The Pat Kenny Show

ButtersSuki

Deleted User wrote: »

You keep telling me things I already know.

Not arguing with you......

ButtersSuki

Deleted User wrote: »

Because no-one normal is pro-Trump?

Why this then?

Surely you don't consider all Trump supporters not normal?

hamburgham

Watched a you tube video of Michael McNamara dissecting the covid stats and clearly demonstratinbg them to be the rubbish that they are. This comment underneath made me laugh though 100% agree with the sentiment.

Pat the tyrant Kenny should be made watch these vds, he has become completely deranged and wants the whole Country locked down and under military law. He is now no 1 enemy to the Irish people as far as I am concerned. The stats for deaths in this Country for the past week= cancer deaths 200 .heart attacks =185

ButtersSuki

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Why this then?

Surely you don't consider all Trump supporters not normal?

Perhaps I'm an idealist, but I don't think it should be normal to support someone with such disgusting opinions.

Richard Hillman

jay0109 wrote: »

How come Newstalk cannot find anyone 'normal' to give the pro-Trump side? Seth is beyond a joke and Newstalk know that well

I remember RTÉ did a report before the 2016 election. They interviewed Hillary Clinton supporters, all young, good looking, in hipster cafes. Where did they go for Trump supporters? A gun support rally. They know exactly what they are doing. It's all carefully choreographed marketing to tell Irish to not get any ideas.

Ol' Donie

hamburgham wrote: »

Watched a you tube video of Michael McNamara dissecting the covid stats and clearly demonstratinbg them to be the rubbish that they are. This comment underneath made me laugh though 100% agree with the sentiment.

Pat the tyrant Kenny should be made watch these vds, he has become completely deranged and wants the whole Country locked down and under military law. He is now no 1 enemy to the Irish people as far as I am concerned. The stats for deaths in this Country for the past week= cancer deaths 200 .heart attacks =185

Ignoring the nonsense about Pat, that seems to be saying the health service doesn't need to have to deal with Covid patients, it has enough to do.

neris

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Well whichever way you want to cut it, the outcome is the same.

And if you were there at the time and listening to media coverage (over there, let alone here), it seemed like it was going to be a walk-over for Hilary.

The Irish media had her in the Oval office with her feet up on the desk months before the election and still cant get over the fact their golden girl lost out.

dominatinMC

Deleted User wrote: »

Perhaps I'm an idealist, but I don't think it should be normal to support someone with such disgusting opinions.

I won't call that idealism, I'd call it ignorance. There are a hell of a lot of people that despise Trump the man, but vote for Trump the president. And a lot of them are, indeed, "normal". These normal people vote for Trump to line their own pockets, as some of his policies are good for them. They don't support his opinions, as you put it, but his policies.

padd b1975

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Because no-one normal is pro-Trump?

Deplorable even?

serfboard

dominatinMC wrote: »

They don't support his opinions, as you put it, but his policies.

Trump, IMO, had to deliver to two groups - those who finance the elections, and the religious who have been convinced that social issues are the only things worth voting on.

With his tax cut for the rich and his Supreme Court (and lower court) appointments, he has delivered to both. The court changes also benefit the billionaires massively too.

dominatinMC

dominatinMC wrote: »

I won't call that idealism, I'd call it ignorance. There are a hell of a lot of people that despise Trump the man, but vote for Trump the president. And a lot of them are, indeed, "normal". These normal people vote for Trump to line their own pockets, as some of his policies are good for them. They don't support his opinions, as you put it, but his policies.

So I'm ignorant.



Thanks.

Trump is even dividing opinion in people here who all more or less agree he is not a very nice man

To be an idealist is not to be "an ignorant person" and I don't think that sentiment was intended in the comment there. It is true that a somewhat higher percentage of people will vote for what person or party they imagine will likely improve their own lives, whilst a smaller cohort will vote on principle that all lives should be improved, especially the lit of the underprivileged. Self versus Society, most people have some moral battle in their minds about this, but when push comes to shove, if your job looks like it might more likely go down the pan by voting one person, survival mode more often steps in and you vote to save your own skin.

I have a friend in USA who adores Trump because she perceives him as being a Godly man (the mind boggles) and she forwards me stuff from religious organisations that send propaganda about Democrats intending to bring in euthanasia of new born healthy babies which have arrived inconveniently. Now if she and her mates genuinely believe this and are horrified by it, it pushes them into the Trump camp and they see as many reasons to live him as they can. The propaganda machine in USA is unreal.

Btw ye boys who spend so much time flittering to USA have an appalling carbon footprint, would yiz not think of the foyres in California ye have started? (Sez a hypocrite who has a shameful history herself)

I think it's time I set a competition on this thread. How many USA States ye have been in... the more states de bigger of yer mickeys, or ye can settle with a duel at dawn

Grolschevik

[Deleted User] wrote: »

the more states de bigger of yer mickeys, or ye can settle with a duel at dawn

Morning glories at the Fighting Cock, Carlow.

dominatinMC

Deleted User wrote: »

So I'm ignorant.



Thanks.

Apologies, that came across wrong! Should have chosen my words better, maybe naivety would have been a better description. No offence intended

whisky_galore

Richard Hillman wrote: »

I remember RTÉ did a report before the 2016 election. They interviewed Hillary Clinton supporters, all young, good looking, in hipster cafes. Where did they go for Trump supporters? A gun support rally. They know exactly what they are doing. It's all carefully choreographed marketing to tell Irish to not get any ideas.

It's not like they planted these people in those venues, that's where you're most likely to find them.

Marketing? Not to get ideas about what? What's in it for RTE? Do tell. My tinfoil hat is on standby.

Dennis Naughton: "You've everything on your doorstep"

No Dennis, the benefit of rural life is that you have nothing (and nobody) on your doorstep.:pac:

I too know a village that a ball has bot been kicked down the main street in in years, everybody lives a mile or two outside of it.

"Suburban sprawl"

Now ya have it Pat

Ol' Donie

Is this interview just an ad? For a broadband provider?? It is isn't it?

What a load of bollòcks

BPKS

Pat had a piece on recently on the dangers of right wing conspiracy theory nuts and the dangers they pose.

While discussing Trump testing positive for Covid 19 this morning - more than 90% of texters were giving their conspiracy theories - its a ruse, Trump will be fine and say he beat the virus to gain votes, a ploy to deflect from the White Supremacy comments, blah, blah, blah.

Historybluff

BPKS wrote: »

Pat had a piece on recently on the dangers of right wing conspiracy theory nuts and the dangers they pose.

While discussing Trump testing positive for Covid 19 this morning - more than 90% of texters were giving their conspiracy theories - its a ruse, Trump will be fine and say he beat the virus to gain votes, a ploy to deflect from the White Supremacy comments, blah, blah, blah.

I agree. Some of those texts were frightening, both from pro-Trumpers and anti-Trumpers. I don't know if Pat should have read them out. They were just ignorant opinions and added nothing to the discussion.

elperello

Historybluff wrote: »

I agree. Some of those texts were frightening, both from pro-Trumpers and anti-Trumpers. I don't know if Pat should have read them out. They were just ignorant opinions and added nothing to the discussion.

Pat didn't endorse any of them.

Maybe no harm to report some of the bad stuff that is out there.

Not everyone is exposed to social media and the nonsense therein masquerading as debate.

Even on this site there is a lot worse than what Pat read out.

2smiggy

the film The Social Dilemma is a very good watch on what is going on from both 'the left' and 'the right'

new on Netflix

Historybluff

elperello wrote: »

Pat didn't endorse any of them.

Maybe no harm to report some of the bad stuff that is out there.

Not everyone is exposed to social media and the nonsense therein masquerading as debate.

Even on this site there is a lot worse than what Pat read out.

That's hardly a ringing endorsement of Pat Kenny. "Listen to his show. The listeners' texts he reads out are usually a lot less bonkers than the opinions you'd read on Boards.ie."

I agree that he didn't endorse them. But how could he? They were daft, ignorant speculation. Indeed, I think I heard him sighing as he read them out. Anyway, I don't think reading them out added anything to the discussion.

BPKS

Newstalk's version of showing both sides of a debate is usually to find the most outlandish contributor they can to outline one side of the argument and have the host and another more balanced contributor outline the other side of the argument.

Then they will read out a load of texts and tweets agreeing with the host/more balanced contributor while at the same time reading out one text that agrees with the other side. And then sneer and ridicule that texter for a while.

Actually come to think of it, that's how RTE and Today FM do it too.

elperello

Historybluff wrote: »

That's hardly a ringing endorsement of Pat Kenny. "Listen to his show. The listeners' texts he reads out are usually a lot less bonkers than the opinions you'd read on Boards.ie."

I agree that he didn't endorse them. But how could he? They were daft, ignorant speculation. Indeed, I think I heard him sighing as he read them out. Anyway, I don't think reading them out added anything to the discussion.

I don't for a second think that Pat was relying on the texts read out to form part of any discussion.

I took his reading of them to to be a piece of reportage reflecting the extremes of opinion anything to do with Trump attract.

Maybe I'm giving him too much credit.

hotmail.com

BPKS wrote: »

Newstalk's version of showing both sides of a debate is usually to find the most outlandish contributor they can to outline one side of the argument and have the host and another more balanced contributor outline the other side of the argument.

Then they will read out a load of texts and tweets agreeing with the host/more balanced contributor while at the same time reading out one text that agrees with the other side. And then sneer and ridicule that texter for a while.

Actually come to think of it, that's how RTE and Today FM do it too.

Half the time, I get the impression the texts are either made up for shock value or else texted in by the same tiny amount of people.

Why would you waste 30cent to text something in about Trump.

The media here will miss Trump when he's gone.

ButtersSuki

hotmail.com wrote: »

Half the time, I get the impression the texts are either made up for shock value or else texted in by the same tiny amount of people.

Why would you waste 30cent to text something in about Trump.

The media here will miss Trump when he's gone.

I think they’ll have 4 more years of him tbh.

hotmail.com

ButtersSuki wrote: »

I think they’ll have 4 more years of him tbh.

They'll be delighted.

He's a form of tabloid rubbish most of the time.

Cole

BPKS wrote: »

Newstalk's version of showing both sides of a debate is usually to find the most outlandish contributor they can to outline one side of the argument and have the host and another more balanced contributor outline the other side of the argument.

Then they will read out a load of texts and tweets agreeing with the host/more balanced contributor while at the same time reading out one text that agrees with the other side. And then sneer and ridicule that texter for a while.

Actually come to think of it, that's how RTE and Today FM do it too.

I don't think it's always like that (across all 3 stations), but that is pretty accurate for Pat's almost daily Trump coverage imo. I've really liked Pat for years, but the way he covers Trump undermines his credibility for me...and just plays into the hands of the whole untrustworthy/fake MSM narrative of some.

prunudo

I agree with many of the sentiments above. His obsession with everything Trump related is tiresome, Matt Cooper went down the same route and I wasnt long switching the dial.
But listening to Pat earlier, the phoneline with a contributor went dead, so what does Pat do, goes to playing some audio about Melania Trump. He's so preoccupied with the man his go to filler pieces are trump related too, he's very quickly loosing his edge and ability to be a balanced broadcaster.