Political Bing

Anyone checkout the Elections site Bing has setup for the upcoming U.S. elections? I have to say I find it pretty useful. The charts at the bottom of the home page are pretty interesting. There's a lot of data but when you boil it all down one thing is very clear: Maddus is wrong.

@DeathByVisualStudio: about?

@Maddus Mattus: Everything of course!

10 hours ago, DeathBy​VisualStudio wrote

Anyone checkout the Elections site Bing has setup for the upcoming U.S. elections? I have to say I find it pretty useful. The charts at the bottom of the home page are pretty interesting.

 

I judge it biased in favor of democrats.  There is no mention of the president refusing to answer questions about the Benghazi attack. Republican media and web sites are talking about this issue incessantly. Yet Bing appears to think it is non existent.

To this day the public does not know if the president knew there had been attacks on the consulate prior to 9/11, if he knew security was withdrawn rather than being increased. We do not know whether the president was told at the time that the consulate was under attack. And we do not know if he knew the Sec of Defense refused to send armed defenders to the attack sites.

To Bing's defense, the Romney camp is not talking about this issue either. Part of him being a centrist, where the reality of people being killed while serving their country is a topic to be avoided. But half the electorate is definitely keyed up about the issue.  Bing should not take sides and ignore them.

I made this video about how I feel about this election

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjrthOPLAKM&feature=youtube_gdata_player

The Interwebs is decidedly liberal. Deal with it.

50 minutes ago, dahat wrote

@SteveRichter: I noticed that yesterday as well... But chaulked it up to the news sources selected... Most of which lean left. Daily Kos? Salon? Huffington? Where is something akin to the Daily Caller, Hot Air, or even Weasel Zippers?

They have Daily Caller, NewsMax, Hotair, as sources.I haven't much explored the site, but advertised right there is a "news slider" that lets you choose from left-wing and right-wing sources. If you place it in the middle, you get generally mainstream sites like CNN, Fox, msnbc, NY Times, WSJ.

(Personally I think its awful they're sticking to this format of left vs. right when there's a diverse amount of viewpoints, which though may be categorized as left-right , isn't always the best way to see them).

1 hour ago, brian.​shapiro wrote

*snip*

They have Daily Caller, NewsMax, Hotair, as sources.I haven't much explored the site, but advertised right there is a "news slider" that lets you choose from left-wing and right-wing sources. If you place it in the middle, you get generally mainstream sites like CNN, Fox, msnbc, NY Times, WSJ.

(Personally I think its awful they're sticking to this format of left vs. right when there's a diverse amount of viewpoints, which though may be categorized as left-right , isn't always the best way to see them).

I think the slider is genius. The best part about it is that you can actually move it at will and see one perspective, the other, or both! Wow.

Regarding Benghazi it also doesn't include articles about how the Republicans voted to cut spending on embassy security in the past. Funny how the facts that seem to matter the most never make it to the front page...

6 minutes ago, DeathBy​VisualStudio wrote

*snip*

I think the slider is genius. The best part about it is that you can actually move it at will and see one perspective, the other, or both! Wow.

Except there aren't only two perspectives, which is the problem.

@brian.shapiro: True dat. It would be nice if the slider had some granularity to it. I guess just like the rest of the media it condones further polarization of the populous and exploitation thereof. "Freedom of Speech" and "Free Markets" have the same problem: they both can be full of fraud.

29 minutes ago, DeathBy​VisualStudio wrote

@brian.shapiro: True dat. It would be nice if the slider had some granularity to it. I guess just like the rest of the media it condones further polarization of the populous and exploitation thereof. "Freedom of Speech" and "Free Markets" have the same problem: they both can be full of fraud.

Regarding polarization, the two parties in the USA used to be regional, not conservative / liberal.

I think the polarization is largely due to the alignment of the parties to the most fundamental differentiation of philosophies - conservative versus liberal.

No one aligns %100 with either party, imho, gratefully.

57 minutes ago, brian.​shapiro wrote

*snip*

Except there aren't only two perspectives, which is the problem.

+1000000

2 hours ago, DeathBy​VisualStudio wrote

Regarding Benghazi it also doesn't include articles about how the Republicans voted to cut spending on embassy security in the past. Funny how the facts that seem to matter the most never make it to the front page...

I have read no assertions by the WH that they left the consulate undefended or did not come to the aid of our people who were under attack because of budget constraints.

1 hour ago, dahat wrote

@DeathByVisualStudio: "Regarding Benghazi"... you just be getting pretty desperate as even the mainstream Democrats have given up on that line of arguing as it is increasingly clear that a giant ball was dropped by State, DOD and the Whitehouse. Attempt to spin all you want... but it does not change the fact that a massive cover up is going on... one that the media would no doubt care about if it wasn't being done to protect the hide of a Democrat President.

I know, sweetie, it's all bronco bama's fault.

@dahat: Is the feigned outrage the only schtick you know? You should go on strike with the rest of your "producer" buddies. That'll teach the media for ignoring your feelings.

3 hours ago, dahat wrote

@brian.shapiro: I was going based on the drop down list of sources on the customize page... which lacks the three sources you mentioned

@DeathByVisualStudio: "Regarding Benghazi"... you just be getting pretty desperate as even the mainstream Democrats have given up on that line of arguing as it is increasingly clear that a giant ball was dropped by State, DOD and the Whitehouse. Attempt to spin all you want... but it does not change the fact that a massive cover up is going on... one that the media would no doubt care about if it wasn't being done to protect the hide of a Democrat President.

I wasn't saying the WH, DOD, etc wasn't blameless. I was underscoring the fact that this information is as non-existent on Bing as the Republican's rants were. You can turn this turd into your favorite talking points if you want. You just make the case of how insanely furiously righteous some people on the right can be... I bet your alias here used to be "Da-Tinfoil-Hat"...