• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Fox cancels airing of ad saying Trump should be impeached

Deuce said:
You don't understand how contributing factors work, is what you're saying?
Click to expand...

I'm not quite sure what you're getting at. But I'll take a stab, Fox and adding up both CNN and MSNBC have approximately the same amount of viewership. Fox caters to the right, MSNBC and CNN to the left, basically cancelling each other out. What I think has happened is the left had gotten use of all networks being in their corner, abet more covertly than now until Fox came along. The left's monopoly was broken.
 
LowDown said:
Yes, it would be like running MAGA ads on MSNBC. Not good for the bottom line.
Click to expand...

What?

Networks are paid by advertisers. That is literally turning down income, which is bad for their bottom line.

I think what you mean is bad for viewership...
 
MSgt said:
Look at your comical response.

- Blind dismissal because it won't support your world view...
- The automatic default to declare whatever and whoever is not you a "lib"...
- Your separation of "libs" from "American"...
- The need to use immature emotion icons to express yourself...

Do you honestly not think you are better than this trash? This is pure ignorance. You can be better than this. Trump has really done a number on his flock. And all he had to do was adopt the developed theme of mindless hate and throw it back at you. With every senseless, immature, and unpresidential Tweet, he displays what he thinks of you and his office. Take control of yourself and discover what terms like "liberal" and "conservative" even mean. Tossing them around as insults does nothing but feed into your irrational emotions.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm working, so I don't really have time to properly debunk your bull**** right now, but I didn't want to let it go with zero response. The only thing comical in this exchange, are your posts.
 
Perotista said:
I'm not quite sure what you're getting at. But I'll take a stab, Fox and adding up both CNN and MSNBC have approximately the same amount of viewership. Fox caters to the right, MSNBC and CNN to the left, basically cancelling each other out. What I think has happened is the left had gotten use of all networks being in their corner, abet more covertly than now until Fox came along. The left's monopoly was broken.
Click to expand...

Well, you already suggested Fox News was being blamed among many other things. So, I'm not sure why you're confused. Fox News doesn't need to have a large viewer base to be a contributing factor to a loss. Any voter who gets swayed by the right-wing bull**** stream becomes a contributing factor.
 
slick said:
That is one repulsive guy who is sponsoring those ads. I wouldn't put those ads on my station either
just for the sake of presenting to the viewer more pleasant, comely atmosphere on TV, regardless
the hideous message is secondary to taking it off the airways.

If this guy can waste 10 million dollars for his pet project let him do it. Carly Fiorina did so twice losing to Boxer & the Trump,
probably others wasted just as much money on feeble causes. Funny stuff!
Click to expand...

Yep, libs have become caricatures of their former selves, and descended into madness. How about that other ad in Virginia which portrays Republicans trying to run down minority children with a truck. Liberalism has truly become a mental disorder, not kidding. This **** is not funny anymore.
 
Deuce said:
Well, you already suggested Fox News was being blamed among many other things. So, I'm not sure why you're confused. Fox News doesn't need to have a large viewer base to be a contributing factor to a loss. Any voter who gets swayed by the right-wing bull**** stream becomes a contributing factor.
Click to expand...

The same could be said about the left wing bull crap as you put it coming from MSNBC and CNN. It's all a matter of perception, perspective, which side one is on. None of the cable news networks are doing America any good taking sides. Be that right or left. It is my opinion that cable news has become propaganda arms of the RNC and DNC, no more, no less. One loves his side of this propaganda wing, networks, hates the other.

The days of Walter Cronkite where the news was just what happened, just the facts without a partisan lean is long gone.
 
Perotista said:
The same could be said about the left wing bull crap as you put it coming from MSNBC and CNN. It's all a matter of perception, perspective, which side one is on. None of the cable news networks are doing America any good taking sides. Be that right or left. It is my opinion that cable news has become propaganda arms of the RNC and DNC, no more, no less. One loves his side of this propaganda wing, networks, hates the other.

The days of Walter Cronkite where the news was just what happened, just the facts without a partisan lean is long gone.
Click to expand...

So why the confusion? It's a factor. How big precisely you think the factor is isn't exactly relevant.
 
Deuce said:
So why the confusion? It's a factor. How big precisely you think the factor is isn't exactly relevant.
Click to expand...

No more a factor than MSNBC and CNN is. Seems to me this is all part of the blame game for a loss last year instead of looking at the main reason for the loss. The candidate herself.
 
Perotista said:
The same could be said about the left wing bull crap as you put it coming from MSNBC and CNN. It's all a matter of perception, perspective, which side one is on. None of the cable news networks are doing America any good taking sides. Be that right or left. It is my opinion that cable news has become propaganda arms of the RNC and DNC, no more, no less. One loves his side of this propaganda wing, networks, hates the other.

The days of Walter Cronkite where the news was just what happened, just the facts without a partisan lean is long gone.
Click to expand...

Your skewed perspective is a function of your bias. A major Harvard study found that the media distribution is bimodal with peaks at center left and far right.

While CNN might do some gimmicks to exaggerate for the sake of their viewers, Fox News routinely detaches from reality altogether. Pizzagate is a great example.
 
Perotista said:
No more a factor than MSNBC and CNN is. Seems to me this is all part of the blame game for a loss last year instead of looking at the main reason for the loss. The candidate herself.
Click to expand...

You call it blaming, I call it identifying the reasons. Every time liberals point out one of the many reasons you people screech about "blaming." What, should I just pretend the Comey memo never existed?

I think your problem is actually this: "Hillary BAD" is the only "reason" you think actually exists.
 
Deuce said:
You call it blaming, I call it identifying the reasons. Every time liberals point out one of the many reasons you people screech about "blaming." What, should I just pretend the Comey memo never existed?

I think your problem is actually this: "Hillary BAD" is the only "reason" you think actually exists.
Click to expand...

It’s getting exhausting. Every criticism of Trump, and there are many with merit, is just met with some version of “libs are just butthurt that Hillary isn’t president,” as if Hillary Clinton is some exalted liberal icon. It’s intellectually dishonest on a mindmelting level.
 
Absentglare said:
Your skewed perspective is a function of your bias. A major Harvard study found that the media distribution is bimodal with peaks at center left and far right.

While CNN might do some gimmicks to exaggerate for the sake of their viewers, Fox News routinely detaches from reality altogether. Pizzagate is a great example.
Click to expand...

Regardless, the fact remains that approximately 2.4 million people watch Fox, how many voted last year? 130 plus million. Are you implying a network that only has a bit of 2 million viewership influence 130 plus million? I think all this heartburn over Fox by the left, all the heartburn by the right over CNN and MSNBC is overblown. I repeat myself, I think the advent of Fox which severs the conservative view point turned the left into a tizzy. Never before had their hold, abet mostly covert be challenged. Now Fox is responsible for every election defeat suffered by a candidate of the left. I don't think Fox or even CNN or MSNBC has that much influence.
 
Perotista said:
Regardless, the fact remains that approximately 2.4 million people watch Fox, how many voted last year? 130 plus million. Are you implying a network that only has a bit of 2 million viewership influence 130 plus million? I think all this heartburn over Fox by the left, all the heartburn by the right over CNN and MSNBC is overblown. I repeat myself, I think the advent of Fox which severs the conservative view point turned the left into a tizzy. Never before had their hold, abet mostly covert be challenged. Now Fox is responsible for every election defeat suffered by a candidate of the left. I don't think Fox or even CNN or MSNBC has that much influence.
Click to expand...

Why you always gotta make sense? You trying to make us all look bad?
 
Deuce said:
You call it blaming, I call it identifying the reasons. Every time liberals point out one of the many reasons you people screech about "blaming." What, should I just pretend the Comey memo never existed?

I think your problem is actually this: "Hillary BAD" is the only "reason" you think actually exists.
Click to expand...

call it what you want, but what about the fact Hillary let Trump out work her and out campaign her? Trump made 116 campaign stops/visits between 1 Sep through 8 Nov to Hillary's 71. Some of those 71 were fund raisers in deep blue California and New York. Hillary took several days off the campaign trail, Trump none. I think that has more to do with her defeat than Fox. Look at the deciding 3 states, Wisconsin, Trump 5 stops/visits, Hillary none, zero. Michigan, Trump 6 visits/stops to Clinton's one. Pennsylvania, Trump 8, Clinton 5. Even in delegate rich Florida, Clinton let Trump outwork her there, 13 Trump visits/stops to Clinton's 8. I don't think any other Democrat would have allowed Trump to out work and out campaign them as much as Hillary allowed trump to do.

Strategy, Trump concentrated on an electoral college map. Using resources and visits to correspond with what would get him to 270 electoral votes. Clinton was bent on expanding, topping the margin received by Obama. She tried to run up the score by winning Utah, Arizona and Florida. She didn't pay much attention to her own backyard. That cost her. I sure any other democratic candidate would have paid more attention to the states in their blue wall, especially Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin.

Trump energized his supporters, his base. Although much smaller than Hillary's, they were willing to go to the four corners of the earth for the guy. Hillary ran a rather ho hum campaign. Trump called into every morning talk show almost everyday, getting his face or words before the public. Hillary basically hid, only going on show like the view whom she knew supported her and wouldn't ask any tough questions. How many days did Hillary go between press conferences? 200 plus days?

I think Hillary took the election for granted, she sure didn't work at it. I think she ran the most inept campaign since G.H.W. Bush back in 1992. Bush in 1992 left the impression that he didn't care whether he won or lost until two weeks left in the campaign. Clinton left the impression that she was next in line and that was all that was needed. Fox compared to the above is rather meaningless.
 
Perotista said:
Regardless, the fact remains that approximately 2.4 million people watch Fox, how many voted last year? 130 plus million. Are you implying a network that only has a bit of 2 million viewership influence 130 plus million? I think all this heartburn over Fox by the left, all the heartburn by the right over CNN and MSNBC is overblown. I repeat myself, I think the advent of Fox which severs the conservative view point turned the left into a tizzy. Never before had their hold, abet mostly covert be challenged. Now Fox is responsible for every election defeat suffered by a candidate of the left. I don't think Fox or even CNN or MSNBC has that much influence.
Click to expand...

Well i see that as coming down to the difference between a particle and a wave.

Those 2.4 million people who watch Fox News are receptive to the guidance of Fox News. They may accept the perspective portrayed by Fox News, incorporate that into their own worldview, and then pass it along to the people around them. We listen to each other, and those listening experiences become formative in our own identity, which we carry around everywhere we go. I guess i'm saying that the message becomes internalized, paraphrased, and then transmitted to other people, so there's a "six degrees of Kevin Bacon" effect that amplifies those 2.4 million viewers into a greater wave of influence.

I think we would find that politics has long been, fundamentally, about word of mouth. Hillary apathy was devastating, because it made it hard for democrats to spread enthusiasm which then depressed turnout.

But to get back to your post, i don't think Fox is responsible for every election. The problem i see with Fox News viewership is that Fox News insulates its viewers from competing narratives, i think this ultimately makes us weaker, less able to respond to the critiques offered by our opponents. Self-assessment is very difficult, to "know thyself" isn't a trivial task. We have to treat our opposition with a minimum of respect and address the strengths of their arguments. Our political polarization feeds off of our attempts to counter the weakest points of each others arguments, which then feeds each sides claim that the other side is full of idiots.
 
Captain America said:
Why you always gotta make sense? You trying to make us all look bad?
Click to expand...

I think what most of those who complain about Fox or the other side, MSNBC and CNN do not realize that those politically active who watch those stations already have their minds made up whom they are going to vote for. I don't have any numbers to back that up, but I think if one was a Trump supporter, they watched Fox. If one was a Clinton supporter, they watched CNN or MSNBC. Conservatives will watch the network that most reflects their views, liberals will watch the network/s that reflect their views. I highly doubt too many liberal are avid Fox watchers and vice versa, conservatives watching MSNBC.

the bottom line is conservatives have Fox which is really biased to the right, liberals have MSNBC, CNN and PBS which are really biased to the left. Then there is the three major over the air networks which are covertly bias towards the left. Not blatantly biased one way or the other like the cable news channels. That's the way I see it.
 
Absentglare said:
Well i see that as coming down to the difference between a particle and a wave.

Those 2.4 million people who watch Fox News are receptive to the guidance of Fox News. They may accept the perspective portrayed by Fox News, incorporate that into their own worldview, and then pass it along to the people around them. We listen to each other, and those listening experiences become formative in our own identity, which we carry around everywhere we go. I guess i'm saying that the message becomes internalized, paraphrased, and then transmitted to other people, so there's a "six degrees of Kevin Bacon" effect that amplifies those 2.4 million viewers into a greater wave of influence.

I think we would find that politics has long been, fundamentally, about word of mouth. Hillary apathy was devastating, because it made it hard for democrats to spread enthusiasm which then depressed turnout.

But to get back to your post, i don't think Fox is responsible for every election. The problem i see with Fox News viewership is that Fox News insulates its viewers from competing narratives, i think this ultimately makes us weaker, less able to respond to the critiques offered by our opponents. Self-assessment is very difficult, to "know thyself" isn't a trivial task. We have to treat our opposition with a minimum of respect and address the strengths of their arguments. Our political polarization feeds off of our attempts to counter the weakest points of each others arguments, which then feeds each sides claim that the other side is full of idiots.
Click to expand...

I understand the wave effect. How much, who knows? If Fox has that wave effect, so too do the other networks. Not as much as they have less viewers. Even taking the wave effect into consideration, you still are talking approximately 2.4 million. Basically the same as watch CNN and MSNBC. then there is the other 25 million or so who watch the over the air channel news.

Perhaps I accepted the fact that Fox is right and CNN and MSNBC is left. At least in their nighttime political talk shows. I pretty much give them equal influence. I'll start viewing watching Fox, when a commercial comes on switch to CNN. When a commercial comes on CNN, I go back to Fox. if both Fox and CNN has commercials at the same time, then I go to MSNBC. All three having commercials, then it is to ESPN. I only watch for around 30 minutes during the day and stay completely away from their talk shows. Way too many people think those nighttime political talk shows are news or reporting the news when they are nothing more than political propaganda.

Yes, I too think Hillary lost because of her apathy, her lack of hard work and campaigning. I posted that thought numerous times with figures to back it up. It wasn't Fox that lost that election for her, but Hillary herself. There no way in Hades that she should have lost, but she did. Trump didn't win it in my opinion, Hillary lost it. Apathy is a good word, so too is running an inept campaign.

I also think the Democrats should stop blaming Fox, the Russians, everything else for the loss in 2016 and look at their candidate. A candidate that was just as much disliked by America as a whole as Trump was. Then look at the campaign itself, its lack of energy and lack of work that the candidate put forth vs. the amount Trump did. Then I'd forgot about it and figure out a way to come up with a better candidate for 2020. I'd but that on the back burner though and start now concentrating on the 2018 midterms and congressional candidates to challenge the Republicans incumbents that has greater appeal to the masses to include independents, the non-affiliated.

Stop being 100% anti-Trump and come up with a vision, ideas, possible solutions to our problems, stand for something other than being anti-Trump. That might be the Democrats biggest obstacle. They can't get over Clinton's loss and being 100% anti-Trump without standing for anything else. When asked this question, Do you think the Democratic Party currently stands for something, or just stands against Trump? 52% of all Americans think the Democrats are nothing more than the anti-Trump Party and doesn't stand for anything else, no substance, no core values.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/page...uestion_18939.xml?uuid=TwsZhmnbEeeUq1sfD_RZ3w
 
Last edited:
Perotista said:
I understand the wave effect. How much, who knows? If Fox has that wave effect, so too do the other networks. Not as much as they have less viewers. Even taking the wave effect into consideration, you still are talking approximately 2.4 million. Basically the same as watch CNN and MSNBC. then there is the other 25 million or so who watch the over the air channel news.

Perhaps I accepted the fact that Fox is right and CNN and MSNBC is left. At least in their nighttime political talk shows. I pretty much give them equal influence. I'll start viewing watching Fox, when a commercial comes on switch to CNN. When a commercial comes on CNN, I go back to Fox. if both Fox and CNN has commercials at the same time, then I go to MSNBC. All three having commercials, then it is to ESPN. I only watch for around 30 minutes during the day and stay completely away from their talk shows. Way too many people think those nighttime political talk shows are news or reporting the news when they are nothing more than political propaganda.

Yes, I too think Hillary lost because of her apathy, her lack of hard work and campaigning. I posted that thought numerous times with figures to back it up. It wasn't Fox that lost that election for her, but Hillary herself. There no way in Hades that she should have lost, but she did. Trump didn't win it in my opinion, Hillary lost it. Apathy is a good word, so too is running an inept campaign.

I also think the Democrats should stop blaming Fox, the Russians, everything else for the loss in 2016 and look at their candidate. A candidate that was just as much disliked by America as a whole as Trump was. Then look at the campaign itself, its lack of energy and lack of work that the candidate put forth vs. the amount Trump did. Then I'd forgot about it and figure out a way to come up with a better candidate for 2020. I'd but that on the back burner though and start now concentrating on the 2018 midterms and congressional candidates to challenge the Republicans incumbents that has greater appeal to the masses to include independents, the non-affiliated.

Stop being 100% anti-Trump and come up with a vision, ideas, possible solutions to our problems, stand for something other than being anti-Trump. That might be the Democrats biggest obstacle. They can't get over Clinton's loss and being 100% anti-Trump without standing for anything else. When asked this question, Do you think the Democratic Party currently stands for something, or just stands against Trump? 52% of all Americans think the Democrats are nothing more than the anti-Trump Party and doesn't stand for anything else, no substance, no core values.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/page...uestion_18939.xml?uuid=TwsZhmnbEeeUq1sfD_RZ3w
Click to expand...

Well said, Pero! :thumbs:
 
Absentglare said:
Well i see that as coming down to the difference between a particle and a wave.

Those 2.4 million people who watch Fox News are receptive to the guidance of Fox News. They may accept the perspective portrayed by Fox News, incorporate that into their own worldview, and then pass it along to the people around them. We listen to each other, and those listening experiences become formative in our own identity, which we carry around everywhere we go. I guess i'm saying that the message becomes internalized, paraphrased, and then transmitted to other people, so there's a "six degrees of Kevin Bacon" effect that amplifies those 2.4 million viewers into a greater wave of influence.

I think we would find that politics has long been, fundamentally, about word of mouth. Hillary apathy was devastating, because it made it hard for democrats to spread enthusiasm which then depressed turnout.

But to get back to your post, i don't think Fox is responsible for every election. The problem i see with Fox News viewership is that Fox News insulates its viewers from competing narratives, i think this ultimately makes us weaker, less able to respond to the critiques offered by our opponents. Self-assessment is very difficult, to "know thyself" isn't a trivial task. We have to treat our opposition with a minimum of respect and address the strengths of their arguments. Our political polarization feeds off of our attempts to counter the weakest points of each others arguments, which then feeds each sides claim that the other side is full of idiots.
Click to expand...

Well thought out. You could probably add that it was evidenced on FaceBook, various internet forums and websites and even right here at Debate Politics. For as surely as the sun comes up, yesterday's FOXNews talking point was today's rightwing position and stance on just about any given topic of the day. Like loyal little drones.

The ripple effect of a couple million sheeple could be significant.
 
polgara said:
Well said, Pero! :thumbs:
Click to expand...

Thanks Pol. I think political parties today get too caught up in their partisan political hackery. That as time has gone by the two major parties represent the views of less and less Americans.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom