Jump to content

If American - which presidential candidate will you vote for? (Nov Edition) If

rkbabang

By rkbabang
in General Discussion

 Share
[[Template core/global/global/poll is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Recommended Posts

rkbabang Mentor

rkbabang

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Pandora plays an ad a few times per hour lately (probably paid for with your tax dollars) with Obama saying that it gets him "fired up" when people say that votes don't matter.  What is next them coming to your house to ask you for your vote?    This is all evidence to me that not voting matters.  The ruling elite doesn't care who you vote for, just as long as you lend the system legitimacy by voting.

 

Another alternative--which actually seems more likely to me--is that Pandora has figured out that people who listen to Pandora (and possibly even your particularly playlist) are more likely to vote Democrat.  And, they might also believe that an appeal by Obama is more likely to sway a Democrat.

 

Thus, a Democratic president telling a group of mostly Democrats to vote might not be evidence that they don't care who you vote for, but rather that they're pretty good at targeted advertising.

 

(To test this, one strategy might be to create an account with a bunch of country music, and see if these appeals go away, or switch to something that would be more appealing to Republicans. Might not matter though, since younger demographics are more likely to be Democrats and Pandora users are more likely to be younger.  It depends on how smart they are with their market segmenting.)

 

That would be an interesting experiment, but it would mean spending an hour or so listening to country music.  That's too high a price to pay for a datapoint.

 

  • Replies 382
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images

DonFanucci Newbie

DonFanucci

Posted
Posted

If I were to guess the reason (because I don't really know much) I would suspect that the reason for this is that your election system is a legacy of your whole political culture. Your political culture is based on the idea of democracy, in particular the idea that the people should be running the government.

 

Actually this is not true. The founding fathers of America were very much anti-democracy. America was designed as a republic- a form of government focused on the protection of individual rights. This is why we have separation of powers, the electoral college, indirect representation in congress, etc. In a republic, voting isn't all that important because the issues you can change via vote are supposed to pertain only to the execution of the government's protection of rights.

rkbabang Mentor

rkbabang

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Not really election related, but this is gold. I've always said that Biden is the Democratic Dan Quayle. If he were a Republican the press would be quoting him daily and making fun of him nonstop.  Here's an email to The Boss from The Stupid Sidekick.

 

> FROM: [email protected]

> TO: [email protected] > 

> OK, I cann barely type this but my hand i sstuck insdie the vendign machine aand if I let go I lose the snickers, tell me what to do boss.

>

(Source: Wikileaks)

 

 

BTW: I do know this is a joke, but it is hilarious considering it isn't Republicans making it.  This is what his own party thinks of him in private.

 

valcont Newbie

valcont

Posted
Posted

 

Not sure if you guys know this in Canada but Fox news is not considered a legitimate news outlet here. Its more of an entertainment channel featuring  blondes who passes Ailes 'sniff' test. They pride themselves on high ratings but since they are the only ones who peddles these crackpot theories , this is the channel of choice for deplorables. I can't wait for Trump to launch his own. That'll be the race to the bottom.

rb Newbie

rb

Posted
Posted

 

Not sure if you guys know this in Canada but Fox news is not considered a legitimate news outlet here. Its more of an entertainment channel featuring  blondes who passes Ailes 'sniff' test. They pride themselves on high ratings but since they are the only ones who peddles these crackpot theories , this is the channel of choice for deplorables. I can't wait for Trump to launch his own. That'll be the race to the bottom.

Yes, up here in the great white north we are very much aware that Fox is not a legitimate news source. You guys down south seem to have a problem figuring that out.

 

Up here we're also beginning to clue into the fact that our neighbor and partner to the south, a nuclear armed superpower, is starting to resemble something of a failed state and that is horrifying!

rkbabang Mentor

rkbabang

Posted
  • Author
Posted

 

Not sure if you guys know this in Canada but Fox news is not considered a legitimate news outlet here. Its more of an entertainment channel featuring  blondes who passes Ailes 'sniff' test. They pride themselves on high ratings but since they are the only ones who peddles these crackpot theories , this is the channel of choice for deplorables. I can't wait for Trump to launch his own. That'll be the race to the bottom.

 

While I agree 100%, what I've always found hilarious is that those on the left think that CNN, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, Washington Post, New York Times, etc,  are any less biased than Fox News is.  There is no such thing as an unbiased news source.  If you think you are watching/reading unbiased news it simply means that you share the same biases as the source.

 

 

vox Newbie

vox

Posted
Posted

To be clear, there are reporters and anchors on Fox News that follow journalistic standards. There's a reason why Chris Wallace was chosen to be the moderator for the third Presidential debate. Bret Baier who broke the indictment story is supposed to be one of them, which is why the story had legs. There are also Fox News entertainers like Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly who do not follow the standards. Implicit bias may be present in journalists for the amount and tenor of the way they choose to cover certain stories, but you won't find traditional media sources hawking completely unfounded conspiracy theories like on the Hannity show.

Liberty Contributor

Liberty

Posted
Posted

All media has bias: Yes. It's all run by humans.

 

The quantity of bias is the same in all media: No. Clearly not.

 

I'll take the NYT or the WSJ over the Soviet Pravda or that 2003 Iraqi minister of information... Some organizations have bias coming from the top down and pervading the whole organizations; they consider it their actual mission to convince people of a certain cause or to support a certain ideology or political party; while others try to hold themselves to high professional standards of fairness and objectivity and have failures that are more on a case-by-case basis or in their blind spots. Sins of omission vs sins of commission, in a way. Or trying to do the right thing and coming short rather than trying to do the wrong thing to begin with.

rb Newbie

rb

Posted
Posted

Seriously? There's no difference between the New York Times and Fox News?  Are you making funnies?

 

I think everyone would agree that MSNBC is pretty left leaning. CNN? I think they're so bad that they don't even know how to lean. Anyway, CNN and MSNBC are a joke. Allmost all cable news is.

 

If you're looking for no bias or as close to it as possible I recommend Reuters. One of the few proper news outlets left.

 

Btw, this is tricky to formulate but sometimes maybe some bias is a good thing. I know that doesn't come out right, but Edward Murrow comes to mind. Was Murrow biased against McCarthy? I think so. Was it the right thing to do? Absolutely.

rb Newbie

rb

Posted
Posted

To be clear, there are reporters and anchors on Fox News that follow journalistic standards. There's a reason why Chris Wallace was chosen to be the moderator for the third Presidential debate. Bret Baier who broke the indictment story is supposed to be one of them, which is why the story had legs. There are also Fox News entertainers like Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly who do not follow the standards. Implicit bias may be present in journalists for the amount and tenor of the way they choose to cover certain stories, but you won't find traditional media sources hawking completely unfounded conspiracy theories like on the Hannity show.

Yea, but what's the % of Hannity and O'reilly type stuff vs Chris Wallace stuff? At some point you stop being a news channel. I don't think that "we have an hour or two of non crazy stuff" is a saving grace.

 

The Bret Baier stuff is case in point for Fox. That sort of story wouldn't have made it on a legitimate news organization because they still have certain journalistic standards. Those standards are obviously lacking/missing at Fox.

rkbabang Mentor

rkbabang

Posted
  • Author
Posted

It is the same thing, the difference in some cases a matter of degree, not of kind.  Also comparing CNN news to Hannity or O'Reilly  isn't fair. Those two would be the first to admit that they are conservatives on the far right and that their shows are biased as such.  But compare the CNN news reporting to the Fox News news reporting and you will find they generally report on the same stories only one from the left and one from the right.  Are you going to tell me that Chris Wallace isn't a liberal and that you can't tell by the phrases he uses and the expression on his face as he talks about certain things?  It may be hard to notice when you agree with him, but he is coming from a left wing point of view. 

 

Just look at the post about Biden from me above, do you deny that he got a pass from the media where Dan Quayle did not?  If he were a Republican you would hear about him endlessly, but because he's a Democrat they ignore him and hope no one notices. 

 

Don't get me wrong I'm not criticizing the bias of any news source.  I don't think it is possible to be unbiased.  But for the most part Fox News is open about its bias and the rest of them claim to have none which is BS.

 

Again this is hard to see when it coincides completely with your own point of view.  All of these news outlets Fox and CNN alike are biased in favor of the United States in apposed to the Middle East for example, but none of them admit as much.  If you were to see a newscast in Iran or Russia you would notice the bias, but in the US you do not see it (unless you are on the left and you watch Foxnews).

 

valcont Newbie

valcont

Posted
Posted

Up here we're also beginning to clue into the fact that our neighbor and partner to the south, a nuclear armed superpower, is starting to resemble something of a failed state and that is horrifying!

 

It might look that way when you read it in the media but I don't sense any of that on the ground unless I'm living in my own little bubble. Ultimately the demographic trends , money and power are on the correct side. Look at the red states and they are usually poor, backward and struggling. Not all blue states are heaven but most of the money and power is concentrated in those. If that changes then we are screwed.

vox Newbie

vox

Posted
Posted

RE: rb

 

I don't know the exact breakdown, and I imagine that total viewership is more important than the hours of content, but they do program an hour of Megyn Kelly in between Hannity and O'Reilly. I don't think that Bret Baier released his story with the intent to deceive, I think his private sources were probably overzealous and misled him.

 

RE: rkbabang

 

You're shifting your position from being 'the mainstream media is not any less biased than Fox News' to 'Fox News is open or apparent about their bias and the mainstream media is not.'

 

Joe Biden has been criticized roundly for his gaffes when he ran for President. Frankly, he doesn't get covered because people care about the Vice President an order of magnitude less than the President.

rkbabang Mentor

rkbabang

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Seriously? There's no difference between the New York Times and Fox News?  Are you making funnies?

 

I think everyone would agree that MSNBC is pretty left leaning. CNN? I think they're so bad that they don't even know how to lean. Anyway, CNN and MSNBC are a joke. Allmost all cable news is.

 

If you're looking for no bias or as close to it as possible I recommend Reuters. One of the few proper news outlets left.

 

Btw, this is tricky to formulate but sometimes maybe some bias is a good thing. I know that doesn't come out right, but Edward Murrow comes to mind. Was Murrow biased against McCarthy? I think so. Was it the right thing to do? Absolutely.

 

We don't see a lot of Reuters here in the US it is more of a British thing our newspapers print Associated Press rather than Reuters.  I'll try reading more Reuters online and see what I think.

 

I agree with you on Murrow.  Bias is a good thing.  Pretending you aren't biased is what I don't like.

 

rkbabang Mentor

rkbabang

Posted
  • Author
Posted

RE: rb

 

I don't know the exact breakdown, and I imagine that total viewership is more important than the hours of content, but they do program an hour of Megyn Kelly in between Hannity and O'Reilly. I don't think that Bret Baier released his story with the intent to deceive, I think his private sources were probably overzealous and misled him.

 

RE: rkbabang

 

You're shifting your position from being 'the mainstream media is not any less biased than Fox News' to 'Fox News is open or apparent about their bias and the mainstream media is not.'

 

Yes I am shifting my opinion as I think about it more.

 

Joe Biden has been criticized roundly for his gaffes when he ran for President. Frankly, he doesn't get covered because people care about the Vice President an order of magnitude less than the President.

 

Tell that to Dick Cheney.

http://cdns.yournewswire.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/DevilDick.jpg

 

rb Newbie

rb

Posted
Posted

Up here we're also beginning to clue into the fact that our neighbor and partner to the south, a nuclear armed superpower, is starting to resemble something of a failed state and that is horrifying!

 

It might look that way when you read it in the media but I don't sense any of that on the ground unless I'm living in my own little bubble. Ultimately the demographic trends , money and power are on the correct side. Look at the red states and they are usually poor, backward and struggling. Not all blue states are heaven but most of the money and power is concentrated in those. If that changes then we are screwed.

 

I'm not talking so much about the money part but the structural part such as:

 

1. Candidate for president talks about jailing his opponent after he wins

2. Candidate for president talks about not accepting result of election is he looses

3. Candidate for president invites foreign adversary to hack communications of political opponent. Half of political spectrum doesn't care or cheers when that comes to pass

4. The main internal security service appears to be partisan and is getting involved in the electoral process

5. Parliament doesn't have any agenda except for obstructionism

6. Members of parliament are talking about impeaching a future president before the election is even held, never mind the result of said election

7. Members of senate impeding the operation of the supreme court by threatening to not confirm justices to the supreme court until they control the executive branch and the appointment process

 

The list goes on, but all that is starting to sound a little failed statey, even if it's a rich one.

Guest Schwab711

Guest Schwab711

Posted
Posted

Seriously? There's no difference between the New York Times and Fox News?  Are you making funnies?

 

I think everyone would agree that MSNBC is pretty left leaning. CNN? I think they're so bad that they don't even know how to lean. Anyway, CNN and MSNBC are a joke. Allmost all cable news is.

 

If you're looking for no bias or as close to it as possible I recommend Reuters. One of the few proper news outlets left.

 

Btw, this is tricky to formulate but sometimes maybe some bias is a good thing. I know that doesn't come out right, but Edward Murrow comes to mind. Was Murrow biased against McCarthy? I think so. Was it the right thing to do? Absolutely.

 

We don't see a lot of Reuters here in the US it is more of a British thing our newspapers print Associated Press rather than Reuters.  I'll try reading more Reuters online and see what I think.

 

I agree with you on Murrow.  Bias is a good thing.  Pretending you aren't biased is what I don't like.

 

"Fair and Balanced"?

 

I saw a headline the other day titled "5 Reasons to Vote for Donald Trump" from WaPo. Would we ever see that from Fox News, Breitbart, ect? The counter-argument "Fox News is just as biased [or insert similar language] as [insert left-leaning media outlet]" is perfect. It cannot be refuted and conveys that "conservative media" only does what "liberal media" does. There is certainly liberal media. But the US has a lot of centrist media as well. We have a media source for every ideology and demographic. I like your writing but I disagree on the magnitude of "media bias".

 

I have similar feelings about government ineptness. I'd like government to be a little smaller. I'd like less double-taxation and over-regulation. At the same time, I think we operate more than adequately as is. USPS provides the same services as FedEx and UPS for roughly 40%-80% less with government bureaucracy. Most government activities are meant to provide services that the private sector couldn't provide because they weren't profitable. Of course these activities are somewhat inefficient! We knew this ahead of time! I think it would be great to see more "investor-like" language when discussing policies. When folks talk about "failed policies", they are usually saying something along the lines of "I think we are paying 10% too much for these services".

 

I think Packer captured this phenomena well in an earlier post. We are all guilty of tailoring our news intake to our personal tastes because it makes sense to do so. There's negative consequences to this and I think we are seeing them in this election. Like the financial crisis, everyone contributed. It would be great to see an organization remind everyone just how similar the dem and rep parties really are. They both want the same things, just sometimes in modestly different ways.

 

I'll go back to planning for corp tax cuts now.

rb Newbie

rb

Posted
Posted

RE: rb

 

I don't know the exact breakdown, and I imagine that total viewership is more important than the hours of content, but they do program an hour of Megyn Kelly in between Hannity and O'Reilly. I don't think that Bret Baier released his story with the intent to deceive, I think his private sources were probably overzealous and misled him.

I don't know whether Baier wanted to deceive or he was just an eager reporter. I just said that Fox seems to be lacking journalistic standards that exist elsewhere. Standards that would have prevented him from coming out with the story.

rb Newbie

rb

Posted
Posted

Joe Biden has been criticized roundly for his gaffes when he ran for President. Frankly, he doesn't get covered because people care about the Vice President an order of magnitude less than the President.

 

Tell that to Dick Cheney.

I don't want to pile on Biden. I think a lot of his gaffes are really endearing. But here's my favorite one.

 

LC Mentor

LC

Posted
Posted

Seriously, what's with these long lines? If you have long lines, why not add more polls?

 

It's a perception thing.  There are long lines, because everyone is voting.  The last thing they want is the perception that I went to vote and almost no one was there.

 

Here in Colorado they mail you a ballot weeks beforehand, you fill it out and drop it off. Simple. New York was a joke: dense areas had lines around 2-3 blocks.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...