Fox Goes from 24 Million viewers to 13 million even though the election is closer in time

[JoeMoma]

Cartoon network enjoyed the bump in ratings tho!

Are you saying all conservatives would rather watch cartoons than politics?

Only the ones who think ratings are more important than facts. And their little dogs, too.

Well, all the candidates running for president like to brag if they draw a large crowd for an event because hopefully large crowds correlates to large (winning) vote counts.
Being responsible for high ratings for a TV event is similar to drawing a large crowd to attend an event in person. I sure Hillary would be crowing about filling up a stadium with a hundred thousand people if she were to do that. Well, Trump is going to brag if he is responsible for 12 million viewers when it comes to the ratings.

Sitting on your ass in front of the TV is the same as driving x-number of miles in all weathers and standing on line for x-hours in order to hear a candidate speak in person? Wow, who knew?

No need to attend any public event in person, then.

Not exactly the same, but similar. There are hundreds of other stations that people can watch.

 

[blackhawk]

No one has denied Trump can draw a crowd and bring in ratings of course in 2008 Barak Obama drew big crowds and brought in ratings as well something to think about.

And he won two presidential elections.

Yes he did because people were more impressed with style than substance a trend that could be repeating its self not really a positive in my opinion.

 

[JoeMoma]

Sometimes crowds/high ratings translates to votes. However, low turnouts to events are usually a bad sign regarding the number of votes on Election Day.

 

[Pogo]

No one has denied Trump can draw a crowd and bring in ratings of course in 2008 Barak Obama drew big crowds and brought in ratings as well something to think about.

And he won two presidential elections.[/QUOTE]

I'm not aware where O'bama contrived a ridiculous bully "reality" show, or went around whining that he didn't have George W. Bush's birth certificate, or did anything in particular for the express purpose of baiting the media to Draw Attention to Numero Uno.

That's what we mean by "ratings" as an active concept, as Rump seems to think they are. How many people happen to watch a particular event is simply a disinterested measuring stick; on the other hand a subject deliberately trying to massage that number --- and thinking it means something --- is quite another thing.

 

[Pogo]

No one has denied Trump can draw a crowd and bring in ratings of course in 2008 Barak Obama drew big crowds and brought in ratings as well something to think about.

And he won two presidential elections.

Yes he did because people were more impressed with style than substance a trend that could be repeating its self not really a positive in my opinion.

What always gets left out of this is the elephant in the room --- look who he was running against, and more to the point WHAT he was running against. That being, the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression.

Against that kind of "substance" --- a dead parrot could have won.

 

[JoeMoma]

No one has denied Trump can draw a crowd and bring in ratings of course in 2008 Barak Obama drew big crowds and brought in ratings as well something to think about.

And he won two presidential elections.

I'm not aware where O'bama contrived a ridiculous bully "reality" show, or went around whining that he didn't have George W. Bush's birth certificate, or did anything in particular for the express purpose of baiting the media to Draw Attention to Numero Uno.

That's what we mean by "ratings" as an active concept, as Rump seems to think they are. How many people happen to watch a particular event is simply a disinterested measuring stick; on the other hand a subject deliberately trying to massage that number --- and thinking it means something --- is quite another thing.[/QUOTE]
We will be having the first votes this in a few days in Iowa. Until then, polls, crowds and ratings will be the measuring sticks for how well the candidates are doing, regardless upon how inaccurate or imprecise those measuring sticks may be.

 

[toxicmedia]

One would think more people are going to pay attention to the election now that the primaries are coming up. But something happened to FOX NEtwork. They got almost half of the viewers than before? What happened?
Oh, let me guess. The popular candidate wasn't there. Boom! Fox got had!

Not sure how much I believe that.

I used to follow cable ratings quite a bit on Newser, and I remember Fox having something like 12 or 13 million viewers last year when I followed it.

I'll have to look again

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

One would think more people are going to pay attention to the election now that the primaries are coming up. But something happened to FOX NEtwork. They got almost half of the viewers than before? What happened?
Oh, let me guess. The popular candidate wasn't there. Boom! Fox got had!

Yup. MSNBC is practically Trump TV and has been for the past 4-5 months.

 

[Pogo]

Cartoon network enjoyed the bump in ratings tho!

Are you saying all conservatives would rather watch cartoons than politics?

Only the ones who think ratings are more important than facts. And their little dogs, too.

Well, all the candidates running for president like to brag if they draw a large crowd for an event because hopefully large crowds correlates to large (winning) vote counts.
Being responsible for high ratings for a TV event is similar to drawing a large crowd to attend an event in person. I sure Hillary would be crowing about filling up a stadium with a hundred thousand people if she were to do that. Well, Trump is going to brag if he is responsible for 12 million viewers when it comes to the ratings.

Sitting on your ass in front of the TV is the same as driving x-number of miles in all weathers and standing on line for x-hours in order to hear a candidate speak in person? Wow, who knew?

No need to attend any public event in person, then.

For many, that's true. I've only ever gone to see one candidate speak in person, and it wasn't at all far to drive (in New Hamster, when I lived across the river in Vermont). It was both convenient, and an interesting and unorthodox candidate (Jerry Brown). But otherwise I don't see the point.

Rump will no doubt and no question brag about his "ratings". He just doesn't understand what that means and doesn't mean. Or I should say, he perfectly well does understand but counts on the unwashed not to understand. Which is just more of the psychomanipulative bullshit that he's made of.

 

[JoeMoma]

No one has denied Trump can draw a crowd and bring in ratings of course in 2008 Barak Obama drew big crowds and brought in ratings as well something to think about.

And he won two presidential elections.

I'm not aware where O'bama contrived a ridiculous bully "reality" show, or went around whining that he didn't have George W. Bush's birth certificate, or did anything in particular for the express purpose of baiting the media to Draw Attention to Numero Uno.

That's what we mean by "ratings" as an active concept, as Rump seems to think they are. How many people happen to watch a particular event is simply a disinterested measuring stick; on the other hand a subject deliberately trying to massage that number --- and thinking it means something --- is quite another thing.

We will be having the first votes this in a few days in Iowa. Until then, polls, crowds and ratings will be the measuring sticks for how well the candidates are doing, regardless upon how inaccurate or imprecise those measuring sticks may be.[/QUOTE]
Damn quotes...I'm too lazy too fix them!

 

[Pogo]

One would think more people are going to pay attention to the election now that the primaries are coming up. But something happened to FOX NEtwork. They got almost half of the viewers than before? What happened?
Oh, let me guess. The popular candidate wasn't there. Boom! Fox got had!

Not sure how much I believe that.

I used to follow cable ratings quite a bit on Newser, and I remember Fox having something like 12 or 13 million viewers last year when I followed it.

I'll have to look again

The bottom line is ---- unless you're in the business of either buying or selling commercial broadcast time --- ratings have no meaning at all. Especially in predicting something like an election.

 

[Rustic]

One would think more people are going to pay attention to the election now that the primaries are coming up. But something happened to FOX NEtwork. They got almost half of the viewers than before? What happened?
Oh, let me guess. The popular candidate wasn't there. Boom! Fox got had!

No one wants to watch Rinos put on a fake debate...
Lol

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

One would think more people are going to pay attention to the election now that the primaries are coming up. But something happened to FOX NEtwork. They got almost half of the viewers than before? What happened?
Oh, let me guess. The popular candidate wasn't there. Boom! Fox got had!

Isn't that about 10 million more than any of the other cable news networks.

 

[CowboyTed]

Thats your problem right there... You think that this a TV ratings competition...

Trump is reality tv, people tune into him for the same reason people was Honey Boo Boo...

Talking about actually policies around the Economy and Healthcare is never going to be as popular as picking a demographic and telling you that they are the reason things aren't right...

So, you are saying Trump = Hitler?

The propaganda tactics he is using comes straight from Gobbles.

First tell every that things are real bad... Then find a group or groups at fault (Hitler:Jews, non-Whites) (Trump: Mexicans, Muslims). Then attack them by saying you are the only one to sort them out...

Hitler told loads of lies about these people and also bolstered himself with BS... Guess what:

Now he relies on people like to no question anything.. He will feed your fears and claim he is the only one who can solve them... This is a pretty old playbook and relies on the electorate being misinformed...

Putin does the same trick in Russia...

But the big thing is he needs guys like JAckson here to be too afraid of Muslims & Mexicans to actually question anything.

There is plenty of examples of him being abusive and a bully.

 

[CowboyTed]

One would think more people are going to pay attention to the election now that the primaries are coming up. But something happened to FOX NEtwork. They got almost half of the viewers than before? What happened?
Oh, let me guess. The popular candidate wasn't there. Boom! Fox got had!

No one wants to watch Rinos put on a fake debate...
Lol

I love how the fake conservative Tea Partiers are doing the best to get Moderate GOP to vote for a Moderate Dem Hillary...

The Moderate fiscal Conservatives are now closer on more issues with Hillary than they are with Trump... Clintons have a history of balancing budgets while Trump is proposing big expensive wars and a wall which will even do what it is intended too... Trump is also going to blanket ban 1/5 of the world from entering the country(how he is going to identify muslims?), this is going to severely affect business...
Trump is Spend Spend Spend....

Hillary will just say did you like under Bill welcome to Clinton II.

 

[Rustic]

One would think more people are going to pay attention to the election now that the primaries are coming up. But something happened to FOX NEtwork. They got almost half of the viewers than before? What happened?
Oh, let me guess. The popular candidate wasn't there. Boom! Fox got had!

No one wants to watch Rinos put on a fake debate...
Lol

I love how the fake conservative Tea Partiers are doing the best to get Moderate GOP to vote for a Moderate Dem Hillary...

The Moderate fiscal Conservatives are now closer on more issues with Hillary than they are with Trump... Clintons have a history of balancing budgets while Trump is proposing big expensive wars and a wall which will even do what it is intended too... Trump is also going to blanket ban 1/5 of the world from entering the country(how he is going to identify muslims?), this is going to severely affect business...
Trump is Spend Spend Spend....

Hillary will just say did you like under Bill welcome to Clinton II.

Na, not really

 

[CowboyTed]

One would think more people are going to pay attention to the election now that the primaries are coming up. But something happened to FOX NEtwork. They got almost half of the viewers than before? What happened?
Oh, let me guess. The popular candidate wasn't there. Boom! Fox got had!

No one wants to watch Rinos put on a fake debate...
Lol

I love how the fake conservative Tea Partiers are doing the best to get Moderate GOP to vote for a Moderate Dem Hillary...

The Moderate fiscal Conservatives are now closer on more issues with Hillary than they are with Trump... Clintons have a history of balancing budgets while Trump is proposing big expensive wars and a wall which will even do what it is intended too... Trump is also going to blanket ban 1/5 of the world from entering the country(how he is going to identify muslims?), this is going to severely affect business...
Trump is Spend Spend Spend....

Hillary will just say did you like under Bill welcome to Clinton II.

Na, not really

Those Fiscal Conservatives (Real Conservatives) will engage later and they will see Trump's little fascist government plan... Also the tapes are going all over Europe of Trumps rants and his vindictive behaviour.. This boy vindictive and a bully... He loves nothing more than harassing the little guy..

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

Thats your problem right there... You think that this a TV ratings competition...

Trump is reality tv, people tune into him for the same reason people was Honey Boo Boo...

Talking about actually policies around the Economy and Healthcare is never going to be as popular as picking a demographic and telling you that they are the reason things aren't right...

So, you are saying Trump = Hitler?

The propaganda tactics he is using comes straight from Gobbles.

First tell every that things are real bad... Then find a group or groups at fault (Hitler:Jews, non-Whites) (Trump: Mexicans, Muslims). Then attack them by saying you are the only one to sort them out...

Hitler told loads of lies about these people and also bolstered himself with BS... Guess what:
View attachment 61555

Now he relies on people like to no question anything.. He will feed your fears and claim he is the only one who can solve them... This is a pretty old playbook and relies on the electorate being misinformed...

Putin does the same trick in Russia...

But the big thing is he needs guys like JAckson here to be too afraid of Muslims & Mexicans to actually question anything.

There is plenty of examples of him being abusive and a bully.

We need a Fuhrer in these turbulent times to deal with the Mexicans and Muslims who want to kill us. Trump, a white nationalist, is that man, and White America will make it so, especially the silent majority.

 

[candycorn]

I was busy watching Top Chef. lol

Is that Marcel character still on there?

No. He looks like Eddie Munster. lol

Used to like him. Tre from the Miami season and I are budz

 

[candycorn]

One would think more people are going to pay attention to the election now that the primaries are coming up. But something happened to FOX NEtwork. They got almost half of the viewers than before? What happened?
Oh, let me guess. The popular candidate wasn't there. Boom! Fox got had!

Bullshit. That's not what ratings mean unless what you're broadcasting is a circus.

Ratings are for the purpose of selling things. They do not apply to a public service broadcast like a political debate. They have no function there. None.

Well, yes it did. Apparently 9,000,000 fewer viewers saw what the GOP has to offer.

For a morally bankrupt republican battleaxe to be cheering it is something straight out of Crazy koo-koo land.

Worshiping a messiah makes people do strange things.

If that 9 million represent the Rumpbots (an extremely shaky theory, but if) .... then the end result would be merely a migration of muddled minds who weren't watching for the issues in the first place, so --- nothing ventured, nothing gained.

The positive would be that the remaining players in the debate get more time to chew on actual nuts-and-bolts issues without dealing with blusterfluff noise. Whether they take that opportunity is another question but at least it's potential.

I would have liked to see them put an empty chair up there and fire questions at it, but that would have been taking it back to an entertainment show.

I had it wrong, 11 million fewer viewers