Glenn Beck And The Faux Boycott

[Red Irish]

Is this the ass that feigns tears and indulges in weepy-eyed patriotism every time he goes on air?

Spare me.

 

[microbial]

Originally posted by: Elias824

Originally posted by: Druidx
One small problem, all these shows people are referring to as news are not news shows. They are editorial commentary done for entertainment.
If you enjoy O?Reilly, Hannity, Beck, Olbermann or Maddow, great otherwise turn the channel.

yes this is the correct answer.

QFT

And their editorial slant is showing from a mile away.

I have no doubt that The Gerry Springer Show could quote some very convincing ratings numbers.

Doesn't make it any less trash.

 

[xj0hnx]

Originally posted by: retrospooty
So what is your point? The one with the highest #'s are the best or prove which way teh country is leaning? Well, I hate to break this too you, but check the last election results. I am pretty sure anyoen and everyone you voted for got the lowest #'s correct?

LOL - idiot.

If Obamanation had won by a landslide, you might have a point, but he didn't, not even close, not even 10%. The ONLY reason he won is because McCan't was the WORST possible choice, AND he picked a sure fire fail for a running mate, and STILL it was only 7%. Now that is an LOL - idiot.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: xj0hnx

Originally posted by: retrospooty
So what is your point? The one with the highest #'s are the best or prove which way teh country is leaning? Well, I hate to break this too you, but check the last election results. I am pretty sure anyoen and everyone you voted for got the lowest #'s correct?

LOL - idiot.

If Obamanation had won by a landslide, you might have a point, but he didn't, not even close, not even 10%. The ONLY reason he won is because McCan't was the WORST possible choice, AND he picked a sure fire fail for a running mate, and STILL it was only 7%. Now that is an LOL - idiot.

Uh... a 7% victory in the popular practically is a landslide in the history of US Presidential elections. Case in point: when Reagan beat Carter in 1980, he won by a 9% margin. 10% margins are quite rare, especially in a race with only 2 major candidates getting 99% of the votes.

 

[ZeGermans]

Meanwhile liberals continue to not really care for bully shows and actually study facts for their opinions.

 

[xj0hnx]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: xj0hnx

Originally posted by: retrospooty
So what is your point? The one with the highest #'s are the best or prove which way teh country is leaning? Well, I hate to break this too you, but check the last election results. I am pretty sure anyoen and everyone you voted for got the lowest #'s correct?

LOL - idiot.

If Obamanation had won by a landslide, you might have a point, but he didn't, not even close, not even 10%. The ONLY reason he won is because McCan't was the WORST possible choice, AND he picked a sure fire fail for a running mate, and STILL it was only 7%. Now that is an LOL - idiot.

Uh... a 7% victory in the popular practically is a landslide in the history of US Presidential elections. Case in point: when Reagan beat Carter in 1980, he won by a 9% margin. 10% margins are quite rare, especially in a race with only 2 major candidates getting 99% of the votes.

The percentage as it relates to elections past is not relevent, what is relevent is that there was no vast majority of voters showing out for Obama, the difference is only about half hte population of New York.

 

[xj0hnx]

Originally posted by: ZeGermans
Meanwhile liberals continue to not really care for bully shows and actually study facts for their opinions.

LOL you said facts, and liberals in the same sentence.

 

[ZeGermans]

Name one issue liberals aren't on the factual side of

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: xj0hnx

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: xj0hnx

Originally posted by: retrospooty
So what is your point? The one with the highest #'s are the best or prove which way teh country is leaning? Well, I hate to break this too you, but check the last election results. I am pretty sure anyoen and everyone you voted for got the lowest #'s correct?

LOL - idiot.

If Obamanation had won by a landslide, you might have a point, but he didn't, not even close, not even 10%. The ONLY reason he won is because McCan't was the WORST possible choice, AND he picked a sure fire fail for a running mate, and STILL it was only 7%. Now that is an LOL - idiot.

Uh... a 7% victory in the popular practically is a landslide in the history of US Presidential elections. Case in point: when Reagan beat Carter in 1980, he won by a 9% margin. 10% margins are quite rare, especially in a race with only 2 major candidates getting 99% of the votes.

The percentage as it relates to elections past is not relevent, what is relevent is that there was no vast majority of voters showing out for Obama, the difference is only about half hte population of New York.

In other words, you're regurgitating the same dipshit partisan spin fed to you by Beck and Limbaugh. Got it :roll:

 

[xj0hnx]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: xj0hnx

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: xj0hnx

Originally posted by: retrospooty
So what is your point? The one with the highest #'s are the best or prove which way teh country is leaning? Well, I hate to break this too you, but check the last election results. I am pretty sure anyoen and everyone you voted for got the lowest #'s correct?

LOL - idiot.

If Obamanation had won by a landslide, you might have a point, but he didn't, not even close, not even 10%. The ONLY reason he won is because McCan't was the WORST possible choice, AND he picked a sure fire fail for a running mate, and STILL it was only 7%. Now that is an LOL - idiot.

Uh... a 7% victory in the popular practically is a landslide in the history of US Presidential elections. Case in point: when Reagan beat Carter in 1980, he won by a 9% margin. 10% margins are quite rare, especially in a race with only 2 major candidates getting 99% of the votes.

The percentage as it relates to elections past is not relevent, what is relevent is that there was no vast majority of voters showing out for Obama, the difference is only about half hte population of New York.

In other words, you're regurgitating the same dipshit partisan spin fed to you by Beck and Limbaugh. Got it :roll:

No just that anyone that claims Obamas election proves there some majority of liberals is an idiot.

 

[Elias824]

Originally posted by: microbial

Originally posted by: Elias824

Originally posted by: Druidx
One small problem, all these shows people are referring to as news are not news shows. They are editorial commentary done for entertainment.
If you enjoy O?Reilly, Hannity, Beck, Olbermann or Maddow, great otherwise turn the channel.

yes this is the correct answer.

QFT

And their editorial slant is showing from a mile away.

I have no doubt that The Gerry Springer Show could quote some very convincing ratings numbers.

Doesn't make it any less trash.

So no one should show any editorial slant? I forgot CNN and MSNBC are 100% un-biased all the time. Get over it, every news source is biased, especially commentators, its literally their job to be biased. get over yourself

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: retrospooty

Originally posted by: Patranus

Originally posted by: umbrella39
You keep acting as if being part of the biggest group of morons this country has ever seen isn't actually pathetic. You are like the Army of Dumb's proud teenaged Papa and biggest cheerleader, it's precious, it really is.

Lets look at cable prime time rankings for July 2009

1. USA
2. TNT
3. Fox News
4. Nick at Night
5. TBS
6. Family
7. FX
8. ESPN
9. SYFY
10. Food
.....
15. CNN
.....
26. MSNBC

http://www.mediabistro.com/tvn...09%20%28Live+SD%29.pdf

LOL HGTV even beats CNN in prime time.

So what is your point? The one with the highest #'s are the best or prove which way teh country is leaning? Well, I hate to break this too you, but check the last election results. I am pretty sure anyoen and everyone you voted for got the lowest #'s correct?

LOL - idiot.

If anything it proves that fox news is just another entertainment channel. Personally the only semi-bearable news on cable is CNN international edition. All the rest of it is MTVesque mindless garbage.

 

[her209]

Jon Stewart rips Fox News a new one
http://www.hulu.com/watch/9082...-news-the-new-liberals

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: umbrella39
LOL, that is funny. So what you are saying is that the largest number of mindless idiots in the counrty actually flock to FOX and not CNN for their programming. Thanks for clearing up what everyone else posting here already knows. Sheeps needs to feeds. We hear you loud and clear. :laugh:

I don't know about you guys but I'm either watching my DVR'd shows or on the Internet.

 

[umbrella39]

I'm with you. I work as much as they'll let me and when I'm home this time of night I internetz a bit and catch up on the shows I've recorded. No cable news channels on my to do list.

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: BarrySotero
....Beck... helped form - ColorofChange...

Is there any truth to this claim?

Originally posted by: Wreckem
That was 10 months ago. It only took 10 months for the Dems to fuck up their majority. They Dems are losing House and Senate seats in 2010. The question is how many.

Fox News was #3 10 months ago too, which leaves your argument looking rather absurd.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Budmantom

That's why we got Obama, the uneducated voted for him.

Now I know you're just trolling because that's all you do, but unfortunately polls disagree with you. The more educated you are, the more likely you are to be an Obama voter.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: Evan

American Idol gets better ratings than Lost too.Thing is, American Idol is still garbage, it's just fun watching a car wreck sometimes.

That's why we got Obama, the uneducated voted for him.

I thought you voted for McCain/Palin?

 

[Red Dawn]

Faux,CNN, MSNBC, etc, it's all crap. it just seems that Faux fans like crap more than the general population who by a large majority don't watch any of those programs. It also seems the more of a fan one is of Faux, MSNBC or CNN the more of a tool they are with Faux Fan leading the way.

 

[SammyJr]

Originally posted by: Patranus

Originally posted by: umbrella39
You keep acting as if being part of the biggest group of morons this country has ever seen isn't actually pathetic. You are like the Army of Dumb's proud teenaged Papa and biggest cheerleader, it's precious, it really is.

Lets look at cable prime time rankings for July 2009

1. USA
2. TNT
3. Fox News
4. Nick at Night
5. TBS
6. Family
7. FX
8. ESPN
9. SYFY
10. Food
.....
15. CNN
.....
26. MSNBC

http://www.mediabistro.com/tvn...09%20%28Live+SD%29.pdf

LOL HGTV even beats CNN in prime time.

Pretty meaningless. Liberals are younger and less likely to be glued to traditional media. I haven't watched John Stewart on cable in years. I do watch on Hulu. I don't think I have ever actually watched MSNBC, but I've seen plenty of Maddow and Olbermann on YouTube. None of that is showing up in the rates. I imagine this is true for a lot of younger people.

On the other hand, old Republicans like my Grandma actually sit down to watch when the show is actually on.

 

[Ichigo]

Originally posted by: SammyJr

Originally posted by: Patranus

Originally posted by: umbrella39
You keep acting as if being part of the biggest group of morons this country has ever seen isn't actually pathetic. You are like the Army of Dumb's proud teenaged Papa and biggest cheerleader, it's precious, it really is.

Lets look at cable prime time rankings for July 2009

1. USA
2. TNT
3. Fox News
4. Nick at Night
5. TBS
6. Family
7. FX
8. ESPN
9. SYFY
10. Food
.....
15. CNN
.....
26. MSNBC

http://www.mediabistro.com/tvn...09%20%28Live+SD%29.pdf

LOL HGTV even beats CNN in prime time.

Pretty meaningless. Liberals are younger and less likely to be glued to traditional media. I haven't watched John Stewart on cable in years. I do watch on Hulu. I don't think I have ever actually watched MSNBC, but I've seen plenty of Maddow and Olbermann on YouTube. None of that is showing up in the rates. I imagine this is true for a lot of younger people.

On the other hand, old Republicans like my Grandma actually sit down to watch when the show is actually on.

QFT

On the flip side, there are a bunch of highly-viewed O' Reilly clips on YouTube, for example, but I can't say that most of them are flattering to him.

 

[retrospooty]

Originally posted by: Patranus

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: retrospooty

Originally posted by: Patranus

Originally posted by: umbrella39
You keep acting as if being part of the biggest group of morons this country has ever seen isn't actually pathetic. You are like the Army of Dumb's proud teenaged Papa and biggest cheerleader, it's precious, it really is.

Lets look at cable prime time rankings for July 2009

1. USA
2. TNT
3. Fox News
4. Nick at Night
5. TBS
6. Family
7. FX
8. ESPN
9. SYFY
10. Food
.....
15. CNN
.....
26. MSNBC

http://www.mediabistro.com/tvn...09%20%28Live+SD%29.pdf

LOL HGTV even beats CNN in prime time.

So what is your point? The one with the highest #'s are the best or prove which way teh country is leaning? Well, I hate to break this too you, but check the last election results. I am pretty sure anyoen and everyone you voted for got the lowest #'s correct?

LOL - idiot.

That was 10 months ago. It only took 10 months for the Dems to fuck up their majority. They Dems are losing House and Senate seats in 2010. The question is how many.

Exactly.

Why do you think this 'health care reform' hasn't passed? its not like the Democrats control the house and have a super majority in the senate. It should be a slam dunk.

So you both think that Fox new ratings going up didnt happen immediatly when the dems took over? You think it just happened in the past few months because they screwed it all up already? LOL - they havent had time to screw it up yet. I understand that you think that they will, but NOTHING has happened yet, politics and finance just dont move that fast. Its only been 6 months. Fox ratings went way up when the opposition came into power, just like AT P&N went from predominantly lib to con when the dems took over. The opposition always gets more vocal when they arent in power - DUH

okeedokee. You think what you want. Elections are what counts. They may lose a few seats this coming mid-term, but not near enough in either house for reps to take over, not with the economy on the rebound next summer. If you think that will happen your deluded... but that is perfectly within your rights to delude yourselves.

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Budmantom

That's why we got Obama, the uneducated voted for him.

Now I know you're just trolling because that's all you do, but unfortunately polls disagree with you. The more educated you are, the more likely you are to be an Obama voter.

I think there's a U curve - very poor/uneducated people tend to vote democrat as well as the highly educated.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Budmantom

That's why we got Obama, the uneducated voted for him.

Now I know you're just trolling because that's all you do, but unfortunately polls disagree with you. The more educated you are, the more likely you are to be an Obama voter.

I think there's a U curve - very poor/uneducated people tend to vote democrat as well as the highly educated.

Well, sorta. Obama does tend to win the 'no high school' vote, but when you run a regression on the data it turns out that it is far more likely that Obama is winning the 'minority and recent immigrant' vote. For example, he lost the 'whites with no college' vote by 20 points, but won the 'minority with no college' vote by 60. In addition he almost won the 'white with a college degree' demographic, and straight out won the 'white with a postgrad' one. He crushed McCain in the 'minority with a college degree' and 'postgraduate'.

Long story short, education is only one of many factors influencing your voting decisions, but the data clearly supports a link between higher education and Democratic Party votes.

 

[Via]

MSNBC's overall ratings are hurt by not having weekend programming.

They just show Lock-up reruns. Adding weekend news and current events shows alone would shoot their ratings much higher.

And don't forget - Fox is watched by as many people who laugh at it as by those who believe what's being said there.

I know a lot of people my age and younger who tune into Fox to "keep tabs on the enemy" or who find it hilarious. Only old people watch it for news.