"vincent p. norris" wrote in message
...
Matt, can you explain to me why about four times as many of those
"left/liberal" newspapers have endorsed the Republican presidential
candidate as endorsed the Democratic candidate, every four years since
about 1936, except for 1964?

(Source of that info: _Editor & Publisher_, the trade paper of the
newspaper business.)

E&P has ZERO credibility...

That is just your personal opinion, not a fact. If it has "zero
credibility," no one would read it and it would have gone belly up
decades ago.

Like national Enquirer...?


but even if true, consider the statistical sample
(hundreds of small town (i.e., quite conservative) versus the NYTiLies,
LATimes...

You've never heard of the Wall Street Journal or the Chicago Tribune?

There's two.

BTW, I find it hard to believe that in 1936, 1940, 1944, the newspapers
were
endorsing the challenger to FDR.

That shows how little you know about American history and the
newspaper business. Go to a library and read some of those
newspapers.

I may not know the newspaper business circa 1930's and 40's, but I do dhave
a fairly good knowledge of American history.

Again, check their statistical sample.

It is not a "statistical sample." It is a census. I assume you know
the difference.

Yes, a sample is a subset. Now, how did E&P do a census of the many
newspapers that long out of business and not archived?

But, even more, you made my point -- thank you.

Now, for all that IRRELEVENT drivel and fodder for "Trivial Pursuit", you
point is...what?