unintelligible] too,” Biden said to Jay Leno.

There’s nothing more elitist than two multimillionaires who own vintage gas guzzlers laughing about killing the oil industry.

Keep reading

Al Gore Hit with Major Reality Check After Making this Wild Boast About ‘Climate Change’ During Interview Touting His Infamous Propaganda Film 

Former Vice-President Al Gore emerged out of hiding to tout his so-called ‘prescience’ regarding global warming and it quickly backfired.

On Wednesday, Gore sat down with ABC ‘News’ to reflect on the 20th anniversary of his environmental propaganda film “An Inconvenient Truth” and the current state of the planet.

As TGP readers know, Gore made a series of wild predictions about global warming in the film and in public that have not come to fruition. These included announcing in 2006 that the Arctic sea ice would completely disappear in ten years.

It’s now 2026, and plenty of Arctic ice remains.

But Gore remains unencumbered by facts. During the interview, Gore boasted that the scientists were “dead right” regarding all of the predictions about the warming of the planet.

This caused the interviewer to inquire what was wrong with his ‘documentary.’

“If scientists were dead right, why has so much been made about this documentary and what was wrong?” the interviewer asked.

“Uh, well, they cherry-picked a few little…About how many years the Arctic is ice-free, the snows of Mount Kilimanjaro,” Gore replied. “The main elements the scientific community has confirmed are right.”

Keep reading

Schiff: Dems Will Subpoena Private Sector People that Worked with Trump

Tuesday on MS NOW’s “The Briefing,” Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) said that if Democrats win the majority in the midterms, they will subpoena private-sector people who worked with President Donald Trump in his second term.

Host Jen Psaki asked, “Should the Senate be, should the Democrats be in the majority and decide to investigate or look into Patel? I mean, you are one of the many people who have been targeted by Trump’s Justice Department under Trump’s direction, as we’ve all seen it. One another person, who announced yesterday that he was being targeted is, of course, Governor Gavin Newsom. I know you spoke with some of my colleagues about that last night, but I wonder, as we’re thinking about because we’ve been talking about the Georgia races tonight, we’ve been talking about politics as we think about if Democrats have the majority next year, you’re on the Judiciary Committee. Trump is still going to target his political enemies. He’s not going to stop. He’s going to have people in the Department of Justice that does that. What changes what kind of Senate majority do to kind of hold them to account or even stop that?”

Schiff said, “Well, we’ll of course, to oversight of the administration. But judging from his first term, when we subpoenaed, for example, administration officials in the Russia Ukraine investigations, they basically stonewall the subpoenas. In fact, Trump was impeached in that first impeachment, not just for trying to extort Zelensky to get him to help cheat in the election, but also because he was stonewalling, congressional subpoenas. So I don’t think we can expect a whole lot from the administration, but we can subpoena the private sector and they will need to comply. So all of the crypto deals and meme coin deals, the UFC fight, all the back channeling on the Paramount SkyDance, and Warner Brothers mergers, whether there are promises made of changing editorial content, all of that kind of corruption, potential corruption, we will be able to look into.”

Keep reading

INSANE: Liberal ‘Historian’ Tries to Tie UFC Fight at the White House to the Lynching of Black People

Heather Cox Richardson is a supposed historian. During a recent discussion with former CNN employee Jim Acosta, she tried to tie the UFC Freedom 250 Fight at the White House to the historic lynching of black people.

This is the same woman who just last month, claimed that Republicans accuse other people of what they themselves are doing, and then suggested that the GOP learned this tactic from the Nazis.

In short, this woman is completely insane, or a liar, or both. But the left loves her. She has a massive following on the Substack platform.

In the video below, she actually says:

“It’s not really a stretch to say that the same impulse that created the UFC fight on the white House lawn is the impulse that really pushed lynching in the late 19th century.”

It’s incredible how she says all of this nonsense with a completely straight face. If she actually believes this, she needs mental help.

Some people on the left are just so desperate to believe the worst about President Trump and his supporters that they dream up dark fantasies like this one, then say them out loud and try to convince others that it’s true.

Trump Derangement Syndrome is real.

Millions of Americans watched the UFC event and had fun while feeling pride for their country. This makes people like Richardson miserable, so her impulse is to somehow ‘ruin’ the event. That’s what she’s trying to do here.

It just comes off as pathetic and sad.

Keep reading

CNN’s Fareed Zakaria Admits One-Party Rule by Democrats Has Been a Disaster for California

During a recent broadcast, CNN’s Fareed Zakaria did a monologue about California and how the state has been failed by the one-party rule of Democrats.

He points to the state’s failure in education, the inability to build housing, and the massive homeless problem, among other things.

Zakaria uses all of this to explain the anger of voters and the rise of Republican candidates like Steve Hilton and Spencer Pratt.

Partial transcript via Real Clear Politics:

FAREED ZAKARIA: At a time when President Trump and Republicans are faring poorly in most polls, the story has been different in California. Republican Steve Hilton finished ahead of many high spending Democrats in the governor’s race to advance to the November election, facing Democrat Xavier Becerra. In Los Angeles, an overwhelmingly Democratic city, Spencer Pratt, a Republican, former reality television personality, looked as if he might make the mayoral general election before finishing third.

California Democrats will be tempted to dismiss all this as a sideshow, but the frustration is real and justified. California is one of the most dynamic places on the planet. It has Silicon Valley, Hollywood, world class universities, extraordinary agriculture, ports, talent and natural beauty. But it is a case study in how a rich society can spend more and more while producing less and less of what its ordinary citizens need.

The paradox of California today is a successful economy attached to a failing model of governance.

Consider the fiscal record. Since 2000, California’s population has grown by roughly 15 percent. But the state’s general expenditures have grown more than 200 percent, from $78 billion to about $248 billion. General spending per person has risen from about $2,300 to about $6,300. The number of state employees has grown by more than 50 percent by one count.

Does anyone think that California government and its benefits have gotten 200 percent better in the last 25 years?

Housing is the central failure. California has long spoken the language of compassion while building a system of exclusion. Alicia Finley writes in the “Wall Street Journal” that from 2021 to 2024, the L.A. metro area, with nearly 13 million people, issued only 118,000 building permits for new homes. Atlanta with about half that population issued 163,000.

California has made it too hard, slow and expensive to build. The result is predictable. Home prices soar, rents rise, workers commute farther, homelessness grows, young people leave. And people are leaving. Over the past seven years, the state has lost a net 1.9 million people through domestic migration.

Keep reading

Bakari Sellers Calls Elon Musk a White Supremacist, and All Hell Breaks Loose

A CNN panel meant to discuss extraordinary wealth lurched far off the rails Friday night when one commentator went into full-on slander mode on Elon Musk, who became the world’s first trillionaire this week. He’s been getting attacked from the left for his success because that’s what the left does.

Well, that and fantasize about spending other people’s money, which is exactly what CNN contributor Cari Champion started with.

“If you spent a million dollars every single day, it would take you more than 2700 years to spend a trillion dollars,” Champion said. “What you could effectively do with a trillion dollars is get rid of global poverty. You could end world hunger, you could cure major diseases like malaria, and you could completely transition the global energy sector to renewables. The fact that he has this type of money only tells me that his power will be more prevalent and that I could not — I cannot guarantee someone like this man would use his power for good.”

Then Bakari Sellers took things further. After blaming Elon Musk’s influence for USAID cuts that he claimed killed thousands of women and children, Sellers leveled a charge that sent the panel into a frenzy: “Elon Musk is a white supremacist who believes in things like the —”

Criminal defense attorney Arthur Aidala jumped in. “Oh, boy,” Aidala said.

“I wasn’t even finished a sentence,” Sellers shot back.

Scott Jennings had a warning ready for Sellers. “You may need a lawyer when this is over,” he quipped.

Sellers pressed on. Musk “believes in things like the Great Replacement Theory,” he said.

But Aidala pushed back hard. “Considering we have about 12 defamation cases in my office right now,” he said, “before you start throwing things around like someone’s a white supremacist — I would win that case.”

Keep reading

Washington Post Slapped with Class Action Over Secret ‘Surveillance Pricing’ Scheme That Charged Readers Different Rates

The Washington Post has been hit with a class action lawsuit alleging the newspaper secretly used readers’ personal data to charge different subscription prices.

CourtHouse News reports that the lawsuit accuses the Bezos-owned outlet of creating “pricing profiles” based on subscribers’ reading habits, demographics, browsing activity, and other personal information.

The lawsuit, which was filed in the Superior Court of Washington, D.C., states:

The Post has been monitoring usage and implementing this pricing practice, often referred to as ‘surveillance pricing’ since at least December 2024, at which point not a single subscriber was aware of The Post’s surveillance pricing or secret harvesting of subscriber data.

The law does not allow this conduct. State attorneys general across the country along with the Federal Trade Commission have begun investigating companies that engage in ‘surveillance pricing’ (also referred to as ‘algorithmic pricing’) using consumer personal information instead of market forces to set individualized prices.

According to the plaintiffs, the practice only became public after New York required companies to disclose when algorithms use consumer data to set individualized prices.

Subscribers reportedly discovered they were being offered dramatically different rates for the same product.

One reader claimed a renewal jumped from $170 to $260, while another obtained a subscription for just $60.

Keep reading