on tv

@MRLOcelot23 more positive coverage might not directly result in any good outcome.

if the coverage is nigaitive

following your logic

they should lose

What is my logic you follow?

people only do what there rtold to

by the tv

@MRLOcelot23 it does not mean any positive coverage or negative. If you positively cover some candidate is not a guarantee.

yes but if there getting better coverage following your logic your more likely to win

@MRLOcelot23 yes

It also depends on the quility of the coverage

true Trump did get alot more

Hillary compain was disgusting to the core. It attracted more people to Trump. But decicions were made according to the coverage.

to an extent thatstrue

but not fully

look at Sanders he got next to none

and he almost won

@MRLOcelot23 I've personally seen him on tv every day

1 hes not

and this is post election

Trumps in the white house Clinton might as well be dead and Sanders is still being his great self

@MRLOcelot23 how do you know about any of them?

?

cause i reserch

@MRLOcelot23 oh, most people don't

more are

Majority don't

more now than ever before

and ever increasing in number

Is that enough to influence elections?

in the futrue

And now?

almost happened with Sanders

j

We can daydream about working democracy tommorow or accept it doesn't work today

Remember that time the hillary mobile illegally dumped their human waste?

never said she was good

@Firefly so insaid of fixing it we get rid of it?

@MRLOcelot23 fixing what? Democracy does not work even on paper. It is a false idea.

@MRLOcelot23 >When you cheat bernie out of his campaign and you try the same method with trump but instead it completely backfires and reveals that you cheated in the elections multiple times]