After Hours Exit Poll

AndrewJRenko

blinding wrote: »

He was chased off his daytime show and moved to Saturday largely at the Behest of the Politically Correct Clergy's Inquisition .

Waters was / is largely sidelined bar some token pieces . Inquisition again .

Interesting, so a weekly show on a national radio station is 'silenced'. And we have Gammon Yeates giving the same opinions as George every day prime time on Newstalk. And we have Pat Kenny doing just a slightly more refined version of George's views in the mornings, and Paul Williams doing a slightly less refined version on the breakfast show.


That's an awful lot of 'silencing' going on there, isn't it?

Donald Trump

Gentleman Off The Pitch wrote: »

The outrage on Twitter as a result is telling, many simply cannot comprehend why the media are giving airtime to someone with an opinion different to their own

But what is your point?


Someone started off basically implying that PC didn't do as well as he could have because of the media. Implying that it drove voters from him, or other candidates, to MDH


I pointed out that it was the exposure given to PC by the media that pushed him ahead of the other 4 candidates.


Then someone complained that the media was negative against him.


So now you say it was twitter? So I'm confused. Did the exposure given to him by the media help him or not? And are you blaming twitter for him not doing better?

blinding

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Interesting, so a weekly show on a national radio station is 'silenced'. And we have Gammon Yeates giving the same opinions as George every day prime time on Newstalk. And we have Pat Kenny doing just a slightly more refined version of George's views in the mornings, and Paul Williams doing a slightly less refined version on the breakfast show.


That's an awful lot of 'silencing' going on there, isn't it?

All these know to be very very careful . They tip toe and make absolutely sure they don’t go over the line . They don’t want to be banished to early Saturday morning and that tiny audience and pay check .

They will most certainly be on the politically correct right side of female subjects .

There is no way that any of them would take a contrary view on this for fear they would be replaced by a woman . Amazing how they are so consistently down with the politically correct feminist point of view . They know that if they take this view there is much less chance of them being replaced by a woman and that probably more than 50% of the up and coming talent held at bay straight away .

AndrewJRenko

blinding wrote: »

All these know to be very very careful . They tip toe and make absolutely sure they don’t go over the line . They don’t want to be banished to early Saturday morning and that tiny audience and pay check .

They will most certainly be on the politically correct right side of female subjects .

There is no way that any of them would take a contrary view on this for fear they would be replaced by a woman . Amazing how they are so consistently down with the politically correct feminist point of view . They know that if they take this view there is much less chance of them being replaced by a woman and that probably more than 50% of the up and coming talent held at bay straight away .

I'd love to understand your definition of 'very, very careful' a bit more clearly. Clearly, for Gammon Yeates, referring to our sitting and future President as 'the pompous poet' is still on the right side of being careful, apparently.


Let's just think about that for a minute - Ivan Yeates referring to someone else as 'pompous'.






So what does 'careful' mean? Does it mean that they can't refer to 'birds' and '****' and 'pakis' and 'spas' like they would in the 'good old days'? Or is it just that they do the old victim-blaming stuff for rape victims and cyclists and social welfare recipients?



And fascinating that you (or they) see the ultimate humiliation as being replaced by a female presenter. :eek:

blinding

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I'd love to understand your definition of 'very, very careful' a bit more clearly. Clearly, for Gammon Yeates, referring to our sitting and future President as 'the pompous poet' is still on the right side of being careful, apparently.


Let's just think about that for a minute - Ivan Yeates referring to someone else as 'pompous'.






So what does 'careful' mean? Does it mean that they can't refer to 'birds' and '****' and 'pakis' and 'spas' like they would in the 'good old days'? Or is it just that they do the old victim-blaming stuff for rape victims and cyclists and social welfare recipients?



And fascinating that you (or they) see the ultimate humiliation as being replaced by a female presenter. :eek:

I didn’t in any way suggest that being replaced by a female presenter was a humiliation . I pointed out that the reason so many of these middle aged men are ‘ right on feminists ' is it makes it a lot harder to call for their replacement by anyone and especial a woman . Sure your man is more feminist than any woman . These guys are good at protecting their own position . As you actually say yourself , what are the chances that these guys are actually ‘ right on feminists ‘ ? Not great I would say but they know which side their bread is buttered on .

They may flirt with being Not Politically Correct but they make sure they don’t push their luck . Its almost surprising that at least one of these guys now and again might have an opinion that steps too far . They are of an age that this could be the case . But ‘ Careful Now “ Rules .

NIMAN

Around the time of the campaigning, I distinctly remember the candidates being told they couldn't do anything if they got into the job.

Funny now that when MDH is all over the news tonight, apparently he is going to do this, that and everything.

Rte definitely love him.

AndrewJRenko

NIMAN wrote: »

Around the time of the campaigning, I distinctly remember the candidates being told they couldn't do anything if they got into the job.

Funny now that when MDH is all over the news tonight, apparently he is going to do this, that and everything.

Rte definitely love him.

Did he say anything specific that he is going to do that goes beyond the powers of the President?

AndrewJRenko

blinding wrote: »

I didn’t in any way suggest that being replaced by a female presenter was a humiliation . I pointed out that the reason so many of these middle aged men are ‘ right on feminists ' is it makes it a lot harder to call for their replacement by anyone and especial a woman . Sure your man is more feminist than any woman . These guys are good at protecting their own position . As you actually say yourself , what are the chances that these guys are actually ‘ right on feminists ‘ ? Not great I would say but they know which side their bread is buttered on .

They may flirt with being Not Politically Correct but they make sure they don’t push their luck . Its almost surprising that at least one of these guys now and again might have an opinion that steps too far . They are of an age that this could be the case . But ‘ Careful Now “ Rules .

So they're all a shower of hypocrites then, you reckon? Good to know.

NIMAN

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Did he say anything specific that he is going to do that goes beyond the powers of the President?

No, but Rte made a lot of points about his upcoming presidency.

None of which he can do anything about.

AndrewJRenko

NIMAN wrote: »

No, but Rte made a lot of points about his upcoming presidency.

Any specific examples?