• 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!

S.C. Gov. Haley appoints Rep. Tim Scott to U.S. Senate

X Factor said:
Just out of curiosity, do you condone or condemn such remarks?
Click to expand...

I find them a characteristic of who says them. Which isn't a good characteristic.
 
Thrilla said:
aww shush up.. he's like your lil twin brother...that votes GOP instead of commie.
Click to expand...

I wish he were. You don't get in trouble for beating up your brother so much. lol
 
hfd said:
Just trying to educate you. He and Thurmond were brethren segregationists. And please, no need for vulgarity. Makes you appear juvenile.
Click to expand...

Oh heavens me. I didn't mean to offend you so. If you intend to "educate" people, perhaps you could start your own thread when you want to go this far off topic?
 
Hatuey said:
Nielsen, can beg all they want. They're a dying company trying to keep up with the times. Their sample is too small and their demographics are an insult to advertisement companies like my own. Simply put, they're as relevant to the advertisement world as Twitter. Facebook provides far more information and isn't bogged down by things like sample size etc.
Click to expand...

You have to be kidding me

Twitter Is Growing Faster Than Facebook In The US [STATS] - AllTwitter

emarketer-twitter-facebook-growth.gif


You're emotional arguments are seriously lacking. You're also assuming these twitter users don't have Facebook accounts or something. We get it man. Paint the entire Tea Party as racist. Dismiss an orgy of data which clearly shows the real racism is on the left towards Blacks who "aren't down with the cause" just like RG3.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...-on-rg3-hes-kind-of-black-but-hes-not-really/
 
Somerville said:
How did you create this list? I found nothing in any of those threads that could be considered racist. In fact most of the threads never even mention this clown from South Carolina.

More than half of the tweeters are people of colour
Click to expand...

You're beclowning yourself

Stop posting to save yourself further embarrassment

They can call him a "House Nword" because they are black? Really?

A new low. Even for you.
 
Bronson said:
You have to be kidding me

Twitter Is Growing Faster Than Facebook In The US [STATS] - AllTwitter

emarketer-twitter-facebook-growth.gif


You're emotional arguments are seriously lacking. You're also assuming these twitter users don't have Facebook accounts or something. We get it man. Paint the entire Tea Party as racist. Dismiss an orgy of data which clearly shows the real racism is on the left towards Blacks who "aren't down with the cause"
Click to expand...

Hmmm, here, I'll lay the cards out. I work for an advertisement company so unlike you - I actually know what I'm talking about. Twitter is geared towards a younger audience - mostly those within the age groups of 18-25. That said, Twitter's growth is a mirror image of other youth geared social media sites like MySpace and Hi5. Each had the same kind of gigantic boom which fell under eventually as there was nowhere for the platform to go. Now, even your website admits that Facebook has gotten all it can out of the US.

At the end of 2011, Facebook had 133 million US users; Twitter had 24 million. There’s still plenty of room to grow for the little micro-blogging network that could, while the giant Facebook has pretty much saturated the US market.
Click to expand...

Because of this, it's only natural that Twitter's growth outpace Facebook's in the US market. However, when examined from a larger perspective and not your myopic view of the world the numbers are quite different:

facebook-myspace-twitter-growth-visitors.jpg


Now here is Twitter's 'growth'

SOTjanuary.png


One giant burst in 2009 with nothing but drops since. In essence, while Facebook's user database grows by the millions on a monthly basis, Twitter's new user base is in heavy decline. This is due to the fact that Facebook doesn't target youth or use close contact to celebrities gimmicks in order to attract an audience. It uses the very real need to get in touch with family members, friends. It's a pretty simple formula but one which transcends the more immature gimmicks of younger websites.

Seriously, do you know anything about marketing?
 
Last edited:
Bronson? Come on. I haven't flexed my job experience muscles since I accurately predicted the fall of Glenn Beck from FOX News much to the chagrin of Conservatives like yourself. Here it is:

Hatuey said:
ROFL more proof that you have no idea how ratings/sponsorships actually work. What's best is that you just contradicted yourself. Sponsorship rates decrease as space becomes harder to fill in. As major companies refuse to sponsor a program that is not only hemorrhaging viewers but also alienating millions of potential costumers, smaller companies follow suit. By default this would mean News Corps has to lower its rates and loses profit because of Beck.

If Beck's ratings were an attraction to companies, they wouldn't drop him right and left, they'd support him. However, they're not. Why?

But let's say for a second your answer was coherent and you understood what it is you're talking about. Numbers are still not important. Demographics are. Demographics are far more important than actual number of viewers. If Glenn Beck had 900K viewers in the 18-49 age groups he'd be far profitable than somebody who has 2.1 million viewers in other demographics. Let's just say that by some miracle Glenn Beck had 2.1 million viewers in the 18-49. This is from 3.1 million just a year ago. Would you consider that a net loss in profit? Or net gain? Now factor in the dozens of sponsors he's lost in just over a year. Now factor in the sponsors who pull out from your network because of that show.

Still think ratings are all that important?

I just ignored the rest of your gibberish and red herrings.
Click to expand...

Here is me predicting Glenn Beck's fall from television a full 3 months before it happened. You sure you wanna go up against me on this particular issue?
 
pbrauer said:
Who will the blacks vote for, the Republicans or the Democrats?
Click to expand...

They will vote to stay on the plantation, and hope for the free stuff.

aka: Overwhelmingly Democrat.
 
Should be interesting to see if he makes a name for himself there and manages to get elected once his seat actually comes up.

It's too bad, but typical, that some will try to stereotype him and insult him based on his race. However....handful of liberal/democratic racists and ignorant people saying prejudiced things on twitter and other outlets are no more evidence of a collective view point of all on that side than when the same kind of thing happens from people on the right. Just because so many on the left are gleefully quick to proclaim the Right as racists / against black people /etc based on a smattering of outside the norm comments doesn't make the action correct nor justify doing it towards their side. It's ignorant when it's done to in this type of situation towards the right and it's equally ignorant doing it to the left.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom