Liberal Media Bubble Underestimated Trump, Deans of Free Speech: P.M. Links

|

  • Nancy Pelosi
    Michael Brochstein/ZUMA Press/Newscom

    There really is a liberal media bubble, and yes, its existence caused everyone to downplay Trump's chances, says FiveThirtyEight.

  • The University of Chicago wants to hire "free speech deans," to make sure speakers aren't shouted down on campus.
  • The Cato Institute's Alex Nowrasteh owned Fox News again.
  • Give Justin Amash a hug.
  • Submitted without comment: Nancy Pelosi says the American people have a right to know what's in the health care reform bill before it passes.
  • Sean Spicer tells the press that there's an anti-Trump deep state.

NEXT: States challenge Trump's revised travel ban in court

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Two on the same day? Nice.

    1. Hello.

      Pelosi is beyond….

      1. Nancy Pelosi says the American people have a right to know what’s in the health care reform bill before it passes.

        At least she can say it with a straight face.

        1. The mummification process doesn’t leave behind very many facial muscles.

        2. Too bad Robby cannot.

      2. …the grave?

        1. She certainly looks that way in that picture.

  2. Give Justin Amash a hug.,/i>

    And a new staff.

    1. Congress cosplay?

  3. Nancy Pelosi says the American people have a right to know what’s in the health care reform bill before it passes.

    Are you serious? Are you serious?

    1. If only she were on that plan, her Alzheimer’s would be covered!

      1. Haven’t we paid enough for her dementia already?

      2. Why is that bitch still alive!

        1. It’s the Botox talking.

    2. It’s really too bad hypocrisy can’t be fatal, because that would be a terminal case.

  4. The University of Chicago wants to hire “free speech deans,” to make sure speakers aren’t shouted down on campus.

    Normally I don’t follow the links, but I would love to know how this is supposed to work.

    1. Campuses are gonna need dean deans to sort out which dean does what.

    2. Or you could teach civics instead of social justice, and personal finance instead of 3 art history classes.

      1. Or compel campus security to do their jobs.

    3. Dear College Administrators,

      The way to stop harassment of invited speakers is dead simple; Announce widely that anyone who disrupts an invited speaker will be removed from campus, that if they are faculty they will be fired, and that students will be expelled. Anyone stupid enough to attack somebody as or around such an event will be turned over the the police for assault.

      Then, follow it up.

      Until you do something close to this we, the Unwashed, will conclude that any statements you make about ‘supporting the First Amendment’ is so much piddle and wind.

  5. The University of Chicago wants to hire “free speech deans,” to make sure speakers aren’t shouted down on campus.

    Hell’s Angels?

    1. + 40 cases of beer.

    2. I just watched Gimme Shelter a few days ago. Still not quite sure what happened there (beyond hotheaded drunks and junkies being hotheaded drunks and junkies)

      1. The death of a dream, man. The death of a dream.

  6. There really is a liberal media bubble, and yes, its existence caused everyone to downplay Trump’s chances…

    Luckily journalists learned their lesson and that shit stopped after the election.

    1. If they don’t knock this shit off soon, by the time the 2020 election comes around they will have cried ‘Wolf!’ so often and to so little effect that the only people that will vote for the Democrat candidate are the hard core True Believers. And that will give Trump an landslide to start his second term, and probably poison the well for 2024 too.

      1. Hell, if I was in Trump’s shoes, that would be enough to motivate me to keep tweeting out goofy shit my whole term. He’s actually managed to legitimately frame the mainstream media as a clueless, insular fifth column to his supporters; a few more months of them fruitlessly flogging the “RUSSIANS!!” angle and very few people are going to give a shit about what they write anymore.

  7. Sean Spicer tells the press that there’s an anti-Trump deep state.

    Also known as The Bureaucracy.

    1. If more people would just watch “Yes, Minister” none of this would be a surprise.

    1. He must’ve eaten the food.

  8. +1 Alt text

  9. Give any prog a turning test, and they will fail miserably because of their bubble.

    As opposed to us libertarians, who probably could articulate their position better than they could.

    1. A turning test? If this involves shaping them on a lathe, count me in!

      1. A lovely lacquered bowl made from the finest spalted Krugman.

        1. + bedpan

  10. And yet the Times, famous for its “to be sure” equivocations, wasn’t even contemplating the possibility of a Trump victory.

    1. Somewhere George Dorn is still screaming.

  11. There really is a liberal media bubble, and yes, its existence caused everyone to downplay Trump’s chances, says FiveThirtyEight.

    Remind me again, what was Nate Silver’s scientific analysis of the election showing was going to happen?

    1. The exception the proves the ruse?

    2. It showed that according to the polls, Drumpf had a 33% chance of winning.

      Consider yourself reminded that you need to understand science before commenting on that.

      1. Hey – we’ve been waiting for one of you people to show up!

        This came up in a thread the other day, and I think you can settle it for us.

        What is it about saying “Drumpf?” We don’t get it.

        1. I assume John Oliver is the genesis. Long story short (if you don’t want to watch Oliver for over 20 minutes): he excoriated Trump, and used Trump’s ancestral name to poke fun at him.

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnpO_RTSNmQ

          1. Oh, I know – I was just poking fun at him. I assume it’s the same sort of thing as Red Teamers who are always sure to include the ‘Hussein’ in Obama’s name.

            Who needs to call him racist when you can just point out that he’s part German?

    3. Silver gave Trump about a 30% chance of winning, which wasn’t unreasonable at the time. That’s still a very realistic shot, and Trump did it by winning a few key states by narrow margins. He gave him a better shot than virtually any of the pundit journalists, or most of the other data people for that matter. I saw a bunch of progressives during the election cycle essentially accuse 538 of overestimating Trump’s chances to get page clicks and to maintain interest in the race, something Silver always denied and argued that the data showed Trump having a real chance even if Clinton was the favorite.

      1. Yeah, he seems to have played it straight. I’m guessing a lot of the polls overestimated turnout for Democrats.

      2. Silver gave Trump a better chance than I would offer my Democrat friends. I demanded, and easily got, 3:1 odds, and made a little over $350 on this election. (The $50 was on an over/under bet on the electoral college votes.)

      3. MSM lambasted 538 for giving Trump more than a3% chance.

  12. Submitted without comment: Nancy Pelosi says the American people have a right to know what’s in the health care reform bill before it passes.
    Good, because I get to add the comment that misquotes her. Again.
    For the full set of comments:

    http://bit.ly/2muURCE

    1. Yep, the quote is taken out of context. You busted them.

      1. Totes! Everyone knows that the ACA was passed as a model of transparency and bureaucratic humility.

        It is known.

      2. Bull
        .
        .
        .
        .

        shit:
        “But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy.”

        Now tell me what sort of “context” I’m missing there. You’re a lying POS.

        1. Basically she is saying that SHE knows what’s in in, but that others need her to pass it so that THEY can fight out what’s in it.

          It does cast her in a different light, but it’s not necessarily a better light.

          1. “It does cast her in a different light, but it’s not necessarily a better light.”

            I’m not seeing a difference; she’s asking congress-critters to pass it without knowing what it is, regardless of whether she claims to know (which requires a sympathetic reading on its own).

          2. I don’t see how adding “away from the fog of controversy”, or the entirety of the text for that matter, at all changes the context. The assertion remains that the bill ought to be passed if you want to find out whether it’s the best thing ever or just a costly clusterfuck because there’s so much controversy you can’t trust any analysis. Same argument, same hubris, extra words.

  13. “”The University of Chicago wants to hire “free speech deans,” to make sure speakers aren’t shouted down on campus someone else takes the heat when students freak out.”

    1. “The University of Chicago wants to hire “free speech deans,” to make sure speakers aren’t shouted down on campus.”
      ” Hey, can I get some muscle over here?”

    1. “She told police she went to tell other residents to stay away from the two men and when she did, one brother began banging on her car screaming, “I’ll kill you.”

    1. That is one ugly woman

    2. As a public speaker, I want to sue Hillary Clinton because she got all of the best gigs.

  14. Ohio Department of Education changes funding rules to screw e-schools.

    http://nbc4i.com/2017/03/09/oh…..ning-time/

  15. Sean Spicer tells the press that there’s an anti-Trump deep state

    Not that the president isn’t a delusional paranoiac and malignant narcissist.

    1. Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t after you.

      1. Or that you didn’t win the popular vote, your electoral margin wasn’t “historic,” that the previous president wasn’t “wiretapping” your phones…

  16. Is Preet out?

  17. “There really is a liberal media bubble, and yes, its existence caused everyone to downplay Trump’s chances, says FiveThirtyEight.”

    This is a continuing section in the E-version oft the local rag:
    “TRUMP TODAY: WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW”
    http://www.sfgate.com/

    They are not capable of embarrassment.

  18. There really is a liberal media bubble, and yes, its existence caused everyone to downplay Trump’s chances, says FiveThirtyEight.

    Yes, there really is this thing called gravity, and we now believe it’s responsible for a large number of bumps on the knee.

    1. Has 538 mentioned why they got it wrong?

      Was it because they were listening to the media?

      They had Hillary with an 85% chance of winning on election night.

  19. ? I recall 67% Hillary and a storm of whining by the NYT.

  20. I think I just saw a tumbleweed.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.