Why are conservatives so proud of choosing a losing candidate?

[RetiredUSN]

What happens when a person hears only one side of the story? Just ask anyone raised in North Korea. Or the Soviet Union. Or those who watch only Fox News.

And it goes both ways - wouldn't you like for us liberals to have to hear your side of the story?

Radio and TV are for profit.

The liberals have the very same opportunity to present their views with a radio and TV show on open market as well.

For many years the USA had only the big three networks who filtered every single bit of news that came across the screen as we watched in our living rooms. They had to manipulate the content to whatever the big boys in Washington agreed to or their access would be limited to all the press conferences, parties and other social events.

Then came a guy named "RUSH"......................and the media changed drastically. Love the man, or hate him, but he opened the eyes of many Americans to the opposing view, and was eventually hated and envied by the mainstream because he presented a threat their monopoly.

I love hearing both sides..............................finally!

 

[Glen Contrarian]

Radio and TV are for profit.

The liberals have the very same opportunity to present their views with a radio and TV show on open market as well.

For many years the USA had only the big three networks who filtered every single bit of news that came across the screen as we watched in our living rooms. They had to manipulate the content to whatever the big boys in Washington agreed to or their access would be limited to all the press conferences, parties and other social events.

Then came a guy named "RUSH"......................and the media changed drastically. Love the man, or hate him, but he opened the eyes of many Americans to the opposing view, and was eventually hated and envied by the mainstream because he presented a threat their monopoly.

I love hearing both sides..............................finally!

Problem is, thanks to the polarization of our media (and Fox has been a BIG part of that polarization), people now get to hear only what they want to hear. Conservatives no longer have to hear the liberal side, and liberals no longer have to hear the conservative side.

And today's polarization - and the rise of Trump - are direct results of the lack of a fairness doctrine.

 

[RetiredUSN]

Problem is, thanks to the polarization of our media (and Fox has been a BIG part of that polarization), people now get to hear only what they want to hear. Conservatives no longer have to hear the liberal side, and liberals no longer have to hear the conservative side.

And today's polarization - and the rise of Trump - are direct results of the lack of a fairness doctrine.

Fully agree Glen. Fox and all other networks decided to come down on one side instead of really doing what they were rightfully guaranteed to do under the constitution.

Instead...they picked sides and limited or slanted the important information to the masses.

 

[Glen Contrarian]

Fully agree Glen. Fox and all other networks decided to come down on one side instead of really doing what they were rightfully guaranteed to do under the constitution.

Instead...they picked sides and limited or slanted the important information to the masses.

So why not require all the major networks - Fox included - to give both (or all) sides of the story, that we liberals might have to hear the conservative side, and conservatives might have to hear the liberal side? That was the aim of the fairness doctrine.

 

[TheGoverness]

So why not require all the major networks - Fox included - to give both (or all) sides of the story, that we liberals might have to hear the conservative side, and conservatives might have to hear the liberal side? That was the aim of the fairness doctrine.

But then Fox News wouldn't be fun to watch anymore.

 

[RetiredUSN]

So why not require all the major networks - Fox included - to give both (or all) sides of the story, that we liberals might have to hear the conservative side, and conservatives might have to hear the liberal side? That was the aim of the fairness doctrine.

They are for profit networks and the less government control, the better.

NPR was supposed to be a neutral form of media and look what happened there.

Let the people decide, not government interference.

Wanna stop polarization? We can start with the azzholes standing on the steps of congress getting 5 minutes of fame with their rhetoric, polarizing statements, and being protected from libel & slander laws.

 

[Velvet Elvis]

Despite being a totally lackluster, credibility-deficient corporate tool that no one likes, hillary clinton is soundly BEATING the conservatives' pride and joy...

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

You must be looking at another FiveThirtyEight. ...or cherry-picked something to support YOUR opinion, solely.

Why, then, is the right so overjoyed to have chosen trump as the face of their party? In thread after thread on this forum, conservative posters aggressively defend him, praising him as a savior who has come to deliver the country from darkness.

Funny...most conservatives don't like him. Again...you must be cherry-picking two or three posters, and accusing a whole swath of people to just align with them.

I would assume it's because conservatives abide by the old motto "it's now whether you win or lose, but how you play that counts."

No dear. They're mostly going to vote AGAINST Hillary, and not FOR Trump.

Tell me...Why are you so overjoyed for supporting a candidate that's been tied to so many scandals, that it's hard to list them all? Not only that, but the word "scandal" has been the albatross that has hung around her neck for decades now. You name it, and she's done it. I wouldn't doubt there are dead bodies buried in shallow graves that were her of her doing.

 

[Velvet Elvis]

Problem is, thanks to the polarization of our media (and Fox has been a BIG part of that polarization), people now get to hear only what they want to hear. Conservatives no longer have to hear the liberal side, and liberals no longer have to hear the conservative side.

So then...why have enterprises like liberal radio failed? Remember Air America, and all the shady deals they did to try to stay relevant (and the crooked things they did to bring in money to keep the lights on)? Why is it that FoxNews blows MSNBC out of the water night after night? Week after week? Month after month?

I think it's because the common person relates more to a conservative view than liberal. I'm not talking about the radical ends of the spectrum. I'm talking about the moderate ones.



And today's polarization - and the rise of Trump - are direct results of the lack of a fairness doctrine.[/QUOTE]

 

[Glen Contrarian]

So then...why have enterprises like liberal radio failed? Remember Air America, and all the shady deals they did to try to stay relevant (and the crooked things they did to bring in money to keep the lights on)? Why is it that FoxNews blows MSNBC out of the water night after night? Week after week? Month after month?

I think it's because the common person relates more to a conservative view than liberal. I'm not talking about the radical ends of the spectrum. I'm talking about the moderate ones.



And today's polarization - and the rise of Trump - are direct results of the lack of a fairness doctrine.

[/QUOTE]

There's an old saying that used to apply to Dems and Republicans, but now it's more appropriate for conservatives and liberals: liberals fall in love, and conservatives fall in line. Most Republicans are indeed "falling in line" behind Trump - they've made it through the five stages of grief, and are somehow still telling themselves that they're conservative...when most of them are obviously no longer conservative at all.

Concerning "Air America" and your claim that they were pulling "shady deals", did you bother to find out the liberal side of the story? I'm guessing that you didn't, for if you did, you wouldn't be so quick to claim that their "shady deals" were what you seem to think.

When it comes to the "common person", if you'll check, all over the world, the more rural the place, the more conservative the people there are likely to be, and the more urban the place, the more liberal the people there are likely to be. This isn't an American thing - it's a human thing, and it's true all over the world. Bear in mind that those in the cities might be quite conservative when compared to American norms (and even more so than European norms), but compared to their home countries' norms, the cities will generally be more liberal. For instance, Riyadh in Saudi Arabia would be seen as very, very conservative compared to American norms...but compared to the rural areas of Saudi Arabia, it would certainly lean to the liberal side.

In other words, the conservative/liberal divide has a lot less to do with how good or how bad a person is, and a lot more to do with where that person grows up. It's not a 100% guarantee - I grew up WAAAAAAAY out in the boonies in the MS Delta - but generally speaking, that's the single greatest factor.

 

[Glen Contrarian]

They are for profit networks and the less government control, the better.

NPR was supposed to be a neutral form of media and look what happened there.

Let the people decide, not government interference.

Wanna stop polarization? We can start with the azzholes standing on the steps of congress getting 5 minutes of fame with their rhetoric, polarizing statements, and being protected from libel & slander laws.

When it comes to NPR, has it occurred to you that they really haven't changed much at all over the years, but the conservatives have moved the goalpost so much farther to the right that NPR now looks like it's on the liberals' 10-yard line?

When it comes to "for profit" networks, here's your choice: you can have "for profit" networks and a very politically-polarized nation...OR you can have "for profit" networks who actually have to tell both sides of the story in their news, and have a somewhat less-polarized nation. Is making sure that our media tells both sides of the story really so tyrannical? Is it really?

 

[Abbazorkzog]

#CruzCrew #NeverTrump

Cruz is far worse than Trump.

 

[Velvet Elvis]

There's an old saying that used to apply to Dems and Republicans, but now it's more appropriate for conservatives and liberals: liberals fall in love, and conservatives fall in line. Most Republicans are indeed "falling in line" behind Trump - they've made it through the five stages of grief, and are somehow still telling themselves that they're conservative...when most of them are obviously no longer conservative at all.

Actually...I've heard this one: "Liberals 'feel.' Conservatives 'think'."

When it comes to the "common person", if you'll check, all over the world...

...and that's where I stopped reading. I don't care about "all over the world." "All over the world" doesn't vote for United States presidents, unless you're talking about the illegal aliens that liberals pine over.

 

[Lord of Planar]

And today's polarization - and the rise of Trump - are direct results of the lack of a fairness doctrine.

Wow.

You want the control in the hands of who decides what is fair?

That is very dangers!

 

[Lord of Planar]

Actually...I've heard this one: "Liberals 'feel.' Conservatives 'think'."

And enough liberals do think, that they realized Air America was overboard.

I used to listen to it, just to laugh at the stupidity spouted.

 

[Velvet Elvis]

And enough liberals do think, that they realized Air America was overboard.

I used to listen to it, just to laugh at the stupidity spouted.

And that's the funny part. So quick to jump on the uber-republicans like Hannity and Coulter, but free passes to the uber-liberals like Maddow and Matthews.

 

[solletica]

You must be looking at another FiveThirtyEight. ...or cherry-picked something to support YOUR opinion, solely.


Funny...most conservatives don't like him. Again

So conservatives voted him as their nominee even thought they don't like him? Why would they do that?

...you must be cherry-picking two or three posters

No cherry-picking, unless you consider GOP primary election results to be "cherry-picking"

, and accusing a whole swath of people to just align with them.

No dear. They're mostly going to vote AGAINST Hillary, and not FOR Trump.

If they wanted Clinton to lose, why did the choose one of the few nominees pathetic enough to lose to her?

Explain.

 

[solletica]

Simply put, because he doesn't have a (D) behind his name, and his last name isn't Clinton or Obama.

And that's why you're happy that you voted for one of the few nominees that was bad enough to lose to the woman w/the D behind her name?

 

[vesper]

#CruzCrew #NeverTrump

I'll second that one. I've adopted Cruz as my senator because I don't have a senator that fights for liberty/freedom. Mine is in bed with the crony capitalists.
Cruz has been in the news lately continuing to fight and standing up against the Obama administration over their dealings with Iran.
Cruz: WH Orchestrated Money Laundering Operation for Iran
He's also been fighting Obama's Internet giveaway and the takeover by the federal government of more private lands among other issues. Too bad there aren't more like him.

I won't be voting for Trump. I can't vote for someone who says things I don't believe in and find totally incompetent. But to some party faithful, the magic R after his name is all that is important.

The term Conservative has truly been bastardized this election cycle. When the right crony types in leadership positions of the Republican party start comparing Trump to Reagan, that's a party that's lost its soul.

 

[gdgyva]

So conservatives voted him as their nominee even thought they don't like him? Why would they do that?



No cherry-picking, unless you consider GOP primary election results to be "cherry-picking"



If they wanted Clinton to lose, why did the choose one of the few nominees pathetic enough to lose to her?

Explain.

another one that is counting her eggs before the chickens have even laid them

polls change, and do election results....

and big favorites often lose....you realize that, right?

Hillary might win...she might not

i wouldnt bet anything on the results right now....

or be surprised come early November either way

 

[solletica]

The election is in November. I know how hard this is, especially for children, but you'll just have to be patient. Maybe you can chew on a piece of rawhide up until then to pass the time.

Did Trump tell his followers to chew on rawhide to help him win?

 

[ocean515]

Why do you lead with such a derogatory statement about 50% of this country's population? I feel certain you are doing it to bate people and get negative responses back. Your post is really not a topic for debate more of just a personal opinion that is founded in nonsense. But since you asked "why is the right so overjoyed" I will answer back as to why I am so overjoyed. Do with it as you will.

First, I despise liars and criminals in the white house. When Bill Clinton chose to make a mockery of the name and statue of our highest office, I said never again would I vote for him. When Barack Obama took his oath to change our country, I was stupid I'll admit. I thought he would change it for the better. I never dreamed of the changes he would make and how he would change this country into the mess it is today. Trump comes along and I'll admit, I was very skeptical of this reality series TV guy. But I don't live my life judging people before I really have a chance to understand what they are about. I've taken the time, lots and lots of time, to really get to know this candidate, what he stands for and the kind of person he is and for my money, I like what I see and hear.

I believe he will bring back integrity to our country and to the Executive office. And, I feel his business experience (which only an idiot would discredit) is something we need desperately.

The last comment I will make is one of irony. It is so ironic that you take what most believe to be the most corrupt person in our recent history (by 100 years) Hillary Clinton and insult Trump supporters as though we have no moral character. I don't know who you support but there is clearly only one criminal running for office that I can see and that criminal is in hiding.

Great post! Hammer hit squarely on nail.

:thumbs:

 

[humbolt]

Did Trump tell his followers to chew on rawhide to help him win?

What? You want me to give away Trump's secrets to electoral success? Not a chance. All I can tell you is that it'll be huge.

 

[nota bene]

Despite being a totally lackluster, credibility-deficient corporate tool that no one likes, hillary clinton is soundly BEATING the conservatives' pride and joy...

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

Why, then, is the right so overjoyed to have chosen trump as the face of their party? In thread after thread on this forum, conservative posters aggressively defend him, praising him as a savior who has come to deliver the country from darkness.

I would assume it's because conservatives abide by the old motto "it's now whether you win or lose, but how you play that counts."

You're begging the question with your "overjoyed."

 

[solletica]

another one that is counting her eggs before the chickens have even laid them

polls change, and do election results....

Indeed, someday dick cheney is gonna be Pres, Or maybe donald rumsfeld

and big favorites often lose....you realize that, right?

Someday mike tyson's gonna make a come back. You just wait...

Hillary might win...she might not

And conservatives might realize that if they wanted to maximize their chances of victory, they should've picked someone who would've been (at least slightly) more competitive in the general election than someone who inserts shoe stores in his mouth.

Then again, they might not.

 

[Carleen]

Despite being a totally lackluster, credibility-deficient corporate tool that no one likes, hillary clinton is soundly BEATING the conservatives' pride and joy...

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

Why, then, is the right so overjoyed to have chosen trump as the face of their party? In thread after thread on this forum, conservative posters aggressively defend him, praising him as a savior who has come to deliver the country from darkness.

I would assume it's because conservatives abide by the old motto "it's now whether you win or lose, but how you play that counts."

It's loyalty to the party. Plain and simple.