Elizabeth Warren rejects town hall on 'hate-for-profit racket' Fox News

[ivwshane]

Quit with the stupid whataboutism. I didn't vote for Trump. Never will.

Yes, he's a dipshit. No, he can't debate for shit. What does that have to do with my point that if you want to reach additional voters, appearing on an opposing viewpoints TV show/channel might just help you?

Are you under the impression that fox viewers are one town hall away from voting for someone other than trump? Ahahahahaha!!

 

[jackstar7]

I'm never speaking for anyone but myself. And in this case, I'm offering an opinion about electability based on how I perceive the general populace. I myself like wonkish candidates but I don't think they do well in elections, based on past experience, such as Clinton 2016 and Dukakis 1988. I'd love to be proven wrong about this, but I doubt I will be. I don't see her making it past the primaries, let alone winning the general. Then again, I don't think my preferred candidate - Buttigieg - will make it either.

Why do you prefer Pete?
And if you effectively want a Warren, why not support her in a way where you help her chances?

 

[woolfe9998]

Why do you prefer Pete?
And if you effectively want a Warren, why not support her in a way where you help her chances?

I support Buttigieg based on intellect, temperament, and competence. I also think that, in spite of being gay, he has the personality to go the distance in the general election. He just needs more exposure through the primary season and general election. But too many democrats I know, including my wife, like him a lot, but don't think independent voters will go for a gay candidate. I think they're wrong, but this perception will likely kill his chances in the dem primary. Too many dems seem to think the country isn't ready for a gay POTUS even if they personally are. And since they want Trump out so badly, they'll vote for someone else, most likely Biden.

So far as Warren goes, I will support her strongly should she win the primary. She isn't my leading candidate in the primary because, for the reasons I've given, I don't think her electability is at the high end of this dem field. Her ideas are mostly great, and her intellect is unquestionable. But right now the priority is getting Trump out.

 

[jackstar7]

I support Buttigieg based on intellect, temperament, and competence. I also think that, in spite of being gay, he has the personality to go the distance in the general election. He just needs more exposure through the primary season and general election. But too many democrats I know, including my wife, like him a lot, but don't think independent voters will go for a gay candidate. I think they're wrong, but this perception will likely kill his chances in the dem primary. Too many dems seem to think the country isn't ready for a gay POTUS even if they personally are. And since they want Trump out so badly, they'll vote for someone else, most likely Biden.

So far as Warren goes, I will support her strongly should she win the primary. She isn't my leading candidate in the primary because, for the reasons I've given, I don't think her electability is at the high end of this dem field. Her ideas are mostly great, and her intellect is unquestionable. But right now the priority is getting Trump out.

So you think there's a Dem that will crossover and take Trump voters, and you don't think it's Warren?

 

[Indus]

So you think there's a Dem that will crossover and take Trump voters, and you don't think it's Warren?

Hillary tried.. she was most right wing Democratic candidate in a generation. We saw how that worked out.

Hint: Bernie or Bust!

Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Are you under the impression that fox viewers are one town hall away from voting for someone other than trump? Ahahahahaha!!

You're generalizing roughly 30m people brochacho. Not the sharpest tool in the shed are you?

It's so funny, you will freely sterotype people (30m people to be exact) based on what channel they might occasionally watch?

The ignorance is strong in this forum. Not surprising though.

 

[ivwshane]

You're generalizing roughly 30m people brochacho. Not the sharpest tool in the shed are you?

It's so funny, you will freely sterotype people (30m people to be exact) based on what channel they might occasionally watch?

The ignorance is strong in this forum. Not surprising though.

I sure am as their support through these last two years have been rock solid.

I'm sorry you can't face reality. Oh and btw, fox doesn't have 30 million views they have less than four million.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

I sure am as their support through these last two years have been rock solid.

I'm sorry you can't face reality. Oh and btw, fox doesn't have 30 million views they have less than four million.

The stereotyping is strong with you.

So strong that your ignorance will get the best of you in life. Reality isn't what your tiny peanut brain perceives - mostly because you are after-all a complete moron.

Like I said, if you feel like you can generalize 30m random people based on a TV channel they might occasionally watch - you're at the same exact level as racist pieces of shit.

Fox News viewers are more likely to back Sen. Bernie Sanders than people who tend to watch MSNBC, according to a new Morning Consult poll.

The poll found that 22% of Fox News viewers who also identified as potential Democratic primary voters back Sanders compared to just 13% of MSNBC viewers.

Sanders was an outlier in this regard, as every other 2020 Democratic included in the poll had more support among MSNBC viewers than those who tend to watch Fox News.

The only candidate with more support among Fox News viewers than Sanders was Joe Biden (42%), but the former vice president also had more support among MSNBC viewers overall (44%).

Fox News tends to present a conservative perspective on issues and is President Donald Trump's preferred broadcaster, making it somewhat surprising a significant portion of its viewers would support a self-declared democratic socialist like Sanders. Meanwhile, MSNBC is a network that appeals to liberals.

A Pew Research Center survey from January 2017, for example, found most Trump voters got their news from Fox while MSNBC was the No. 2 choice for people who backed former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Sanders did a town hall with Fox News last month, which was seen as a major success for both the senator and the network with over 2.5 million viewers.

The Vermont senator's positive performance in the town hall gained Trump's attention and seemed to set a new standard for other 2020 Democrats. Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota has since done a town hall with Fox and other 2020 Democrats are poised to follow suit, including Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Indiana, and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York.

https://www.businessinsider.com/fox...-to-support-bernie-sanders-than-msnbcs-2019-5

 

[Indus]

You're generalizing roughly 30m people brochacho. Not the sharpest tool in the shed are you?

It's so funny, you will freely sterotype people (30m people to be exact) based on what channel they might occasionally watch?

The ignorance is strong in this forum. Not surprising though.

No one forces you to stay here. You're not a prisoner here.. you can leave when you want to.

 

[ivwshane]

The stereotyping is strong with you.

So strong that your ignorance will get the best of you in life. Reality isn't what your tiny peanut brain perceives - mostly because you are after-all a complete moron.

Like I said, if you feel like you can generalize 30m random people based on a TV channel they might occasionally watch - you're at the same exact level as racist pieces of shit.




https://www.businessinsider.com/fox...-to-support-bernie-sanders-than-msnbcs-2019-5

No you stupid fuck. I generalized less than four million. Now if you've got some sort of evidence to show I'm wrong and that fox viewers will be voting for a Democrat candidate then I'm all ears, otherwise, all you've got is your feels.

 

[ivwshane]

No one forces you to stay here. You're not a prisoner here.. you can leave when you want to.

Don't mind him, he's doing what righties do best, project.

 

[JEDIYoda]

The stereotyping is strong with you.

So strong that your ignorance will get the best of you in life. Reality isn't what your tiny peanut brain perceives - mostly because you are after-all a complete moron.

Like I said, if you feel like you can generalize 30m random people based on a TV channel they might occasionally watch - you're at the same exact level as racist pieces of shit.




https://www.businessinsider.com/fox...-to-support-bernie-sanders-than-msnbcs-2019-5

That's the best you can do?? You are sounding like you work for FOX News......
Call people who don`t agree with your version of reality -- racist pieces of shit!!!
hahahahahaaaaaa

 

[woolfe9998]

So you think there's a Dem that will crossover and take Trump voters, and you don't think it's Warren?

Yes, I think Biden and Buttigieg are better candidates for getting swing voters. No one is getting at Trump's true base. However, I'm not wild about Biden.

Rather than continuing to ask me these questions which are really a way of expressing displeasure at my opinion of Warren's electability, why don't you explain why you think she's particularly electable as compared to the rest of the field? Not why you like her policies, but why you think she plays best to swing voters.

 

[kage69]

Yes, I think Biden and Buttigieg are better candidates for getting swing voters. No one is getting at Trump's true base. However, I'm not wild about Biden.

Rather than continuing to ask me these questions which are really a way of expressing displeasure at my opinion of Warren's electability, why don't you explain why you think she's particularly electable as compared to the rest of the field? Not why you like her policies, but why you think she plays best to swing voters.

Knowledge, tenacity, and a 'cut the bullshit' attitude is appealing in a Thatcher kind of way. I think it may account for some of the rural, conservative support for her lately. Few people have raked Wall Street suits over the coals like she did. I find her vastly more electable than say, the very fake sounding Gillibrand (IMO). Would love to see a competent woman clean up after this disaster/sorry excuse for a man. The sexists like Trump and McConnell would def deserve it what it does to their feels, to say nothing of having to face justice by not being in office.

 

[woolfe9998]

Knowledge, tenacity, and a 'cut the bullshit' attitude is appealing in a Thatcher kind of way. I think it may account for some of the rural, conservative support for her lately. Few people have raked Wall Street suits over the coals like she did. I find her vastly more electable than say, the very fake sounding Gillibrand (IMO). Would love to see a competent woman clean up after this disaster/sorry excuse for a man. The sexists like Trump and McConnell would def deserve it what it does to their feels, to say nothing of having to face justice by not being in office.

I agree with you that she's more electable than Gillibrand, or for that matter, Kamala Harris who is just not a straight talker at all. I think on the issue of electability there is a spectrum among these candidates. I find Warren to be neither at the top nor bottom of that spectrum.

Another point I would add in Warren's favor: oddly the "Pochantis" thing. Trump's base is SO fixated on this that they're likely to vastly overplay it. I don't think it has much traction to begin with as virtually everyone knows that they personally have engaged in some kind of puffery on job and/or school applications in their lives. And if we're going to hear about it day after day like it's the be all, end all of the election it's going to backfire on them.

 

[Muse]

Thanks for proving my point? You're a stereotyping piece of dog shit, just like racist white nationalists. Congrats! You're on the same level as racists.... You segregate people and stereotype their voting based on what TV channel they choose to watch.

Your lack of intelligence is showing silly old man.

Dude you are a straight up jerk.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Dude you are a straight up jerk.

Sure bud, sure. The person that is stereotyping someone based on TV viewership is the good person.

How about I stereotype people that watch MTV, Maury, and Jerry Springer? How about I stereotype who is on SNAP and section 8 housing?

You're at the same level as that when you do something like stereotype someone that have their TV tuned to a particular channel at some point.



But like I said, keep losing elections. You're destined to repeat your mistakes since you can't learn from them. Not surprising who the most ignorant party is. See my link in my prior post showing how many Bernie supporters watch Fox News.

The truth hurts, I know. Maybe you can go cry in the corner for a while as you accept your own self ignorance.

 

[Muse]

Sure bud, sure. The person that is stereotyping someone based on TV viewership is the good person.

How about I stereotype people that watch MTV, Maury, and Jerry Springer? How about I stereotype who is on SNAP and section 8 housing?

You're at the same level as that when you do something like stereotype someone that have their TV tuned to a particular channel at some point.



But like I said, keep losing elections. You're destined to repeat your mistakes since you can't learn from them. Not surprising who the most ignorant party is. See my link in my prior post showing how many Bernie supporters watch Fox News.

The truth hurts, I know. Maybe you can go cry in the corner for a while as you accept your own self ignorance.

You are just plain full of shit. You don't know a thing about me, are just projecting and you don't know JEDIyoda at all. Go fuck yourself

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

You are just plain full of shit. You don't know a thing about me, are just projecting and you don't know JEDIyoda at all. Go fuck yourself

I can tell your intelligence level by the length of your reply to my points.

You have none. You're stupid. Thanks for proving my point. Go ahead now and toodle off little boy. It's past your bed time.

 

[Muse]

I can tell your intelligence level by the length of your reply to my points.

You have none. You're stupid. Thanks for proving my point. Go ahead now and toodle off little boy. It's past your bed time.

Man, you are clearly just looking for an argument. Monty Python has a skit about that. For a price, you can buy an argument with an expert. Myself, I don't engage in arguments. Goodnight.

 

[JEDIYoda]

I can tell your intelligence level by the length of your reply to my points.

You have none. You're stupid. Thanks for proving my point. Go ahead now and toodle off little boy. It's past your bed time.

What you call "points" to others is considered incoherent babbling!
I would never attack your level of intelligence, because your doing a good job without any outside help!
Goodnight!

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Man, you are clearly just looking for an argument. Monty Python has a skit about that. For a price, you can buy an argument with an expert. Myself, I don't engage in arguments. Goodnight.

One side is presenting debate points.

The other side is presenting nothing but insults and bullshit with no real argument.


You would fail debate class in an instant. The length of your replies quickly illustrates your lack of intelligence.

 

[ivwshane]

Oh the irony!

Sounds like someone needs a mirror.

 

[HomerJS]

The stereotyping is strong with you.

So strong that your ignorance will get the best of you in life. Reality isn't what your tiny peanut brain perceives - mostly because you are after-all a complete moron.

Like I said, if you feel like you can generalize 30m random people based on a TV channel they might occasionally watch - you're at the same exact level as racist pieces of shit.




https://www.businessinsider.com/fox...-to-support-bernie-sanders-than-msnbcs-2019-5

Since 50% of Republicans thought Obama was born in Kenya seems stereotyping is appropriate. BTW - What network did they get that crap from??

 

[jackstar7]

Yes, I think Biden and Buttigieg are better candidates for getting swing voters. No one is getting at Trump's true base. However, I'm not wild about Biden.

Rather than continuing to ask me these questions which are really a way of expressing displeasure at my opinion of Warren's electability, why don't you explain why you think she's particularly electable as compared to the rest of the field? Not why you like her policies, but why you think she plays best to swing voters.

I don't think swing voters exist. I think Dems lose no matter what now. Until some real reckoning, it's Trump forever.

The process is for show and we know it because 2016 was actually hacked.

But I support Warren because she is speaking economics to people who are swayed only by that and no social issues seem to matter to middle America unless they affect wallets. Excluding zealots, of course.

Also, asking questions is my way of not being a dick. I want to learn what smart people think. You see who I dismiss, but I earnestly engage the genuinely thoughtful.