Following the election, Hillary Clinton has come up with many absurd excuses to explain her loss to Donald Trump.

While ignoring her flat out ignorance as to the real reason she lost, she has been claiming that the voting system was rigged, the Electoral College was rigged, and even that Russian hackers had something to do with her crushing defeat.

Recently, she made a claim that media bias is the real reason she lost, not her incompetence or un-trustworthiness after her many political scandals.

Clinton claimed “fake news coverage” was the real reason behind her presidential loss.

Her main concerns seemed to have stemmed from “fake news stories” voters would view on Facebook, which is a social media site rather than a news organization in the first place.

She even backed up her claims with a “scientific study” conducted by a fluff media source known for their leftist influences, BuzzFeed.

The Daily Caller reports:

As 2016 draws to a close, the ongoing debate regarding “fake news” has pressed forward, but notably absent from the debate is any evidence that “fake news” impacted voters’ decisions on whom to vote for in last month’s election.

Less than two weeks after the election, PBS aired a segment titled: “How online hoaxes and fake news played a role in this election,” which featured BuzzFeed writer Craig Silverman. 

The segment leaned heavily on a BuzzFeed “study” that purportedly showed that the top 20 “fake news” election stories outperformed the top 20 “real” election stories on Facebook.

Hillary Clinton’s evidence to back her claims was since proven false by sources that are actually reputable, including Facebook, where the news was mostly received according to the BuzzFeed story.

The Daily Caller reports:

Putting aside the fact that BuzzFeed
was accused of using suspect methodology to fit a narrative, and putting aside the fact that Facebook has since discredited the data upon which BuzzFeed relied for the study, the findings still didn’t show that fake news had any impact on the way people voted last November.

There have been several other members of the press who claimed fake news played a role in the election.

The Daily Caller reports:

Earlier this month, MSNBC’s Brian Williams claimed that “fake news played a role in this election.” But Williams, who lost his job for fabricating stories, offered no evidence.

Not surprisingly, it was proven that the claims made by Clinton fell short.

While she cried that “fake news” was hurting her campaign, real studies were conducted to prove otherwise.

The Daily Caller reports:

As originally reported by TheDC, the data actually shows that “fake news” struggles to actually reach — much less convince — any kind of audience.

But that hasn’t kept The New York Times and other top liberal news sources from advancing a narrative in which fake news plays a real role in U.S. politics.

Regardless of excuses made by Hillary Clinton, her corrupt actions and poor political ideologies were definite factors to her loss as President, not fluff media sources catering to social media users.

What are your thoughts?

Do you believe “fake news” had anything to do with Clinton’s loss?

Or was she simply the lesser candidate?

Leave us your thoughts in the comments section below.