|
I hope we can have a little discussion of the online portion of the right wing media empire in the U.S. The websites of the various broadcast entities we've already discussed (Rush, Beck etc.) Drudgereport Breitbart.com and affiliated sites Dailycaller American Thinker American Spectator Foxnews I'm surrounded by righties and when I pull up browser histories of work computers I often see stuff like the above in there. Throw in also: Foxnation "bloggish" sites like freerepublic.com etc. Edit: Websites are the one political media where I think you can make a good argument that the left has as much firepower or possibly even more than the right. Zwabu fucked around with this message at 02:57 on Oct 20, 2012 |
#
¿
Oct 20, 2012 02:54
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 03:57 |
|
|
The Michael J. Fox thing was a campaign ad for Claire McCaskill in her race for the U.S. Senate in Missouri which was very close, Fox made the ad because of the distinction between the positions on stem cell research between McCaskill and her GOP opponent, so that's why Limbaugh was trashing Fox. The irony is that by coming off as such an rear end, Limbaugh amplified the ad's effectiveness by about a million-fold and, I think, helped McCaskill get elected by a significant degree. I don't know that the issue and Limbaugh's role in it was specifically polled to see what effect he had, though. Edit - Fox ad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9WB_PXjTBo Limbaugh: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpFC9uziVhE Zwabu fucked around with this message at 01:22 on Oct 28, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2012 01:19
|
|
|
Uncle Wemus posted:How do the media figures like the ones in the OP get started? They dont seem to be journalists so are they just right-wing letters-to-the-editor writers who get attention? Who or what made Rush? Glenn Beck was literally a morning zoo-type radio shock jock. Somehow he got transformed into a right wing political media figure on the way to getting hired by CNN to do right wing commentary, I have no idea if he even did any kind of political show prior to CNN. I don't think Rush's early starts in radio were necessarily political, he was trying to do sports and such, not sure how the transition to a politically oriented show happened. Edit: Of note, many of the right wing media darlings, if not most, don't even have a college education. This goes for Rush, Hannity, and Beck. Folks like Ann Coulter who actually have degrees from well regarded schools are the outliers.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2012 01:51
|
|
|
TwoQuestions posted:These people are proud not to think, and that's the scariest part. The proudly self-applied label of "dittohead" and all that "megadittoes" bullshit pretty much tells the story. All the "Great American" poo poo on Hannity is pretty nauseating too. You, Cheeto-eating morbidly obese angry racist redneck, are a Great American for espousing similar views to my own! No, YOU are the Great American! This speaks to the mentality, I can't believe most people aren't insulted by this, you don't need to actually DO anything brave or noteworthy, just by being in my tribe, you are not only a good, but GREAT American!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2012 22:48
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghH9Cl-Pj60 Here's Rush Limbaugh pouring out some bile against Chris Christie for daring make the President look good. Notable things: -Rush's voice sounds really odd to me, not like his normal. Plus he seems to kind of lose the thread a little towards the end, more than even usual for people stumbling on their words a bit on broadcast radio. Studio at home, wonder if dude is hopped up on the goofballs again. -He says Bloomberg endorsed Romney, when he in fact endorsed Obama. Fox News always carried this incorrect news, I wonder if Rush got this from Fox or vice versa? -Funny that the "Daily Rushbo" youtube channel only shows the thinner Rush pictures. I'm pretty sure he's back on the "fat" part of his fat/thin cycles.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2012 03:59
|
|
|
Typical Pubbie posted:WHERE IS DICK MORRIS? Here he is!: http://www.dickmorris.com/why-i-was-wrong/ C'mon everyone: http://www.talkstreamlive.com/program/rush_limbaugh/
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2012 18:10
|
|
|
Republicans posted:Listening to Limbaugh for the first time since Obama won in 2008 and sweet gently caress his constant snorting, swallowing and smacking his lips into the mic is grossing me out. Lots of tears over the positive exit-polling for Obama and his policies. Expect a huge ramp-up of the "makers vs. takers" narrative in coming days. I was trying to figure out whether he was gonna go full on "election stolen" conspiracy with this exit poll stuff, or "America now filled with Obamaphone stupids". I'm actually a bit relieved that it seems to be the latter.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2012 18:20
|
|
|
Rush sounds remarkably chipper this morning, I suspect that despite any happy talk that he had an idea what the real odds were going into election night. It is interesting that he is actually praising Romney to the skies, talking about what a great guy/good man he is and how his ideal Mormon family represents the American ideal. I expected Mitt to get immediately savaged by the whole right wing media crew, so this development is a bit unexpected. Now that the election is over I am really curious whether Fox will abruptly drop the Benghazi thing that no one else but right wingers care about, or continue to flog it as the next Fast and Furious impeachment bait. Edit: In the immediate post-election broadcast in 2008 he seemed completely flummoxed and not to know exactly what to say, a big contrast to today. Zwabu fucked around with this message at 18:38 on Nov 7, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2012 18:36
|
|
|
Rush: "Our shabby last second pandering efforts to parade Condi Rice and Mia Love didn't counteract our decades of open vicious hate against brown skinned people, WTF? WHY DOESN'T IT WORK"
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2012 19:14
|
|
|
Okay for those who have continued to listen to Rush today, earlier it seemed like he was veering away from straight up "we wuz robbed" in favor of "country now full of dumb Obamaphone negroes who outnumber us", but just a moment ago before this current break he went with the really loud emphasis of "either we outnumbered OR THE BIGGEST ELECTION THEFT IN HISTORY HAS OCCURRED, one or the other". So is he "just trying to ask questions" and play all cute with this poo poo?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2012 20:34
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:He's just trying to increase ratings and count his money. I seriously doubt he even cares what happened last night. Yeah, show is kind of rambling and no clear message in my opinion. You'll never hear anything out of these right wing shows, ultimately, that doesn't amount to "we are right and must never abandon TRUE CONSERVATIVE principles", "libs suck", so after a big election loss I'm always curious if there's ever any "we need to do things different" but that would go against those other messages, so it just winds up being a muddled mess.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2012 20:52
|
|
|
That hour or so of Fox News theater that followed when Rove challenged the Ohio result is some of the best live TV performance art I've seen in a while. Is it Hannity on the radio now or someone subbing in? His voice sounds different from the last time I heard him.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2012 22:48
|
|
|
I gorged on right wing media yesterday, listening to Rush, checking out every right wing site I could think of (Daily Caller, American Spectator, National Review Online, Drudge etc. - couldn't even bring myself to go to Hot Air though). The emerging talking points seem to be: -The Takers are now in the majority, that's why we lost (sort of changing the "47%" to 51% instead) -"It's not your Mom and Dad's traditional (WHITE) America anymore (Dick Morris, Bill O'Reilly and others). They outnumber us now." -Romney lost because he wasn't a True Conservative and didn't get True Conservatives to turn out for him as much as needed. -Romney ran a virtually flawless campaign and did everything he needed to, you goddam True Conservatives hosed us by not turning out for him because My Ideological Purity -Romney had all the mojo and momentum but lost it when he didn't attack Obama on Benghazi, WHY DIDN'T HE DO THAT (this is like a ubiquitous talking point now, I heard it first from Krauthammer on Fox's election coverage but it's everywhere now) I didn't see any ideas or strategies on how to avoid such an outcome aside from a general consensus that nominating drooling rapechat trogolydytes who say embarrassing things should be avoided. You do hear the occasional "well next time maybe we should try picking a TRUE CONSERVATIVE" but I don't think that is being said with much conviction. They may yet talk themselves back into that one especially if they do well in 2014. There is a consensus that Romney was definitely the best available candidate. Virtually no one is seriously arguing that Gingrich or Santorum would have done as well. No one know what to do about the big issue of nonwhite and especially Hispanic voters representing a larger and larger share of voters in each successive election, and voting overwhelmingly for Democrats. There are the usual petulant expressions, "why don't they fall for our token black/Latinos" (Rush), but a lot of people seem to realize that the old canard that "Latinos are Catholic and therefore socially conservative, they SHOULD be conservatives by right" is basically pretty hollow and doesn't hold up to any scrutiny of real world phenomena. I see no admission anywhere that the Sheriff Joe anti-immigration rhetoric in GOP primaries, along with "show us your papers" laws, is pretty drat racist, in a a way that is not subtle at all, and that this must be curbed.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2012 15:03
|
|
|
I think "momentum" as measurable in polling already had returned to Obama before Sandy, possibly as a result of good debate performances after #1, but Sandy still had a big effect in a number of ways. -Ate up most of the news during the last week right up until the weekend. Thus preventing any stories, Romney attacks, Benghazi or whatever, gaining any traction before voting. -Romney had to basically stand down viciously attacking Obama during the immediate storm period else look like a total tool. -Obama could score extra points in his own favor just being President and doing President things with storm relief. With or without Christie's help this would have been a plus for obama. -Correspondingly, there wasn't anything comparable Romney could do, not being the President or even any kind of public servant. Collecting WalMart corn just looked silly and "wannabe". I think Obama had it even before the storm, but I would never say the storm did not have a major impact. It kind of froze out any chance of Romney coming back. It's like your football team is down a touchdown with a few minutes to go and you have the ball, and some ruling causes all the time to go off the clock but the last 5 seconds, and now the other team has the ball too. Game over.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2012 19:26
|
|
|
This is awesome because the next step will be ObamaClaus image macros on Facebook and ObamaClaus T-shirts sold from the Limbaugh website and you can automatically spot who is a douchebag from 2 miles away.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2012 19:43
|
|
|
Nimmy posted:I posted some disparaging remarks about my fellow catholics in the election thread a few days ago because I always thought we were mostly good people and not divisive moral majoritarians. This has made the news, or at least the Atlanta Journal Constitution's blog (and the College President is awesome): http://blogs.ajc.com/get-schooled-blog/2012/11/10/ann-coulter-vs-the-jesuits-a-college-invite-is-rescinded/?cxntfid=blogs_get_schooled_blog
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2012 04:13
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:There are a few distinct camps of folks who listen to this right wing stuff. The true believers, who run to it for information and who can't form an opinion of their own practically on anything until they are told what to think about it. Then there's the people like most of us in this thread who just tune in for the insanity, the comedic value of it all and to generally keep tabs on it and the occasional listener who generally can't be bothered with such things that tunes in once a year and is shocked at what's being said and that so many people believe it. Funny that you should mention this. I created a Twitter account a few days before the election just to harvest bitter GOP tears, and was not disappointed. I put every right wing mofo I could find on there and it was glorious, although now that the election is over I instantly have no use for Twitter once again. But just looking through some right winger's Twitter page shortly after the election, I saw the guy (some fifth string reject I never even heard of, just wound up on my feed because of @RepublicanTears and #tcot) commenting to some other right winger that he had a whole bunch of people subscribe to his feed right before the election and now they were rapidly dropping off, and he couldn't figure out why anyone would do this.  I did watch Fox News coverage of the election from around the time the PA/WI/MI dominoes began to fall all the way through the concession and victory speeches, and it was really glorious, incredible TV, and I mean that completely unironically. The Rove meltdown over Ohio and the Meghyn Kelly high heel walk down to the nerd box is of course a classic moment in and of itself, but the whole thing was pretty incredible, from the way a funeral pall descended over the whole crew around the halfway point (Cavuto was seriously almost in tears), to the broadcast crew kind of not knowing what to do with themselves from the time of the Rove outburst to the concession speech, to watching people like the mummified corpse of Krauthammer aggressively begin delegitimizing Obama's victory before the guy even began his speech. It was really magical. 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2012 01:40
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:I'm dragging this from the election thread, but Hannity's back to Swifboating John Kerry again. This. This right here is what angers me so much about these people. The right is like a has-been band that is stuck playing their songs from the 80's, except now they're playing at county fairs and weddings instead of giant arenas.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2012 20:45
|
|
|
Blastedhellscape posted:I love how her entire gimmick is that she's a young female atheist who just happens to agree with everything old religious conservative dudes say. The first time I ever saw her she was selling one of her books on the Bill Maher show and as far as I could tell the entire premise was "As a young female atheist I believe that while Christian male conservatives are the most oppressed people on earth." See also: just about every nonwhite right wing media person, including the elected ones like LTC ALLEN WEST. See, if you're the black right winger, then you can get on Fox and talk about how blacks love being enslaved on the Democrat Plantation and only be about 90 percent the rear end in a top hat Rush Limbaugh would be saying the same thing. Likewise if you're the Indian right winger like D'Souza you can talk about how Barack Obama is the anti-colonial President. If you are the Asian right winger like Malkin, you can talk about how internment of the Japanese was really great. If you happen to be female like noted Undead Harpy Ann Coulter, you can talk about how women shouldn't be allowed to vote. Gravy for everyone!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2012 01:44
|
|
|
Spacedad posted:He's basically a walking caricature of 'willfully ignorant and over-privileged college republican.' Except for the part where he went to college.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2012 23:18
|
|
|
beatlegs posted:Yeah Olbermann was a bit of a blowhard but he was literally the first mainstream commentator who had the guts to say anything critical of Bush post-Iraq. Before that no one in the mainstream press would have dared do such a thing. He broke the ice and made it easier for others to be hired who actually asked hard questions about Bush's horrible policies and for that alone he should be respected. This, times a thousand. This is the significance of Keith Olbermann, is that he was the first when no one else dared to be. You have to remember or transport yourself back in time to the "Dixie-Chicking" era of post 9/11 America where the Bush Administration actively promoted the idea that anyone critical of Bush or the war in Iraq should shut the gently caress up and be afraid of them. It took Olbermann and Cindy Sheehan to crack that facade, and there were plenty after them but they were the first. I didn't really care for Keith's polemic screed style either but he has to get credit for being first.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2012 05:16
|
|
|
Sydney Bottocks posted:Here's a news item for those of us who've wondered how Fox News might react towards a guest who opines that they might not actually be "fair and balanced": Ahahaha I think this actually happened while I was at work, I heard part of this in the background but wasn't paying attention. Definitely the little bit at the beginning and what the female broadcaster says about Cyber Monday at the end. It would be great if more of Fox's guests would call them out on the ridiculous overhype of Benghazi like this. Soon you'd be left with Hannity and Neil Cavuto interviewing each other.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2012 21:57
|
|
|
Re: Fox/Ricks kerfuffle - It's amazing that Fox insists on this petulant garbage about the secret apology instead of just realizing they were owned, letting it go and not doing anything to call yet more attention to how badly their guest owned them. They are really thin skinned despite the number one in the ratings thing. I can't even imagine what will happen to them if MSNBC or anyone else ever begins overtaking them in a big way. I seem to recall other instances of Fox pushing the snark like this in the recent past being posted in these threads too.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2012 20:12
|
|
|
Zuhzuhzombie!! posted:'Pressure is building.' This seems to be the new thing on Fox. Not only droning endlessly on Benghazi, but each day something "looks like it's going to take this scandal to a whole new level". Just walking by TVs with Fox News on them briefly during the last day or two gave me this knowledge.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2012 03:45
|
|
|
With respect to Benghazi-gate, it would be necessary to know what is actually being alleged amidst all the sound and fury. Is it -Obama didn't secure our embassy/consulate -He watched from his throne of skulls while brave Americans died, and personally prevented troops from going to help, perhaps he even personally shot them -He didn't KNOW it was a terrorist attack for almost two weeks -He KNEW it was a terrorist attack for almost two weeks but LIED to the American public. Why, Obama, why did you lie to us? Let's see what we've got for Obama Administration scandals so far. -Fast and Furious -Van Jones something something -New Black Panther-gate. Holder won't investigate any of HIS PEOPLE -Benghazi-gate All trumped up Fox News BS compared to real policy issues where there are legitimate grounds for critique. Am I missing any?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2012 02:01
|
|
|
Warchicken posted:Forget have a beer with, Obama is a president I could smoke a blunt with. They really missed out on a chance to raise money for the campaign. "Contribute a thousand dollars and join the Choom Gang for a special ceremony in the White House rec room!"
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2012 19:52
|
|
|
Walter posted:So am I correct in assuming that the people who don't understand marginal tax rates believe that the way it works is, once you hit a higher bracket, all of your earnings are taxed at that higher rate? Even if you make enough money to be affected, if you just plug your numbers into TurboTax or the equivalent and it files your return and tells you your tax rate, there's no way to know how marginal rates work if you don't look into it. Most people are not plugging different numbers into their tax program to see how their taxes would work out if they made 250K PLUS ONE dollar versus 249,999 dollars. And I'd venture to say most people don't bother to research the topic.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2012 12:20
|
|
|
Butt Soup Barnes posted:I don't watch much cable news but I thought over the past year or so MSNBC has been working to cement itself as a much more liberal/progressive network. Yes. Morning Joe isn't representative at all, he's the outlier on the network. The whole afternoon/evening lineup, from Ed Schulz to Sharpton, O'Donnell, Matthews and Maddow are varying shades of progressive/liberal. There has been a big change within the last year or so to make the network much more overtly partisan for Democrats/liberals, possibly gearing up to the election. I think MSNBC took a look at what Fox was doing, said "hey, half the country is NOT into all this right wing poo poo, let's grab the market on the other side of that since CNN is going crazy trying to be Fox Lite." From a business point of view it's a smart move. They grabbed a market that was totally ignored by other networks. CNN is stupid because no matter how much they try to have the Erick Erickson types on there, right wingers are always going to want their name brand FOX Kool-Aid, and will always call CNN the Communist/Clinton News Network because they aren't even going to bother watching it to see that CNN is trying to pander to them. The time when MSNBC had Savage and Imus on TV might as well be a thousand years ago, they have completely changed their philosophy to try and grab the liberal part of the market and brand themselves that way. They are being successful at it. Fox doesn't even have a token liberal show like Morning Joe is a token conservative show for MSNBC. Their viewers want to have that poo poo on 24 hours a day and they don't want their Hannity buzz getting killed by some liberal egghead. Hell they don't even have Colmes as a token regular punching bag on the Hannity show anymore.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2012 00:51
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Olbermann didn't pioneer poo poo, nor was he courageous. The fact that he could get on TV and bloviate pointlessly, with as little rigor as Michael Savage, was a sign that people were utterly sick of Bush and his wars. He was catering to a new market, purely as entertainment. Not a single person was enlightened by him. I disagree wholeheartedly. I don't know how much news you watched when Olbermann started with his anti-Bush coments on-air, but Bush had the entirety of American media cowed. No one dared say poo poo. Even people who would make a negative comment in a nonsustained way, like the Dixie Chicks, had their careers ruined. Savage and company don't count because they were on Bush's team. Olbermann risked his broadcasting career to speak out. Being the first was hugely important in that environment. And on a major channel. There were no Maddows or Ed Schultz's or anyone else doing that on TV. Maybe someone eventually would have, but it might have been another year or more. Most people landing a gig on a major cable channel wouldn't dare risk their paycheck and career advancement. I love Maddow but what she's doing is infinitely easier than Keith speaking out first against an administration that had made it clear they were keeping their eye on everyone and had it out for any media critics.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2012 22:33
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:I was definitely watching news to the point of scandal fatigue back then, and as far as I can recall this was the breakout moment: Here's a longer list, with dates and links to MSNBC: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Keith_Olbermann%27s_special_comments
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2012 22:59
|
|
|
Sick_Boy posted:Why didn’t whites vote and why didn’t we all spot it sooner? I don't understand this passage at all (aside from the part where he tries to duck any responsibility for being wrong). Because of Sandy, there could be no polling. But there WAS a poll after Sandy, by Gallup. Which was wrong by 4 points or so. What?  Sick_Boy posted:There is a very good story to be told about Bain and it was masterfully captured in an ad produced by Romney media guru Stuart Stevens but was aired for only limited times and there was no follow up. Had that very ad been run more, Romney would, in my opinion, have been elected president! I wondered about this very thing throughout the campaign. Since Romney's main argument for President was based on his private sector experience (since the current GOP environment prevents him claiming credit for Romneycare), which boiled down to Bain, I figured there HAD to be some kind of positive stories about good things that came out of Bain, and the fact that we pretty much didn't hear about this, even from Romney's campaign, was pretty damning. Implying there wasn't much of anything except arcane finance maneuvers, loading up companies with debt and stripping the copper wire out of their walls. I wonder if this ad is on Youtube.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2012 00:55
|
|
|
Pope Guilty posted:I heard good things about Margaret Cho and tried watching one of her videos on Netflix. It was pretty much this for 90 minutes. Cho is uneven. Her early stuff is great, when she dwells in strident politics it is not good, plus the jokes about her mom get repetitive. Watch "I'm the One That I Want", I think it's really good, if you don't like that you probably need not see anything else of hers. At her best she has verbal, almost poet like gifts like a George Carlin.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2012 16:34
|
|
|
Does Alex Jones trash Romney or George W. Bush on his show, or is his wingnuttery strictly reserved for Obama and other Democrats?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2012 03:37
|
|
|
Vladimir Poutine posted:It's a very typical reaction for an Australian. Another right-wing Australian actually dropped an  Well played, well played.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2012 15:23
|
|
on that post:
|
Sydney Bottocks posted:With that said, of course nothing remotely like that is ever going to happen, for precisely the reason you stated. You're 1000% correct in that Murdoch is perfectly happy to let Fox News be what it is as long as it makes him money, and random tweets aside, Murdoch knows that if his network's talking heads suddenly started advocating for more stringent gun laws, it'd be the beginning of the end for Fox News. I am reminded that after the second presidential debate in this last campaign, Fox News deleted an entire 4 minute answer from Romney on gun control from its transcript, citing "audio gap", where Romney said, among other things: Mitt Romney posted:We, of course, don’t want to have automatic weapons, and that’s already illegal in this country to have automatic weapons. It was left as "audio gap" overnight until the story started to blow up on blogs, then it was quickly and unceremoniously added back in without any acknowledgment of error. Don't wanna hurt Romney with the gun wingnuts now!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2012 17:23
|
|
|
Butt Soup Barnes posted:IIRC it was found that all the other networks had the same audio gap in their transcription for a while, so it's more likely that the transcribing service made the error and all of the networks pulled from the same source. I would be interested in any citation attesting to this. I've been looking and see nothing that refers to this in reference to anyone but Fox News.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2012 01:04
|
|
|
 The best part is the constipated look on the hosts' faces that say "HOHOHO i can't believe we're pimping this lame poo poo YET AGAIN those solid gold Lamborghinis better be worth it".
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2012 03:28
|
|
|
The WorldNetDaily argument is idiotic, but it's about Natural Born Citizens, which is the requirement to be POTUS, not being a citizen of the U.S. So Arnold Schwarzenegger is a citizen with all the associated rights, but not eligible to be POTUS. It's idiotic because the Natural Born condition has never been defined with precision. If it's so clear cut an issue as they now claim, how come no one knew this four years ago?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2013 23:08
|
|
|
radical meme posted:I listened to Hannity on the drive home and am listening to Levin now and I was intrigued by how, after trashing the fiscal cliff deal and attacking Boehner and McConnell, they both predicted that U.S. debt would be downgraded over the coming budget battle. Of course, it would all be Obama's fault. They are already greasing the wheels for the GOP to shut the government down in two months. See, here's the thing though. It's been this kind of stuff for the last four years running. Even most GOP voters aren't Koch Bros. level super billionaires who can indulge fits of political pique while Rome, and the markets, burn. 8 years is a hell of a long time to let the economy be in the shitter to stick it to Obama. Whether they are sympathetic with the cause or not, if intransigence and debt ceiling shenanigans cause a market crash and any possible recovery to die in the crib, the country as a whole WILL assign the blame to the GOP. Aren't there devastating political consequences for this at SOME point? I live among and work with a huge tribe of GOP voters who are probably largely in the "one to a few million bucks net worth, make a lot but under a million dollars yearly" group who, while fairly secure economically, will be seriously adversely effected by a market crash or continued weak economy. They no longer have the option or luxury of trying to get Obama out of office, and I seriously doubt they will benefit from continued lovely economy for four more years much less a full blown crash. If at all rational they will want things to recover just for their own families, businesses and retirement accounts to do better. I will be watching very closely their reaction if their own party insists on driving the train off the rails in a couple of months.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2013 00:52
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 4, 2024 03:57 |
|
|
Spacedad posted:Karl Rove (and his underlings) and a group of paid of liars (who later of course fully admitted to lying) called the "swift boat veterens for truth" basically attacked Kerry over his war record, trying to make him look like he got his purple hearts wrongly through lazy half-assed service. They were doing this because they knew that it would look bad for a purple heart vet to go up against a national guard "Rich Man's Son" draft-dodger like George W (who hardly even showed up for national guard service) on the subject of war experience. Oh but you know he was never REALLY on vacation because they have cell phones and secure satellite uplinks at the Crawford ranch! *trashes Obama for every dinner out with his wife* The Swiftboat thing wouldn't have been half so infuriating if George Junior wasn't such an obvious piece of poo poo and if it hadn't worked so well (to this day half or more of all right wingers you run into will swear that Kerry's service records and decorations were all falsified etc.). Kerry and his campaign fell into it because, in my view, they didn't have the courage to run against the decision to invade Iraq, which was still a year or so away from becoming unpopular in the national consensus. It was gratifying to watch the GOP smear machine flail uselessly trying the same type of tricks against Obama and get owned so badly by his campaign, twice.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2013 21:56
|
|