Not really, Fern. For example, I pointed out that Conservatives and Republicans OWN the AM airwaves. 95% of AM talk radio is conservative/GOP-slanted. The cable news channels as I've pointed out have gravitated towards a balance of sorts with Fox on the right, MSNBC on the left and CNN somewhere in the middle.
Conservatives and Republicans like to play the game that somehow they're the "underdog" when in reality, that's nowhere near the case.
What is wrong with PBS? Imo, NewsHour is the only watchable evening news program on air right now.
All that says to me is that a little over 5 million people in this country should be required to complete a civics exam before voting.
I'm being mostly sarcastic.
Lets not forget the I-reports. If I want to hear constant uneducated opinions about whats going on in the world I can read AT P&N. I want NEWS from my news channel.
It seems like CNN is trying to hard to be 'hip' with their twittering, blogs and i-reports. They always try to show how they are interacting with the audience through the web and take up news reporting time showcasing a nice map that allows people to see how connected CNN is by showing them locations of all the i-reporters
First
Lifer
- Jun 3, 2002
- 10,518
- 271
- 136
Originally posted by: loki8481
Originally posted by: geno
it's sorta like being the biggest fish in a cup of water.
Yeah, but what it shows is that Fox is great at what it does; making the news entertaining. It's certainly not the consensus best, but it's definitely tops as an entertainment vehicle. That's why their commentators usually do so well; hell, O'Reilly is tops among all cable TV shows behind USA and TNT. Of course, unbeknownst to him, it isn't because his political dialog is sharp, unbiased, and well researched, it's because he's a wonderful train wreck to watch.
jonks
Lifer
- Feb 7, 2005
- 13,918
- 20
- 81
Funny piece in the NYT on Glenn Beck.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03...l?_r=2&pagewanted=1&hp
why are people watching Glenn Beck?
And if you ask Republican strategist Mike Murphy, due to the shifting demographics in this country, Reps are on their way to permanent minority status. They may have a couple more cycles in them, but unless they come way around on some issues, forever marginalized will they be.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03...l?_r=2&pagewanted=1&hp
why are people watching Glenn Beck?
And if you ask Republican strategist Mike Murphy, due to the shifting demographics in this country, Reps are on their way to permanent minority status. They may have a couple more cycles in them, but unless they come way around on some issues, forever marginalized will they be.
No kidding. No one ever went out of business catering to Conservatives and Republicrats who love to play the "poor, oppressed underdog." Witness Sean Hannity's "Conservatives in Exile" and his other equally retarded catch phrase, "Welcome to the Conservative Underground."
Beck, however, is in an entirely more insane category...
I think that's the question I'm posing. There's some people in this thread saying PBS is slanted. I'm trying to figure out if they're serious or not. I guess if reality is a slant, PBS takes the cake.
Honestly, given my reaction from the last Presidential election cycle, is that voters don't care at all about issues. John McCain lost because he was boring. John Kerry lost because he was boring. Al Gore lost because he was boring. Bob Dole lost because he was boring. "Issues" are rarely what drives voters' opinions.
The Republicans may be forever marginalized solely on the fact they don't have anyone to equal Obama's teleprompter.
There is a percentage of people who will vote Democrat on all elections, there is a percentage of people who will vote Republican on all elections. Then there is the majority of America who votes based on who is more interesting, who is the bigger "celebrity". I mean, do you think the Democratic stronghold of California voted the Republican Governator into office for his "policies" or "stand on issues"? I don't think so.
jonks
Lifer
- Feb 7, 2005
- 13,918
- 20
- 81
NY elected Republican Governor George Pataki. The man was drier than the Sahara. The only reason he had a shot is because he was a pro-choice moderate fiscal conservative. Neither he nor Rudy Giuliani nor any pro-choice candidate has a shot in national republican politics and it won't matter how charismatic they are, it's solely about that issue.
Almost everyone votes on the issues, if not one particular issue, or one party, and a small percentage of people are swing voters who may or may not be swayed by a particular candidate's charisma.
You seem to be ignoring demographics, namely racial and social. The republican party is almost entirely caucasion in a country with a rapidly dwindling caucasion majority. Fewer than 1% of the RNC delegates were black. It's not a surprise why republicans are so anti-immigration, because every person of color that gets in here votes against them. And electing a black chairman who gets jiggy with it not going to fix their problems anymore than Palin won over Clinton voters.
In short, the Republican party is almost entirely white in a country where white is a quickly shrinking proportion of the whole. Unless they grab a large percentage of hispanics/blacks or other, they are seriously looking at the end of national politics.
^^^^
Republicans lose elections when they get lured into playing the political games of the Democrats.
If Republicans went back to their fiscal conservative base, they'd kick ass in elections.
Republicans lose elections when they get lured into playing the political games of the Democrats.
If Republicans went back to their fiscal conservative base, they'd kick ass in elections.
jonks
Lifer
- Feb 7, 2005
- 13,918
- 20
- 81
Right, when Republicans lose, it's the Democrats fault, and not their own. When the Democrats win, it's because they hoodwinked the populace, not because people are sick of Republicans. As long as republicans whine about the media, the press, the liberal agenda, the intelligencia, the conspiracies...they sound insane. There's Fox news, talk radio, the internet, most places of worship, and the last 8 years in the white house. The republicans like to play victim and blame democrats instead of facing what's wrong with their party. And what's wrong is a hell of a lot more than just their loss of focus on fiscal responsibility.
You have serious reading comprehension deficiencies. I never blamed the Democrats for Republicans losing.
Republicans lose when they try to appeal to people like you - who would never vote for a Republican no matter what the circumstance is. It's the Republican's fault, not Democrats.
:roll:
No further discussion necessary, you have no desire to hear anything else besides your own ideology.
Actually, let's do discuss. What is "a hell of a lot more than just their loss of focus on fiscal responsibility"? Do you believe Republicans lose because they are not "liberal enough"? They are not "progressive enough"? Republicans will never win on a platform of "Democrat Lite". John McCain was the perfect candidate for your liking, and you probably joined in on the Obamamania instead of embracing McCain. Now why is that? Your "perfect" Republican candidate won the nomination for President, and he lost! He lost with the entire left-wing of America insulting him every step of the way.
Get your head out of your ass and maybe, just maybe, you can show at least some sign there is intelligence in you.
TRENDING THREADS
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 312
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter