-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
Ironic That the Repub Debate was on MSNBC
- Thread starter Fern
- Start date
The Dem's are wussies, that's common knowledge, But there is such a thing as having too much backbone, The GOP isn't realizing that this aint england, americans don't respect that whole stiff upper lip attitude for too long. The bushies may respect the whole push ahead until we fall on our face mentality, but everyone else wants to see a real changing of the guard, not just replacing one puppet for the next.
ATM the GOp is looking more soft than the dem's, they didn't touch on anything of signifigant importance during their debate, they made it their buisness to avoid the one issue everyone wanted to hear them speak on "bush and iraq" they are going to have to face this quagmire whether they want to or not, and until they do they're only gonna continue to concede the spotlight to the dems.
ATM the GOp is looking more soft than the dem's, they didn't touch on anything of signifigant importance during their debate, they made it their buisness to avoid the one issue everyone wanted to hear them speak on "bush and iraq" they are going to have to face this quagmire whether they want to or not, and until they do they're only gonna continue to concede the spotlight to the dems.
Stoneburner
Diamond Member
mathews worked for a democrat but he's been targeted by the left almost as much as bill oreilly and the limbaugh types. Besides mathews voted for bush in 2000.
CallMeJoe
Diamond Member
Just saw Dick Morris on O'Reilly. He says the whole debate was a Democrats' plot to tear down Rudy to the same level as the other Republican candidates. He also said that Romney was given much more time than the other candidates because he's the one the Dems want to run against.
The poll on Drudge Report had Romney the clear winner, something like 33% to Guiliani's 20%. So are you saying Drudge's readers have been hoodwinked by the Librul Media?
I suppose the Democrats want to run against Romney because his colossal convenient flip flops dwarf anything Kerry did. But if he can successfully flip flop toward the center after winning a Repub nomination he could be very potent against inexperienced Obama or blubbering Hillary Rodham by virtue of his debating skills and confident air.
Darkhawk28
Diamond Member
Brian Williams, who idolizes Rush Limbaugh, hosted the Democratic debate. End of thread.
Paddington
Senior member
The Republicans routinely hold their national conventions in cities (and metros) known to be Democrat heavy, like New York, Philadelphia, Chicago, and Detroit.
Let's see the Democrats hold their convention in a GOP heavy metro like Phoenix, Cincinnati, or Dallas.
Let's see the Democrats hold their convention in a GOP heavy metro like Phoenix, Cincinnati, or Dallas.
ProfJohn
Lifer
ummm
Matthews has worked for four Democratic politicians. He was a presidential speechwriter for four years during the administration of Jimmy Carter. Among his efforts was Carter's infamous "malaise" speech, though the word "malaise" did not actually appear in the official transcript. He served as a top aide to long-time Speaker of the House of Representatives Tip O'Neill for six years. He worked in the U.S. Senate for five years on the staffs of Senators Frank Moss and Edmund Muskie before losing to Pennsylvania Congressman Joshua Eilberg in a U.S. House of Representatives Democratic primary in 1974.
As you were saying?
Well, the Democratic choices are kind of limited...the majority of metro areas and reasonably sized cities tend to be Democratic. Unless they want to hold their convention in Bugdick, Arkansas...which probably doesn't have a decent sized convention center.
Just kidding, but in the spirit of this truly ridiculous thread...
Personally, I think it's more likely that the people who typically watch Fox News in primetime do so because they don't want to see actual footage of anything and make up their own minds or draw their own conclusions about it. They'd rather just assume that O'Reilly and Hannity will make good decisions for them. Watching those two shows in particular is just like reading the op-ed page of the newspaper rather than actually reading the articles.
It's stupid because, like in almost EVERY political point scoring game, reality is whittled down to some bumper sticker idea because it makes your political point easier to make. Being Democrat or Republican is not a binary thing, it's entirely possible that one group of Republicans is hugely biased towards the right, while a group of Democrats might vote that way, but otherwise be fair and unbiased. Or, for that matter, it could be the other way around. I don't see how anyone can reasonably claim that every Democrat is just like every Republican, and that if you think ONE group on one side is biased, then by extension you must view every group on every side as equally biased. It's a ridiculous claim, made only so you yahoos can find something else to nag the Democrats for. It's cheap partisan hackery.
The typical Fox News viewer doesn't watch any other thing than Fox so they're ratings will hold steady, which they did. MSNBC on the other hand got a huge boost nearly tripling their number in overall viewers, and doubling their demo numbers, beating Fox in that category. In other words don't read Drudge, he's a partisan hack who will never give you the whole story.
A Democrat in the 1970s isn't necessarily a Democrat in 2007, so I don't think that proves much. He has also claimed to have voted for George W. Bush in 2000 if you want to cite something more recent. Either way he is a very objective journalist and gives a hard time to everybody.
her209
No Lifer
I'm still wondering if anyone's been held accountable for the following two "mistakes".
Foley mislabeled as a Democrat.
Incorrectly reporting that Clinton's outed Obama's madrassa past.
imported_Shivetya
Platinum Member
because the Republicans aren't going to cower before some imaginary bogey-man? C'mon, the Democratic debate fiasco with Fox News (co-sponsored by the Congressional Black Caucus) was all about controlling the message, not becaue Fox would be hostile to them. They simply want their supporters, who are more than willing, to believe things a certain way.
TRENDING THREADS
-
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: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
