According to Predictwise, Trump as a 23% chance of being the GOP nominee and Sanders has a 5% chance of being the Democratic nominee http://www.predictwise.com/

He'd be far ahead of all candidates.

When it comes to Trump and the media, I'm reminded of that old adage, "Money talks and bullshit walks."

Sanders doesn't have 1/23rd the chance of being nominated.

Now, I don't doubt that, by virtue of his fascism, Trump's a bigger story. But he's not 23 times the size of the story that Sanders is.

manipulating NYC news. Giving the people what they want.

Why are we talking more here about Trump than Sanders most days?

(And why isn't anyone talking about O'Malley?)

at worst, tools of blatant propaganda.

This is not a particularly convincing argument. There are some 14 candidates in the Republican primary race. There are three (and only two really getting any support) in the Democratic race. To be getting in the 30% range in a field of 14 makes you a front runner. To be getting in the 30% range in a two-person race does not.

There may be good reasons to compllain that ABC hasn't given Sanders enough air time, but I don't think this is one of them.

if you want to make this about people who are not frontrunners. Though that has the problem that support for those candidates is in the teens.

is apparently of much more interest to the media because of the number of candidates and the fluidity and drama of it (who will emerge in the ever-rotating bunch of challengers to overcome Trump?). The Democratic race is far smaller, and has been nearly static these past months.

I don't think comparing coverage of the Democrats to ANY of the Republicans is that valuable right now.

My strategy is to ignore the entire mishegas.