FoxNews posts results of poll.

[techs]

So immediately after the State of the Union FoxNews had a text message poll asking "How did the President do?"
The results were consistent from 11:31 until 11:58 when the poll closed.
At 11:22 the result was 84 percent Excellent, 4 percent Average and 10 percent Poor.
At 11:58 when the poll closed it was 85 percent Excellent, 4 percent Average and 10 percent Poor.
Discounting for the moment how you can come up with anything but a 100 percent figure in a text message poll, Jon Stewart made a great observation:
"Those are Stalin type numbers"
:Q

I guess if anyone out there still trusts FoxNews they won't be surprised.
However, for the rest of us, the sane ones, we recognize Stalin type numbers and Stalin type 'newscasts" when we them.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: techs
So immediately after the State of the Union FoxNews had a text message poll asking "How did the President do?"
The results were consistent from 11:31 until 11:58 when the poll closed.
At 11:22 the result was 84 percent Excellent, 4 percent Average and 10 percent Poor.
At 11:58 when the poll closed it was 85 percent Excellent, 4 percent Average and 10 percent Poor.
Discounting for the moment how you can come up with anything but a 100 percent figure in a text message poll, Jon Stewart made a great observation:
"Those are Stalin type numbers"
:Q

I guess if anyone out there still trusts FoxNews they won't be surprised.
However, for the rest of us, the sane ones, we recognize Stalin type numbers and Stalin type 'newscasts" when we them.

AT Republican P&Nr's getting paid overtime.

 

[imported_Shivetya]

Originally posted by: techs

:Q

I guess if anyone out there still trusts FoxNews they won't be surprised.
However, for the rest of us, the sane ones, we recognize Stalin type numbers and Stalin type 'newscasts" when we them.

as in, whatever....


you are so effing hilarious, I wouldn't know what to do without your type around here...



oh yeah, have an intelligent conversation... that might...

 

[Lemon law]

First of all, the methodology is vague---but I certainly suggest anyone watching it on the fox network is probably far more inclined to think the speech was excellent and will probably listen to Limbaugh next.

When you do a poll, you try to get a random sample---not a biased sample.

But the missing percent or two may be accounted for if they didn't have a rating below poor.
Pathetic and retarded spring to mind---Fox may have decided to chuck those responses.

 

[Darthvoy]

Originally posted by: Shivetya

Originally posted by: techs

:Q

I guess if anyone out there still trusts FoxNews they won't be surprised.
However, for the rest of us, the sane ones, we recognize Stalin type numbers and Stalin type 'newscasts" when we them.

as in, whatever....


you are so effing hilarious, I wouldn't know what to do without your type around here...



oh yeah, have an intelligent conversation... that might...

when all else fails...insult! Right...cause you did not refute what the op posted.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Originally posted by: techs
So immediately after the State of the Union FoxNews had a text message poll asking "How did the President do?"
The results were consistent from 11:31 until 11:58 when the poll closed.
At 11:22 the result was 84 percent Excellent, 4 percent Average and 10 percent Poor.
At 11:58 when the poll closed it was 85 percent Excellent, 4 percent Average and 10 percent Poor.
Discounting for the moment how you can come up with anything but a 100 percent figure in a text message poll, Jon Stewart made a great observation:
"Those are Stalin type numbers"
:Q

I guess if anyone out there still trusts FoxNews they won't be surprised.
However, for the rest of us, the sane ones, we recognize Stalin type numbers and Stalin type 'newscasts" when we them.

Looks like they probably truncated the decimals. Techs, you never cease to amaze me. It's interesting that you consider yourself as one of the "sane ones". I wish I could help you to see just how biased and irrational you are, but I don't have time to undertake such an exercise in futility. Got to go now, I'm late for my Stalin Fan Club meeting.

 

[palehorse]

The OP amounts to nothing more than a conspiracy theory (trollbait)... so how exactly is this news?

/thread

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: palehorse74
The OP amounts to nothing more than a conspiracy theory (trollbait)... so how exactly is this news?

A better question would be, exactly how can Faux be considered as "news?"

Keith Olbermann's got it right. He calls them Fox NOISE. :thumbsup: :laugh:

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: techs
So immediately after the State of the Union FoxNews had a text message poll asking "How did the President do?"
The results were consistent from 11:31 until 11:58 when the poll closed.
At 11:22 the result was 84 percent Excellent, 4 percent Average and 10 percent Poor.
At 11:58 when the poll closed it was 85 percent Excellent, 4 percent Average and 10 percent Poor.
Discounting for the moment how you can come up with anything but a 100 percent figure in a text message poll, Jon Stewart made a great observation:
"Those are Stalin type numbers"
:Q

I guess if anyone out there still trusts FoxNews they won't be surprised.
However, for the rest of us, the sane ones, we recognize Stalin type numbers and Stalin type 'newscasts" when we them.

Rounding off the decimals? Maybe you should think before you post this drivel?

 

[thraashman]

Originally posted by: techs
So immediately after the State of the Union FoxNews had a text message poll asking "How did the President do?"
The results were consistent from 11:31 until 11:58 when the poll closed.
At 11:22 the result was 84 percent Excellent, 4 percent Average and 10 percent Poor.
At 11:58 when the poll closed it was 85 percent Excellent, 4 percent Average and 10 percent Poor.
Discounting for the moment how you can come up with anything but a 100 percent figure in a text message poll, Jon Stewart made a great observation:
"Those are Stalin type numbers"
:Q

I guess if anyone out there still trusts FoxNews they won't be surprised.
However, for the rest of us, the sane ones, we recognize Stalin type numbers and Stalin type 'newscasts" when we them.

Am I the only one who paid any attention to this part? Like 3 responses immediately attack techs for his comment about not being 100%, but he himself says to discount it!

 

[JD50]

Are you people effing retarded? This is a text message poll, hardly meant to be scientific. People watching Fox News are obviously mostly Republican, so of course they are going to like what Bush says. Using this to say that Fox News is biased is absolutely nuts, the only thing that this poll proves is that the majority of people that watch Fox News are Republicans, well DUH!

I know you are not this desperate for a FNC bashing thread.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: JD50
Are you people effing retarded? This is a text message poll, hardly meant to be scientific. People watching Fox News are obviously mostly Republican, so of course they are going to like what Bush says. Using this to say that Fox News is biased is absolutely nuts, the only thing that this poll proves is that the majority of people that watch Fox News are Republicans, well DUH!

I know you are not this desperate for a FNC bashing thread.

I thought Stewart's comment was funny and took it only as an attempt to be humorous.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: JD50
Are you people effing retarded? This is a text message poll, hardly meant to be scientific. People watching Fox News are obviously mostly Republican, so of course they are going to like what Bush says. Using this to say that Fox News is biased is absolutely nuts, the only thing that this poll proves is that the majority of people that watch Fox News are Republicans, well DUH!

I know you are not this desperate for a FNC bashing thread.

I thought Stewart's comment was funny and took it only as an attempt to be humorous.

I'm not talking about Stewart, I'm talking about people on this board that are using this poll to say that Fox News is biased and shouldn't be considered a valid news source.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: JD50
Are you people effing retarded? This is a text message poll, hardly meant to be scientific. People watching Fox News are obviously mostly Republican, so of course they are going to like what Bush says. Using this to say that Fox News is biased is absolutely nuts, the only thing that this poll proves is that the majority of people that watch Fox News are Republicans, well DUH!

I know you are not this desperate for a FNC bashing thread.

Don't you think it is a little odd that the poll results never charged?

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: JD50
Are you people effing retarded? This is a text message poll, hardly meant to be scientific. People watching Fox News are obviously mostly Republican, so of course they are going to like what Bush says. Using this to say that Fox News is biased is absolutely nuts, the only thing that this poll proves is that the majority of people that watch Fox News are Republicans, well DUH!

I know you are not this desperate for a FNC bashing thread.

I thought Stewart's comment was funny and took it only as an attempt to be humorous.

I'm not talking about Stewart, I'm talking about people on this board that are using this poll to say that Fox News is biased and shouldn't be considered a valid news source.

I agree, they don't need to use this poll to come to the correct conclusion that they are extremely biased, all they need to do is look at who runs it (Roger Ailes) and who owns it (Rupert Murdoch)

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

I agree that there 98% total is merely a function of rounding.

The poll itself is indicative of how retarded people must be to watch Faux News. Personally, the only thing I'm surprised about is that Faux viewers are capable of text messaging.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: JD50
Are you people effing retarded? This is a text message poll, hardly meant to be scientific. People watching Fox News are obviously mostly Republican, so of course they are going to like what Bush says. Using this to say that Fox News is biased is absolutely nuts, the only thing that this poll proves is that the majority of people that watch Fox News are Republicans, well DUH!

I know you are not this desperate for a FNC bashing thread.

Don't you think it is a little odd that the poll results never charged?

Its a poll that uses text messages, I wouldn't be surprised with any results from that poll. There was probably a couple of Bush fanboys texting as much as they could, but really, who cares, this is not news. Maybe we should analyze the results of Americas Funniest Home videos.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
I agree that there 98% total is merely a function of rounding.

The poll itself is indicative of how retarded people must be to watch Faux News. Personally, the only thing I'm surprised about is that Faux viewers are capable of text messaging.

No worse than your average Florida voter.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
I agree that there 98% total is merely a function of rounding.

The poll itself is indicative of how retarded people must be to watch Faux News. Personally, the only thing I'm surprised about is that Faux viewers are capable of text messaging.

No worse than your average Florida voter.

Zing!

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
The poll itself is indicative of how retarded people must be to watch Faux News. Personally, the only thing I'm surprised about is that Faux viewers are capable of text messaging.

How are being tech savvy and watching Fox News mutually exclusive?

I watch Fox News (and CNN, NBC, MSNBC, and CNBC), voted Republican several times during my life, and I can probably hack circles around you...

how u like 'dem apples?

Anyone who uses a single source for news and information is a moron. Anyone who dismisses any source from their body of references, simply because they often disagree with the viewpoints or agenda, is an even bigger moron.

 

[ayabe]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
I agree that there 98% total is merely a function of rounding.

The poll itself is indicative of how retarded people must be to watch Faux News. Personally, the only thing I'm surprised about is that Faux viewers are capable of text messaging.

No worse than your average Florida voter.

Hey!

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
The poll itself is indicative of how retarded people must be to watch Faux News. Personally, the only thing I'm surprised about is that Faux viewers are capable of text messaging.

How are being tech savvy and watching Fox News mutually exclusive?

I watch Fox News (and CNN, NBC, MSNBC, and CNBC), voted Republican several times during my life, and I can probably hack circles around you...

how u like 'dem apples?

Most shut in Nerds can.

Anyone who uses a single source for news and information is a moron. Anyone who dismisses any source from their body of references, simply because they often disagree with the viewpoints or agenda, is an even bigger moron.

How often do you use Al Jezeera as a source?

 

[ztadmin]

Originally posted by: JD50
Are you people effing retarded? This is a text message poll, hardly meant to be scientific. People watching Fox News are obviously mostly Republican, so of course they are going to like what Bush says. Using this to say that Fox News is biased is absolutely nuts, the only thing that this poll proves is that the majority of people that watch Fox News are Republicans, well DUH!

I know you are not this desperate for a FNC bashing thread.

It doesn't really matter if the poll is meant to be scientific. It might be nice to think that most viewers are intelligent and thoughtful enough to consider the environment in which the poll was conducted, but I'm guessing a lot of viewers don't think about that. Fox must be counting on that, too, when they run an opt-in text message poll. If Fox thought their viewers would recognize the poll as being meaningless, they wouldn't spend the money to run it.

On the issue of bias, I'd say the people at Fox News like making money. Our country is pretty evenly divided - we have about an equal number of people on the left and on the right. Let's face it, people don't watch Fox just to get the facts. Generally speaking, they watch whichever network conveys the news in the tone that they want to hear it in. Fox knows its customer base, and so when it comes time to run a quick and dirty poll, why should they go out of their way to try to get input from liberals? They can run their meaningless poll, and their right-wing viewers will be satisfied by it.

Fox as a whole isn't trying to promote a right-wing agenda. Don't give Fox so much credit - they're trying to make as much money as possible, not advance policies that they think will be good for America. The corporation exists to make money, and Fox knows they can do so by targeting right-wing viewers. It's hard to call that a bias.

On the other hand, you can certainly say Fox's anchors are biased. But, they're just hired by the corporation because the corporation knows that's what will draw in the audience they're targeting.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: JD50
Are you people effing retarded? This is a text message poll, hardly meant to be scientific.

Is it too much to ask any media company that even pretends to be a "news" organization to be responsible enough to maintain at least the slightest semblance of credibility in the material that actually makes it onto their air space? :roll:

Originally posted by: palehorse74
Anyone who uses a single source for news and information is a moron. Anyone who dismisses any source from their body of references, simply because they often disagree with the viewpoints or agenda, is an even bigger moron.

And anyone who doesn't critically evaluate their sources is more of a moron than that. There's simply too much hard evidence that Faux's editiorial process is so skewed and devoid of truth that it isn't worth considering as anything more than a sensationalistic junk tabloid.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: JD50
Are you people effing retarded? This is a text message poll, hardly meant to be scientific.

Is it too much to ask any media company that even pretends to be a "news" organization to be responsible enough to maintain at least the slightest semblance of credibility in the material that actually makes it onto their air space? :roll:

Originally posted by: palehorse74
Anyone who uses a single source for news and information is a moron. Anyone who dismisses any source from their body of references, simply because they often disagree with the viewpoints or agenda, is an even bigger moron.

And anyone who doesn't critically evaluate their sources is more of a moron than that. There's simply too much hard evidence that Faux's editiorial process is so skewed and devoid of truth that it isn't worth considering as anything more than a sensationalistic junk tabloid.

I assume that you would say the same about Dan Rather then?