Was media coverage of Mitt Romney overly negative in the final days of the election?

by L.A. Times Posted 2012/11/19 22:26:52

2,810 votes
Read all 1,136 opinions
Lightning Report View Results and Demographics + View Demographics

Loading Demographics... Click an icon to see demographic results Display unknown and private
	Yes	1,356 votes	48%
	No	1,454 votes	52%

The Washington-based Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism found that “positive stories about Obama (29%) outnumbered negative ones (19%) by 10 points in the week leading up to the voting” on Nov. 6.

The survey of 59 news outlets found that Romney got considerably more negative coverage, both at the end of the campaign and in the period dating back to the nominating conventions, beginning in late August.

+30

Add a comment above

RTHTGakaRoland 2012/11/20 00:27:17

Yes

+63
>> See Replies

More polls by L.A. Times

Bureauc 0webama 2012/12/18 16:23:05

Yes

Not to mention overly supportive of barack while ignoring fast and furious, Holders contempt of Congress and so on.

reply
Justin 2012/12/01 19:04:57

Yes

How ironic, the LA Times is one of BO's most faithful lap dogs.

reply
Drummerlou 2012/11/28 14:42:07

No

+1
The coverage was that He stuck his own foot in his mouth more than once, showing his true colors and what he really stood for in opposition to what he was saying and in the end costing him what he so dearly wanted to posess.The white house and this country.Just another notch in a billionaires belt.

reply
Studied 2012/11/28 01:43:58

Yes

without a doubt

reply
Mike56 2012/11/27 23:04:02

Yes

+2
why just "final days"? All over the dirtiest campaign in the US history

reply
Trish to Mike56 2012/11/28 00:06:44 (edited)

Mitt made one dumb comment after another. I think he was trying to lose.

He made it easy for Obama

reply
Mike56 to Trish 2012/11/28 00:16:02 (edited)

nobody's comments were dumber than 0's, nobody is less competent than he. The tragedy of this country is that with the massive support from the media and entertainment, even the ass - the embodiment of your party - would have had pretty good chances.

BTW, could you explain me what exactly was 0's role in "getting" UBL? No Demunist ever was able to answer.

reply
Trish to Mike56 2012/11/28 00:22:08

+1
This is what you wasted your vote on??????

reply
Mike56 to Trish 2012/11/28 00:28:26 (edited)

Well, thank God i didn't waste it on that:

reply
Trish to Mike56 2012/11/28 00:31:00

reply
Mike56 to Trish 2012/11/29 14:22:26

whose Mama?

reply
Trish to Mike56 2012/11/29 14:30:24

reply
Mike56 to Trish 2012/12/03 20:40:32

that is what your aloof Nothing-in-Chief who cares about nobody but himself read from the teleprompter. So what? He never meant what his speachwriters wrote for him

reply
Trish to Mike56 2012/11/29 14:31:51 (edited)

reply
Mike56 to Trish 2012/12/03 20:42:41

is that what Al-Obama's gang is feeding you over there, in Canada? Or "Canada" is just a code name for a ceartain PR dept of his huge campaign tumor?

reply
jorge0214 to Mike56 2012/12/03 18:29:49

Hmmm- I thought the racist Obama haters were calling the president a Socialist or a Communist...
can't be a Facist and a Socialist at the same time- get your story straight, or just admit you hate smart, hardworking black people who are a success and you, well you sit around and whine, blame and complain about smart, successful, hardworking black people.

sigh....

PEACE

reply
Mike56 to jorge0214 2012/12/03 20:48:27

"smart, successful, hardworking black people" are against your lazy, careless and totally unskilled freeloader 0. Moreover, those people are hated among the 0's base. Just remember how your scum has been treating Justice Thomas, Condi Rice, Thom Sowell, Allen West, etc.

reply
jorge0214 to Mike56 2012/12/03 22:23:17

My scum?
And who are the totally unskilled freeloaders?

reply
Mike56 to jorge0214 2012/12/04 17:18:25

Yes, your partaigenossen.
0, aka Zero, aka Obama is

reply
jorge0214 to jorge0214 2012/12/04 20:10:37

hmmmm- well I have lots of clients who pay me A LOT of $ for being an unskilled freeloader who has a masters degree and an architecture license.
i guess it depends on your definition of unskilled?

Btw- I do not think any sane person would call a guy who worked hard enough and was smart enough to be pressident a zero- you might want to look in the mirror?
You seem really bitter.....
And it will kill you someday- calm down.

Peace and Blessed Advent.

reply
hippycat 2012/11/27 22:51:12

No

+1
wasn't negative enough considering what the man stood for,

reply
Trish to hippycat 2012/11/28 00:20:11

+1
You can say that again!

reply
Cal 2012/11/27 19:27:47 (edited)
Purelabor 2012/11/27 17:40:35

Yes

+1
Romney got nothing but negative from the news media.
Just think if the news had reported in a non-bias way?
People would know a lot more about Obama and his failures.

reply
Trish to Purelabor 2012/11/28 00:48:35

Sorry Faux News lied to you.

reply
exhon2009 2012/11/27 17:28:12

Yes

The LA Slimes, as part of MSM, was complicit.

reply
RJeffreySavlov 2012/11/27 16:07:02

Yes

But he lost because he was promoting jobs to a country that doesn't want to work.

reply
Flowers 2012/11/27 15:56:25

Yes

But that was to be expected. The media outlets are politically liberal and therefore they are going to spin the news to suit their needs. It's the public's responsibility to research and demand unbiased information and not enough people are doing that. The result is the system slips further and further away.

reply
Christopher Kirchen 2012/11/27 14:29:16

Yes

it was ALWAYS overly negative. if it had been halfway equitable, Romney would be President now, and would be awaiting a second term now.

reply
C. C. Rider 2012/11/27 13:51:34

No

+2
Hell no, BUT the coverage of Romney being overly negative toward this nation and Obama was. THAT was his fault. Infact, Cluster Faux and Sodahead cons are still declaring Romney the winner. LMAO The best part is even with Rove paying to have Romney win still backfired on him....but I am sure Rove has "outsourced" Romney's money by now.

reply
Fallout 2012/11/27 12:43:53

No

+4
Faux news may have given Mr. 47% a 52% image. But most Americans
get their news from multiple sources.

The truth is not negative. The election results were positive.

reply
Trish 2012/11/27 12:40:03 (edited)

No

+5
ROBME got negative coverage because he obviously sucked! The Republican party is even trying their best to distance themselves from him. Meanwhile, conservative Sodaheads are still defending the LOSER.

reply
Grandpa to Trish 2012/11/27 14:47:39

+1
The only loser are the American people >> HIGHER TAXES < NO JOBS < AND A CLOWN STILL IN THE WHITEHOUSE < NO BALANCED BUDGET < All THINGS ON THE TABLE BUT YOUR HERO"S SCARED COW obamanation called obamacare

reply
Mike56 to Trish 2012/11/27 23:06:35

nobody sucked more than the pathetic, dishonest, unskilled Nothing-in-Chief 0.
He had nothing on his side but the dirty campaign and friendly "media". The scum and sham "won",

reply
Trish to Mike56 2012/11/27 23:11:25 (edited)

+1

Calm down Mikey, calm down.

reply
Mike56 to Trish 2012/11/28 00:02:42

you don't seem much smarter than your "president", Tricia

reply
cindy 2012/11/27 12:31:02

Yes

The only news I turn to is FOX.... The other stations won't recieve a minute of my time. Communist run for their communist leader.

reply
hippycat to cindy 2012/11/27 15:01:37

+1
LOL - so truth may never cross your path; Amen.

reply
cindy to hippycat 2012/11/28 00:09:50

Back at ya

reply
hippycat to cindy 2012/11/28 00:12:15

yep & yawn

reply