Because personal opinions are biased, so you can't judge someone's objectivity by asking them for personal opinion. This is the third time i have to say that, I feel like you're not replying to me, just stating your own personal agenda using my posts as an excuse.
The point is that Stewart isn't any more bias in those two interviews than he was on the Daily Show. Anyone that's watched a week of his show when he was the host could easily assume who he'd pick between the two. Even if he finds Clinton to be Dick Dastardly in nature. You saying he's less bias cause of a TV show is rational how? Or better yet why does he have to be less bias because of a TV show? And that's not to patronize you just a serious question, and why I've kept reaffirming.
Stewart was plenty tough on his democratic guests(although not all of them - there were some pretty horrible interviews. And although slightly unrelated Cosby is the best example of it. On his show Stewart always acted like Cosby is a god but when news of Cosby allegedly raping those women came out he straight up said "not surprised we all knew Cosby is a piece of ****").
Once again, you seem to step one way then the other, how does this counter my argument? You basically show Stewart covering his own ass, and saying "forget all that hype I gave Cosby while on here, screw that dirty lying rapist" (paraphrasing). Doesn't really show that he's isn't any more bias between the two media forms.
FOX still is by far the most watched network. I think it's just inevitably we're moving towards more liberal ideas as a society, that has been going on for thousands of years.
Eh you mean progressing? We're not moving toward any side, just that of logic, if Liberals want to claim this then fine, but they'd be hard pressed to prove it especially with potential leaders like Clinton.
You're putting your own ideas on me, jumping to conclusions, again. I thought i made it pretty clear that i enjoyed their dismantling of Bush administration because of their ability to attack not just Bush personally, which i think with people like Bush or Trump is impossible to avoid, but also attacked his policies.
Basically what I just said in that quote, not sure what you're trying to back away from at this point. I claimed a perspective of yours through your posts and you pretty much confirm it and yet take issue when I say I think you're liberal in nature, wishing for better material from more liberal leaning comedian personalities. I don't see anywhere in that flow of thought as to why that's a bad thing to you if true, if not true fine but you still have yet to claim that rather just saying let's not talk about it.
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/george-stephanopoulos-takes-donald-trump-41006295
There is another from 60 minutes with him and his running mate. And it's so poorly prepared that it makes me look like a good student (cause I procrastinate on here rather than doing my work).
I don't really consider news independent, no, I just had higher opinion of Colbert and Oliver, as well as society as a whole.
I got that from your post...I've even said that you saw them in such light, and you've confirmed it to an extent. As I said it's nothing against their character it's just easy to make people laugh from slapstick than make so massive political joke that gets lost in context, which is what Hilary is. Though Trevor Noah has pulled it off quite well in the wake of the DNC bs.
Also you could have easily just squashed all of this when I queried your statement about where we live. I'd assume that I'm right about your perception being New York is primarily liberal and Arizona is primarily conservative. Though I'd quickly inform you for the last 2 elections I could vote I've not found either candidate good and this time as well, and I'm also not anywhere near conservative. As has been seen on this thread I'm libertarian or better yet align more so with ideologies of it.