Limbaugh Listeners have "High Knowledge"

red states rule

Senior Member
May 30, 2006
16,011
573
48
This is why conservative talk radio is successful and liberal talk radio fails.

http://newsbusters.org/node/6674
Rush Limbaugh Listeners Top Chart for 'High Knowledge'
Posted by Greg Sheffield on July 31, 2006 - 18:30.
Which party controls the U.S. House? Who is the current Secretary of State? Who is the president of Russia?
If you know all three questions, you could be a Rush Limbaugh listener. According to a new study by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, Rush Limbaugh listeners place second in the category of "high knowledge." This is above the pretentious New Yorker, the almost as pretentious NPR, news magazines like Time, the "News Hour with Jim Lehrer," and cable news outlets.

Doesn't "acting" smart count for something? It only does in New York socials and in "An Inconvenient Truth."


Weekly Standard/New Republic: 50%
Rush Limbaugh: 48%
New Yorker/Atlantic: 44%
O’Reilly Factor: 42%
News magazines 41%
Online news (daily): 41%
NPR: 39%
Daily Show: 38%
Sunday AM talk: 36%
Talk radio: 36%
Business magazines: 33%
NewsHour: 32%
CNN: 31%
Daily newspaper: 30%
Nightly network news: 30%
Larry King Live: 30%
Fox News Channel: 28%
TV news magazines: 27%
Community newspapers: 27%
Letterman/Leno: 26%
C-SPAN: 25%
Local TV news: 24%
 
You can have talk radio. The Dems own the Television airwaves.


red states rule said:
This is why conservative talk radio is successful and liberal talk radio fails.

http://newsbusters.org/node/6674
Rush Limbaugh Listeners Top Chart for 'High Knowledge'
Posted by Greg Sheffield on July 31, 2006 - 18:30.
Which party controls the U.S. House? Who is the current Secretary of State? Who is the president of Russia?
If you know all three questions, you could be a Rush Limbaugh listener. According to a new study by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, Rush Limbaugh listeners place second in the category of "high knowledge." This is above the pretentious New Yorker, the almost as pretentious NPR, news magazines like Time, the "News Hour with Jim Lehrer," and cable news outlets.

Doesn't "acting" smart count for something? It only does in New York socials and in "An Inconvenient Truth."


Weekly Standard/New Republic: 50%
Rush Limbaugh: 48%
New Yorker/Atlantic: 44%
O’Reilly Factor: 42%
News magazines 41%
Online news (daily): 41%
NPR: 39%
Daily Show: 38%
Sunday AM talk: 36%
Talk radio: 36%
Business magazines: 33%
NewsHour: 32%
CNN: 31%
Daily newspaper: 30%
Nightly network news: 30%
Larry King Live: 30%
Fox News Channel: 28%
TV news magazines: 27%
Community newspapers: 27%
Letterman/Leno: 26%
C-SPAN: 25%
Local TV news: 24%
 
We know, that is why it is called the liberal media.

That is also why Fox News and talk radio is gaining, and the liberal media is losing viewers/listeners.
 
I'd hardly consider a working knowledge of current events "high knowledge." I'd rather see a sampling of IQ scores across the political spectrum.
 
5stringJeff said:
I'd hardly consider a working knowledge of current events "high knowledge." I'd rather see a sampling of IQ scores across the political spectrum.

I don't see where high IQ scores would necessarily equate to political smarts either.
 
ScreamingEagle said:
I don't see where high IQ scores would necessarily equate to political smarts either.


Libs have this superiority complex that demands they believe they are smarter then everyone else

Also today is the 18th anniversary of Rush's show.

He is starting his 19th year of making liberal nightmares come true
 
ScreamingEagle said:
I don't see where high IQ scores would necessarily equate to political smarts either.

It might be telling if the average IQ score of politically active Democrats was higher than that of politically active Republicans, or vice versa, or that politically active Greens, or Libertarians or whomever, were quantifiably more intellegent. You're right, it wouldn't be a smoking gun, but it might give policies espoused by the "smarter" party a bit more credence.
 
Mr.Conley said:
Personally, I hope the Republicans are smarter. That would be some delicious irony. Plus I'd feel better about Iraq.

I'd rather see the results of the testing of people with common sense.
 
I would also. Especially in the red states. Because no matter how much Y'ALL want to deny it. Its no coincidence that most of the Bush states are in the....well....ehhem.. The Midwest or what one would consider not the most intellectual part of the country. These are the people who voted for Bush, because he talked like them, he sounded like a real idiot like the red staters..and guess what..THEY WERE RIGHT !!!


5stringJeff said:
I'd hardly consider a working knowledge of current events "high knowledge." I'd rather see a sampling of IQ scores across the political spectrum.
 
5stringJeff said:
I'd hardly consider a working knowledge of current events "high knowledge." I'd rather see a sampling of IQ scores across the political spectrum.


I don't think IQ really means anything when it comes politics.

This is neither here nor there, but I thinks it's an interesting fact: A few years ago I read an interview with Alex Trebek of Jeopardy! He was asked who the best and worst contestants were. The best: teachers. The worst: Mensa members. :)
 
T-Bor said:
I would also. Especially in the red states. Because no matter how much Y'ALL want to deny it. Its no coincidence that most of the Bush states are in the....well....ehhem.. The Midwest or what one would consider not the most intellectual part of the country. These are the people who voted for Bush, because he talked like them, he sounded like a real idiot like the red staters..and guess what..THEY WERE RIGHT !!!


T-bor, libs like you are the reason your party is sinking. You l;ok at the gfolks who have rejected liberalism as idiots. Is that how you will get people to vote Democrat in the next election? To insult them?

You and your ilk keep up the good work. People are starting to see what liberalism really stands for and they do not like what they see.

On all fronts, liberalism is failing and it is a wonderful sight to behold
 
From a politicians' viewpoint, a successful one does what he has to in order to keep his job. In America that means money, PR, money and PR. From a voters' stand point, a good politician does what the voter elected him to accomplish. You don't need to know what river runs through Ecuador to accomplish that.
 
T-Bor said:
I would also. Especially in the red states. Because no matter how much Y'ALL want to deny it. Its no coincidence that most of the Bush states are in the....well....ehhem.. The Midwest or what one would consider not the most intellectual part of the country. These are the people who voted for Bush, because he talked like them, he sounded like a real idiot like the red staters..and guess what..THEY WERE RIGHT !!!
Don't go trashing "y'all." It's a fine word and an essential part of the language. IT lets you get more information across in less time. I use "y'all" all the time (except around the blue bloods, got to know your audience). I condemn you for condemning y'all.
 
Mr.Conley said:
Don't go trashing "y'all." It's a fine word and an essential part of the language. IT lets you get more information across in less time. I use "y'all" all the time (except around the blue bloods, got to know your audience). I condemn you for condemning y'all.

Let libs like T-bor show their contempt for red staters. It will make the Republicans job in November much easier
 
nt250 said:
I don't think IQ really means anything when it comes politics.

This is neither here nor there, but I thinks it's an interesting fact: A few years ago I read an interview with Alex Trebek of Jeopardy! He was asked who the best and worst contestants were. The best: teachers. The worst: Mensa members. :)

No wonder I failed the online audition test! :(
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top