I'll take a stab in the dark here and say that one was a well-written, well-delivered, inoffensive, and mildly inspiring speech that urged people of all beliefs and political persuasions to come together to work for the betterment of our nation, delivered in front of the kind of diverse coalition of people it described; The other was a rambling mess that took swipes at protestors and lefties and painted the more than half of the country urging more transparency and accountability from their government as ungrateful, unpatriotic agitators, delivered in front of a small sea of angry white sycophants. Why the fuck should the coverage of those two things be the same?
This is emblematic of this "both sides" stuff you're always on. Maybe coverage isn't equal because the factors aren't actually equal. One player makes 20 errors per game and one makes one error every 20 games, but when anyone correctly says "Jeez, that one player is really shit," you wanna kvetch about how maybe the playing field is to blame and isolate one specific error from each player to analyze against each other on an individual basis. Then when you're called out on it, you say "Hey look, I think that player's shit too! I'm just asking questions!"
Why? Why ask these questions constantly when you don't even actually disagree with the initial assessment?
Look man, for someone that's clearly very concerned about being seen as an independent that's not beholden to either side, let me throw this out there: Almost every time you pop up in here or on an FB conversation, it unerringly begins with you arguing against or bemoaning a liberal viewpoint. Now credit where credit is due, somewhere in there you might agree with a point or two, you might throw shade at a conservative belief, but the fact that it nearly always begins with you devil's advocating against liberals... do you not see how that colors the perception that you seem to have chosen a side?
Maybe every now and then, start out with what you agree on, then launch towards where you diverge, instead of going right into the invective against and then having to have it dragged out of you a couple posts later that you actually agreed with some things. And if you hate Trump, for god's sake, can you just commiserate with us about that a little bit without frantically looking around the room for some counterexample that marginally justifies him?
Bookmarks