What does the future hold for Donald Trump? - threadbans in OP

Rjd2

nolivesmatter wrote: »

I see CNN and the likes going after Tucker Carlson and Fox News a lot these days. Something was needed to fill the gap left by Trump. They were probably more disappointed than him when he got banned from Twitter.

Cable ratings are down since Trump left.

He didn't get much right did Trump, but when he said the media loved him they weren't lying.

The media are pretty unimaginative so have decided Tucker can fill the role and tbf Tucker also enjoys the attention.

So much of establishment media dying on both sides would do America no harm whatsoever.

everlast75

Rjd2 wrote: »

Cable ratings are down since Trump left.

He didn't get much right did Trump, but when he said the media loved him they weren't lying.

The media are pretty unimaginative so have decided Tucker can fill the role and tbf Tucker also enjoys the attention.

So much of establishment media dying on both sides would do America no harm whatsoever.

Tucker is another Pierse Morgan, or Rush Limbaugh etc etc. Their schtik is making people angry and mocking those that can't defend themselves, and then whine like a baby when they are held to account.

Carlson and Hannity are two of the most poisonous agitators in American media. It would be no sad loss if their shows were pulled. Heaven knows they have had enough warnings over the years with forced "time outs".

They refuse to learn, so tough sh1t if they get canned.

duploelabs

everlast75 wrote: »

Tucker is another Pierse Morgan, or Rush Limbaugh etc etc. Their schtik is making people angry and mocking those that can't defend themselves, and then whine like a baby when they are held to account.

Carlson and Hannity are two of the most poisonous agitators in American media. It would be no sad loss if their shows were pulled. Heaven knows they have had enough warnings over the years with forced "time outs".

They refuse to learn, so tough sh1t if they get canned.

Carlson’s definition of white supremacy, he added, was “self-servingly narrow” – essentially, anyone short of the KKK was not racist.

nolivesmatter

everlast75 wrote: »

They refuse to learn, so tough sh1t if they get canned.

It wouldn't be the worst thing if all political commentary was done away with.

duploelabs

nolivesmatter wrote: »

It wouldn't be the worst thing if all political commentary was done away with.

Oh so it's the 'bad people on both sides' defence?! There's only one side here, as detailed above, engaging in white supremacy rhetoric

nolivesmatter

duploelabs wrote: »

Oh so it's the 'bad people on both sides' defence?! There's only one side here, as detailed above, engaging in white supremacy rhetoric

Relax. I didn't say anybody was bad, nor is this post a defense of anything. I don't like the idea of political commentary. I think news channels should try to be as objective as possible and let people make up their own minds.

Why is it that people like you think everything must be about taking sides.

duploelabs

nolivesmatter wrote: »

Relax. I didn't say anybody was bad, nor is this post a defense of anything. I don't like the idea of political commentary. I think news channels should try to be as objective as possible and let people make up their own minds.

Why is it that people like you think everything must be about taking sides.

Because the shlick of bad people on both sides is just a cop out and an apologist to those who spread hate speech, similar to the 'very fine people' subsequent to the Charlottesville murder

nolivesmatter

duploelabs wrote: »

Because the shlick of bad people on both sides is just a cop out and an apologist to those who spread hate speech, similar to the 'very fine people' subsequent to the Charlottesville murder

There's nothing like that happening here.

Again, I don't like political commentary. It's too biased and it's all 'performative outrage' as John Oliver puts it in that clip you post. It's adds nothing positive.

Rjd2

everlast75 wrote: »

Tucker is another Pierse Morgan, or Rush Limbaugh etc etc. Their schtik is making people angry and mocking those that can't defend themselves, and then whine like a baby when they are held to account.

Carlson and Hannity are two of the most poisonous agitators in American media. It would be no sad loss if their shows were pulled. Heaven knows they have had enough warnings over the years with forced "time outs".

They refuse to learn, so tough sh1t if they get canned.

Not saying he is good, but it's seem obvious the likes of CNN and possibly Zucker (who loved Trump ) have decided they need a Protagonist like Trump for ratings thus why CNN keep going on about him. Heck then you have Tucker lapping it up on the other side which makes it more grim.

Lachlan Murdoch is pally with Tucker and has actually given more time etc so I think America are stuck with him.

I doubt it will work though, Joe Bloggs doesn't care about Tucker like they did with Trump.

duploelabs

Rjd2 wrote: »

Not saying he is good, but it's seem obvious the likes of CNN and possibly Zucker (who loved Trump ) have decided they need a Protagonist like Trump for ratings thus why CNN keep going on about him. Heck then you have Tucker lapping it up on the other side which makes it more grim.

Lachlan Murdoch is pally with Tucker and has actually given more time etc so I think America are stuck with him.

I doubt it will work though, Joe Bloggs doesn't care about Tucker like they did with Trump.

But advertisers do, so brands don't like to see their products advertised alongside white robed rhetoric (unless you're a detergent perhaps) and will take pause when they're considering their ad spend in future

Rjd2

duploelabs wrote: »

But advertisers do, so brands don't like to see their products advertised alongside white robed rhetoric (unless you're a detergent perhaps) and will take pause when they're considering their ad spend in future

Think Yashar has said he is very close to Lachlan and Rupert Murdoch and they don't want to "give in" , they have fired others but they just didn't have the relationship that Tucker has with them .

Tucker struggles with advertising, but his numbers are very good and he does much better than people might think in the key 25-54 demo and of course he is a strong lead in for other fox shows etc.

Tell me how

Rjd2 wrote: »

Think Yashar has said he is very close to Lachlan and Rupert Murdoch and they don't want to "give in" , they have fired others but they just didn't have the relationship that Tucker has with them .

Tucker struggles with advertising, but his numbers are very good and he does much better than people might think in the key 25-54 demo and of course he is a strong lead in for other fox shows etc.

They have fired others when it was costing too much to keep them in house for either various actions they had carried out, (See Ailes, O'Reilly, Bolling, Giulfoyle, Henry) or for obvious reasons some people left after suffering at the hands of these people (See Kelly, Tantaros etc)

Having a host who appeals to a certain demograhic in the US is their strategy because it gives them close to a monopoly on the advertising for that demographic.

extra gravy

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1372000278166274049?s=19

Eight Asians shot dead in Atlanta while Trump refers to it as the China Virus again on Fox News last night. Disgusting.

Tell me how

Wouldn't be surprised to see another press release from Trump on this over the next few days.

https://twitter.com/Morning_Joe/status/1372127335424651271

His old buddy could be in the news once again in relation to it also.

https://twitter.com/MaddowBlog/status/1371998056086913025

Don't think Giuliani is working for him any more, will be interesting to see what way it evolves if Rudy comes under pressure in any way.

ExMachina1000

The Trump /Varadkar meeting was much better than yesterday's ramblings on both sides.

I particularly liked when leo told the world that Trump had promised to make America great again and had succeeded.

Although yesterday's meeting was an online video event it just seemed so dull and bland.

extra gravy

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

I particularly liked when leo told the world that Trump had promised to make America great again and had succeeded.

You actually believed him when he said that? Bless.

ExMachina1000

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

The Trump /Varadkar meeting was much better than yesterday's ramblings on both sides.

I particularly liked when leo told the world that Trump had promised to make America great again and had succeeded.

Although yesterday's meeting was an online video event it just seemed so dull and bland.

I'll take dull and boring over Trump telling Varadkar that Ireland is in the UK.

everlast75

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

The Trump /Varadkar meeting was much better than yesterday's ramblings on both sides.

I particularly liked when leo told the world that Trump had promised to make America great again and had succeeded.

Although yesterday's meeting was an online video event it just seemed so dull and bland.

Still desperate for positive things to find about Trump i see?

Your dedication to a one term, twice impeached disaster of a president is quite sad.

You should try and look up to a better class of person.

ohnonotgmail

everlast75 wrote: »

Still desperate for positive things to find about Trump i see?

Your dedication to a one term, twice impeached disaster of a president is quite sad.

You should try and look up to a better class of person.

one term, twice impeached, twice lost the popular vote, was never above a 50% approval rating, disaster of a president.

Smee_Again

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

one term, twice impeached, twice lost the popular vote, was never above a 50% approval rating, disaster of a president.

He also lost the House and the Senate.

everlast75

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

one term, twice impeached, twice lost the popular vote, was never above a 50% approval rating, disaster of a president.

*one term, twice impeached, twice lost the popular vote, loser of the House, loser of the Senate and then the White House and was never above a 50% approval rating, disaster of a president

PropJoe10

everlast75 wrote: »

*one term, twice impeached, twice lost the popular vote, loser of the House, loser of the Senate and then the White House and was never above a 50% approval rating, disaster of a president

You left out the fact that he's also under criminal investigation for trying to extort officials into overturning a fair election. So much winning!

Quin_Dub

everlast75 wrote: »

*one term, twice impeached, twice lost the popular vote, loser of the House, loser of the Senate and then the White House and was never above a 50% approval rating, disaster of a president

That feeds into the enduring question I have for the GOP - Why do they still see him as "their future" ??

His first (and only) extremely narrow victory can be viewed as largely a combination of "Everybody hates Hilary" and "Sure what's the worst that could happen". The latter largely driven by him being politically at least, a completely unknown quantity.

However , once people actually knew what he was politically , every Election that he has been involved in - he and/or the GOP have been tonked.

What exactly is it they think they can win with him now?

They have been handed multiple opportunities to cut him loose and have failed to do so.. I don't get it.

This isn't an ideological question , I totally get the alignment there - This is a "Can we win an Election with him?" question.

All the evidence says that they can't , so why persist with him and not just move to a more palatable option ?

Smee_Again

Quin_Dub wrote: »

That feeds into the enduring question I have for the GOP - Why do they still see him as "their future" ??

His first (and only) extremely narrow victory can be viewed as largely a combination of "Everybody hates Hilary" and "Sure what's the worst that could happen". The latter largely driven by him being politically at least, a completely unknown quantity.

However , once people actually knew what he was politically , every Election that he has been involved in - he and/or the GOP have been tonked.

What exactly is it they think they can win with him now?

They have been handed multiple opportunities to cut him loose and have failed to do so.. I don't get it.

This isn't an ideological question , I totally get the alignment there - This is a "Can we win an Election with him?" question.

All the evidence says that they can't , so why persist with him and not just move to a more palatable option ?

Because if they don’t it’ll lead to a split in the party.

They’d drop him like a sack of spuds if they could but his base is incredibly strong and losing that, and presumably leading to a sizeable and viable third party, would result in the Dems walking the next I don’t know how many elections.

PropJoe10

Quin_Dub wrote: »

That feeds into the enduring question I have for the GOP - Why do they still see him as "their future" ??

His first (and only) extremely narrow victory can be viewed as largely a combination of "Everybody hates Hilary" and "Sure what's the worst that could happen". The latter largely driven by him being politically at least, a completely unknown quantity.

However , once people actually knew what he was politically , every Election that he has been involved in - he and/or the GOP have been tonked.

What exactly is it they think they can win with him now?

They have been handed multiple opportunities to cut him loose and have failed to do so.. I don't get it.

This isn't an ideological question , I totally get the alignment there - This is a "Can we win an Election with him?" question.

All the evidence says that they can't , so why persist with him and not just move to a more palatable option ?

It's really down to the fact that there's pretty much zero overlap between political parties. They're still behind him due to his popularity within his own base. The fact that he's absolutely loathed elsewhere isn't really something they can factor in, because if they completely turn on Trump, they don't gain anything on the other side but also lose their own support base.

Really, it's a matter of sitting tight and hoping that Trump's support wanes within GOP voter circles. If it doesn't, then they are doomed for at least the next decade, and I think they most likely know this but don't have any idea how to turn the voters away from Trump.

astrofool

PropJoe10 wrote: »

It's really down to the fact that there's pretty much zero overlap between political parties. They're still behind him due to his popularity within his own base. The fact that he's absolutely loathed elsewhere isn't really something they can factor in, because if they completely turn on Trump, they don't gain anything on the other side but also lose their own support base.

Really, it's a matter of sitting tight and hoping that Trump's support wanes within GOP voter circles. If it doesn't, then they are doomed for at least the next decade, and I think they most likely know this but don't have any idea how to turn the voters away from Trump.

They can keep delivering McDonalds to him and hope that nature takes care of the rest.

Quin_Dub

PropJoe10 wrote: »

It's really down to the fact that there's pretty much zero overlap between political parties. They're still behind him due to his popularity within his own base. The fact that he's absolutely loathed elsewhere isn't really something they can factor in, because if they completely turn on Trump, they don't gain anything on the other side but also lose their own support base.

Really, it's a matter of sitting tight and hoping that Trump's support wanes within GOP voter circles. If it doesn't, then they are doomed for at least the next decade, and I think they most likely know this but don't have any idea how to turn the voters away from Trump.

Agreed - If the Democrats sort themselves out and pass the voting rights legislation before the 2022 cycle starts then I think the GOP are in very serious trouble across the board , not just for the WH.

It will force them back towards the centre if they want to take control at all.

MisterAnarchy

They killed the golden goose.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9374393/CNN-losing-viewers-Trump-left-office-nearly-50-24-54-age-group.html

CNN is losing around a million viewers on average each night since President Donald Trump left office - and is down nearly 50% in the key 24-54 age group, a report said on Thursday.

It was inevitable really .
CNN basically shot themselves in the foot .

extra gravy

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

They killed the golden goose.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9374393/CNN-losing-viewers-Trump-left-office-nearly-50-24-54-age-group.html



It was inevitable really .
CNN basically shot themselves in the foot .

Nothing to do with CNN. People tuned in to watch his press conferences and have a good laugh at him. Ratings were always going to be down when he was turfed out of office.

MisterAnarchy

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

They killed the golden goose.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9374393/CNN-losing-viewers-Trump-left-office-nearly-50-24-54-age-group.html



It was inevitable really .
CNN basically shot themselves in the foot .

Do you think the number of people standing outside Homer's office would go up or go down if he was replaced by a qualified, competent nuclear safety inspector?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQCiVaoEk7A