Kamala Harris 2021

[hobbes2702 12846]

3 minutes ago, Satoshi said:

 

Fox News is like a millimeter more to the right than cnn is to the left. That’s why I said essentially equal in terms of bias. 

So you ignored an entire axis of the chart. Like I said, good to know you can’t read a chart.

[Satoshi 129]

4 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

So you can’t read a table. Good to know.

NPR does depend on government funding. It’s also one of our most non biased news sources. Unless you have some data that proves them wrong. Oh you don’t and are jjst talking out of your ass.

I commented only on the x axis, bias. Not sure why you’re extrapolating anything else from what I said. 

[Brisketexan 104628]

23 minutes ago, Satoshi said:

Great so according to that chart CNN level of bias is essentially equal to Fox News. Thanks for sharing. 
 

But that chart is a fucking joke. NPR falls in the neutral category? Their existence is largely dependent on leftist government funding. Lolololol

And there THAT is.  What a lazy-ass, garbage troll take.  I literally listened to NPR speak to congresscritters from both parties on the issue  of the various spending bills/proposals the past couple of weeks, and the interviewer 1) kept the conversation topical, and 2) asked hard/uncomfortable questions of both, giving them a chance to state their case, but not unchallenged.  It was about as close to objective and unbiased interviewing as you can get.

What a piss-ant troll take.  You haven't been banned enough.  You're a flat-out troll.

[hobbes2702 12846]

12 minutes ago, Satoshi said:

I commented only on the x axis, bias. Not sure why you’re extrapolating anything else from what I said. 

I’m not extrapolating anything. You read a single axis on a two axis chart. That’s a really dumb way to analyze a chart with x and y. The entire chart measures media bias. That bias is presented in two ways, political bias, and reliability. Both of those things determine the bias of the news source not just one. 

[hobbes2702 12846]

9 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

And there THAT is.  What a lazy-ass, garbage troll take.  I literally listened to NPR speak to congresscritters from both parties on the issue  of the various spending bills/proposals the past couple of weeks, and the interviewer 1) kept the conversation topical, and 2) asked hard/uncomfortable questions of both, giving them a chance to state their case, but not unchallenged.  It was about as close to objective and unbiased interviewing as you can get.

What a piss-ant troll take.  You haven't been banned enough.  You're a flat-out troll.

Ding ding ding

[TwiceHorn 31283]

22 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

And there THAT is.  What a lazy-ass, garbage troll take.  I literally listened to NPR speak to congresscritters from both parties on the issue  of the various spending bills/proposals the past couple of weeks, and the interviewer 1) kept the conversation topical, and 2) asked hard/uncomfortable questions of both, giving them a chance to state their case, but not unchallenged.  It was about as close to objective and unbiased interviewing as you can get.

What a piss-ant troll take.  You haven't been banned enough.  You're a flat-out troll.

It also demonstrates that he never listens to NPR.  Their news reporting is pretty highly factual, although occasionally you can hear the disdain in the reporter-with the unspellable name's voice.

Some of the "shows" do have a bit more explicit liberal bias.  But it never masquerades as fact.

[wildcat09 29257]

It hasn't even been a week since Fox was caught deceptively editing a video of Biden and the troll is here saying they're just a barely right-leaning CNN.

[Brisketexan 104628]

7 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

It also demonstrates that he never listens to NPR.  Their news reporting is pretty highly factual, although occasionally you can hear the disdain in the reporter-with the unspellable name's voice.

Some of the "shows" do have a bit more explicit liberal bias.  But it never masquerades as fact.

Oh, shit, the "shows" in the evening often end up exploring the artistic struggle of a ethnically maori lesbian playwright or somesuch -- cool, cool.  Those are an entirely separate production from NPR news, which is an excellent source that is well within the group of "reasonably free of bias, and makes an honest effort to get input from opposing perspectives."  Shit, they were talking about the Texas abortion law the other day, and they interviewed a gal with Texas Right to Life -- they asked her some good, open-ended questions that let her state her position and perspective, they asked a few hard questions that made her defend certain stated criticisms of the law, etc.  It was a fair and objective interview.  I learned about her group's position and expectations.  I found them scary as shit, but that wasn't because of any "bias" in reporting -- in fact, it was because of the matter-of-fact statements coming directly from her mouth.

[bolverk 29400]

The chart posted above is two years out-of-date -- they revise it regularly. The one above also does a poor job distinguishing between FOX's online news site versus the channel. Below, you can clearly see their placement and where they show Newsmax on the line between "selective" and "misleading." OAN TV is in the latter category.

Here's the most recent:

Also, Satoshi/GRHorn is way out of bounds on how much NPR relies on federal funding. In other words, he is as always full of shit.

While NPR does not receive any direct federal funding, it does receive a small number of competitive grants from CPB and federal agencies like the Department of Education and the Department of Commerce. This funding amounts to approximately 2% of NPR's overall revenues.

[F250 28691]

NPR has the word Public in it so it's socialist. lulz

Anyone that listens to NPR knows that all the affiliates are constantly running pledge drives and playing credits to the businesses that provide underwriting. 

NPR news is pretty fucking objective. To the point they give undue respect to some absurd shit like Trump. "The President stated XYZ although that is factually incorrect. We are unsure as to why the President would make that statement."

The other shows are not liberal unless you consider a discussion on the mundane liberal.

 

[cactusflinthead 27594]

2 hours ago, Satoshi said:

I commented only on the x axis, bias. Not sure why you’re extrapolating anything else from what I said. 

Keep digging fuckhead

[Born to Run 6567]

It also demonstrates that he never listens to NPR.  Their news reporting is pretty highly factual, although occasionally you can hear the disdain in the reporter-with the unspellable name's voice.
Some of the "shows" do have a bit more explicit liberal bias.  But it never masquerades as fact.

And half the time they go out of the way to be neutral, even the topic is clear right wing fuckery: " what do you think Mr Trump is trying to accomplish here" (reality Trump was lashing out full Id no plan)


Edit: What F250 said

[Biff Tannen 45497]

I question the validity of the chart when fox and friends and breitbart are higher on the y axis than regular old Fox News. Though maybe it’s just gotten that bad lately. 

[Smax 3800]

And there THAT is.  What a lazy-ass, garbage troll take.  I literally listened to NPR speak to congresscritters from both parties on the issue  of the various spending bills/proposals the past couple of weeks, and the interviewer 1) kept the conversation topical, and 2) asked hard/uncomfortable questions of both, giving them a chance to state their case, but not unchallenged.  It was about as close to objective and unbiased interviewing as you can get.
What a piss-ant troll take.  You haven't been banned enough.  You're a flat-out troll.

I listen to it daily and npr is far from neutral Nowhere near the opposite spectrum as fox but definitely leans left of center

[Brisketexan 104628]

I listen to it daily and npr is far from neutral Nowhere near the opposite spectrum as fox but definitely leans left of center

Yeah, I’ve questioned that myself in recent years. I listen to a story, and come away thinking the “right wing” subject of the story is a dumbass/up to bullshittery. So I play it back in my head to think about what gave me that impression. It is very rarely a “slant” by the commentator. Instead, it’s usually the result of the right wing subject answering a question with “I’m a dumbass up to bullshittery.” Kind of like how we got constant complaining about how the media was obviously biased against Trump because they insisted on….playing his exact words, unedited.

The right regularly comes off looking like shit because….they actually look like shit. It’s not makeup, it’s not the lighting. They genuinely look like shit. Occam’s razor.

[fattyflattie 4636]

1 hour ago, Smax said:

5 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

And there THAT is.  What a lazy-ass, garbage troll take.  I literally listened to NPR speak to congresscritters from both parties on the issue  of the various spending bills/proposals the past couple of weeks, and the interviewer 1) kept the conversation topical, and 2) asked hard/uncomfortable questions of both, giving them a chance to state their case, but not unchallenged.  It was about as close to objective and unbiased interviewing as you can get.
What a piss-ant troll take.  You haven't been banned enough.  You're a flat-out troll.

I listen to it daily and npr is far from neutral Nowhere near the opposite spectrum as fox but definitely leans left of center

I think they landed it perfectly on the chart.  It’s not pure center, it’s not difficult to listen to no matter your politics.    I think it was closer to pure center 7-10 years ago. 

[Bullneck 18987]

On 11/14/2021 at 11:31 PM, Satoshi said:

This is an obvious insider hit piece on Kamala. So you have to ask why is CNN publishing it? Seems to me that it’s Biden friendly people throwing this story out there. 
 

 

Let me get this straight: a report is packed with reporting?  Do I have that right?

[TwiceHorn 31283]

20 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

I think they landed it perfectly on the chart.  It’s not pure center, it’s not difficult to listen to no matter your politics.    I think it was closer to pure center 7-10 years ago. 

Well, one problem for NPR is that it is staffed entirely by sentient, educated, intelligent people.

There's not a soul at NPR that isn't absolutely revolted by Trump and all that he stands for and the complete abasement of the GOP at his feet.   So, yeah, that probably kind of comes through.  And that makes it librul these days.

Edited November 16, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[bolverk 29400]

5 minutes ago, Bullneck said:

Let me get this straight: a report is packed with reporting?  Do I have that right?

There was quite a bit of angst in the twitterverse over this story, because it came out on the same day that CNN apparently had a big special on Chris Christie that many claimed to be trying to clean up his reputation.

At the same time, Kamala was in France cleaning up relations and, by all accounts, acquitted herself very well and was warmly welcomed by their politicos. The twitterati claim that none of that was covered on CNN or other American cable channels. They felt like it was a hit piece released while she was actually doing good stuff.

Personally, I don't know. I cut the cord in 2009, so I have no idea how any of this played out on cable news. But that was the gist of it as I understand it.

[fattyflattie 4636]

4 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, one problem for NPR is that it is staffed entirely by sentient, educated, intelligent people.

I forgot, educated intelligent pubs do not exist, only D’s.  

[Brisketexan 104628]

I forgot, educated intelligent pubs do not exist, only D’s.  

It’s kind of a self-fulfilling feedback loop. There used to be plenty of Repubs who were intelligent, had integrity, defensible positions, etc. Now, the only common thread is that they must debase themselves to a cult. And they have to show that they are on bird with the team ethos: be cruel dicks. That group self selects - people with honor and integrity bail, leaving only the worst behind.

It didn’t used to be that way. You and I both know it.

[fattyflattie 4636]

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

That group self selects - people with honor and integrity bail, leaving only the worst behind.

There’s a contingent that hold their nose, or hold out altogether.  We may not be large in numbers, but it exists. 

[C-Man 27056]

6 hours ago, Satoshi said:

Great so according to that chart CNN level of bias is essentially equal to Fox News. Thanks for sharing. 
 

But that chart is a fucking joke. NPR falls in the neutral category? Their existence is largely dependent on leftist government funding. Lolololol

You're a fucking idiot.

 

6 hours ago, VivaNaranja said:

I mean, Satoshi is definitely illiterate (Fox News Network clearly skews further than CNN in that chart), but I think there's issues with those rankings. In what world are OANN and Newsmax as centrist as CNN and Newsweek? Not to mention the New York Post's placement

Look at the date. December 2019. OANN and Newsmax got way more alt-right whackadoodle during the pandemic/2020 election cycle. (At least I think. I wasn't even aware of their existence until then.)

[F250 28691]

41 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

I forgot, educated intelligent pubs do not exist, only D’s.  

[Brisketexan 104628]

There’s a contingent that hold their nose, or hold out altogether.  We may not be large in numbers, but it exists. 

So….you hold your nose….and vote for the exact people who have demonstrated that they have no honor, integrity, or principles. Maybe you shouldn’t do that. Maybe you should take a whiff, realize they stink, and walk the fuck away. That’s what I did.

[elfenix 34171]

22 minutes ago, C-Man said:

You're a fucking idiot.

 

Look at the date. December 2019. OANN and Newsmax got way more alt-right whackadoodle during the pandemic/2020 election cycle. (At least I think. I wasn't even aware of their existence until then.)

i heard of newsmax ("spewsmax") nearly 20 years ago.  iirc they were big in the swiftboating thing.  then they fell off the map for me, only to come back hard and fast in the last couple years. 

[6th Street 6357]

I remember she got destroyed in the primaries, so not surprising to see her poll so poorly. Worse than those other scrubs like Warren, Klobs, and Castro

[F250 28691]

George Will voted for "Lets go Brandon." When the top Republican intellectual bails on the GOP along with the rest of the intelligent ones (RINOs because they read books) it means your party is full of imbeciles.

I don't even like the Democratic party and don't like Liberals but Holy Shit, the GOP is full of Know Nothing Knuckle Dragging Fucking Mouth Breathers. The GOP doesn’t even have a platform. It stands for nothing. Conservativism now just means shit I am going to bitch about today but will change my mind tomorrow depending on what Trump says.

With that said, Kamala is ass, my dude. I'll still vote for her over whatever Right Wing Nationalist the GOP rolls out.

[Bullneck 18987]

9 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

I forgot, educated intelligent pubs do not exist, only D’s.  

There are a number of former Republicans that are now Democrats on this board.  Myself included.

I can think of only one D who is thinking of switching parties, and that person is Joe Manchin, and coincidentally is a big, slimy bitch.

[Bullneck 18987]

9 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

There’s a contingent that hold their nose, or hold out altogether.  We may not be large in numbers, but it exists. 

One of my oldest friends from Corpus happens to also live in NJ.  In 2008 he said he "held his nose" and voted for McCain, who happened to be one of the last decent and reasonable Republicans (ignoring that S&L money he took in the '80s).

This friend is a one issue voter -- taxes.  I think his stance is kind of short sighted but it has a kind of logic to it.  

So pick a R in office right now and tell me what logic they have.

[Satoshi 129]

10 minutes ago, Bullneck said:

There are a number of former Republicans that are now Democrats on this board.  Myself included.

I can think of only one D who is thinking of switching parties, and that person is Joe Manchin, and coincidentally is a big, slimy bitch.

Not sure how slimy of a bitch this guy is 

[Sawbonz 27436]

9 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

I forgot, educated intelligent pubs do not exist, only D’s.  

Name one

I say this as someone who has voted Republican as often as Democrat in the past. Republicans are a dying species. The ones that are left are fucking lunatics. The decent ones are retiring from office. There is no one coming up through the ranks to replace those decent ones

Edited November 16, 2021 by Sawbonz

[wildcat09 29257]

10 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

I forgot, educated intelligent pubs do not exist, only D’s.  

Intelligent Republican voters don't go into journalism.

[fattyflattie 4636]

24 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Name one

I say this as someone who has voted Republican as often as Democrat in the past. Republicans are a dying species. The ones that are left are fucking lunatics. The decent ones are retiring from office. There is no one coming up through the ranks to replace those decent ones

I was speaking to the voters. But I’m certain there are intelligent, well educated R’s in elected spots. Their ideas being a bit wacky doesn’t mean they are dumb. Of course there’s always a few like old tits McGee down in Co, etc.  Even the dipshit with the toes and space lasers is a UGA grad iirc. 

[fattyflattie 4636]

9 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Maybe you should take a whiff, realize they stink, and walk the fuck away.

Im just going to withhold, like last election. Not going to vote for the other pile of shit just because I don’t like my usual pile of shit.  

[hobbes2702 12846]

11 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

I forgot, educated intelligent pubs do not exist, only D’s.  

Anyone who’s educated and intelligent wouldn’t participate in a party that’s actively wants to overthrow the government.

[Longhorn_Fan68 33843]

2 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Anyone who’s educated and intelligent wouldn’t participate in a party that’s actively wants to overthrow the government.

[Captainant 27464]

11 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

I forgot, educated intelligent pubs do not exist, only D’s.  

It's almost like opposition to "higher order thinking skills and critical thinking" is part of the GOP platform or something

[alincoln 2364]

11 hours ago, 6th Street said:

I remember she got destroyed in the primaries, so not surprising to see her poll so poorly. Worse than those other scrubs like Warren, Klobs, and Castro

She's the D Palin but Trump was awful enough for the electorate to ignore her.  Does the power of incumbency apply when neither the POTUS nor the VP are on the incumbent ticket?  I guess the current plan is for Biden to run again but she has no chance of making it to the top of the ticket.

[hobbes2702 12846]

49 minutes ago, alincoln said:

She's the D Palin but Trump was awful enough for the electorate to ignore her.  Does the power of incumbency apply when neither the POTUS nor the VP are on the incumbent ticket?  I guess the current plan is for Biden to run again but she has no chance of making it to the top of the ticket.

In what way at all is she similar to Palin other than being female and nominated for VP? 

[TexArcher 37519]

19 hours ago, Satoshi said:

Great so according to that chart CNN level of bias is essentially equal to Fox News. Thanks for sharing. 
 

But that chart is a fucking joke. NPR falls in the neutral category? Their existence is largely dependent on leftist government funding. Lolololol

This is some next level stupidity.

[Longhorn_Fan68 33843]

52 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

This is some next level stupidity.

nah, you'd have to be able to read a chart to get to the next level

[Red Five 40665]

1 hour ago, alincoln said:

She's the D Palin

Don't do this. There is no equivalent to Palin. 

[Bateshorn 9905]

20 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

And there THAT is.  What a lazy-ass, garbage troll take.  I literally listened to NPR speak to congresscritters from both parties on the issue  of the various spending bills/proposals the past couple of weeks, and the interviewer 1) kept the conversation topical, and 2) asked hard/uncomfortable questions of both, giving them a chance to state their case, but not unchallenged.  It was about as close to objective and unbiased interviewing as you can get.

What a piss-ant troll take.  You haven't been banned enough.  You're a flat-out troll.

Also, the government money that goes to NPR subsidizes the rural and small station operations budgets, not programming.  The big PBS and NPR outfits produce most of the programming using private donations (Ray Kroc’s wife left a huge chunk of their fortune to the NPR mothership in DC).  If you take away the government funding, it just means your small town NPR station won’t be able to keep the lights on.  The big Boston, NY, DC, Chicago, and LA outfits will be just fine. 
 

With the migration to talk radio /and  corporate radio consolidation of FM and AM, NPR is often the only source of free news, traffic, and weather in small communities. 
 

NPR is an excellent example of public private partnership that works and involves minimal tax payer investment and maximum return. 

Edited November 16, 2021 by Bateshorn

[Texaspython 231]

20 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

And there THAT is.  What a lazy-ass, garbage troll take.  I literally listened to NPR speak to congresscritters from both parties on the issue  of the various spending bills/proposals the past couple of weeks, and the interviewer 1) kept the conversation topical, and 2) asked hard/uncomfortable questions of both, giving them a chance to state their case, but not unchallenged.  It was about as close to objective and unbiased interviewing as you can get.

What a piss-ant troll take.  You haven't been banned enough.  You're a flat-out troll.

Guy has never listened to NPR. It’s “leftist” or so he’s been told. He’s good little boy.

[Sawbonz 27436]

4 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

I was speaking to the voters. But I’m certain there are intelligent, well educated R’s in elected spots. Their ideas being a bit wacky doesn’t mean they are dumb. Of course there’s always a few like old tits McGee down in Co, etc.  Even the dipshit with the toes and space lasers is a UGA grad iirc. 

 

4 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

Im just going to withhold, like last election. Not going to vote for the other pile of shit just because I don’t like my usual pile of shit.  

The problem with that is by sitting out you are helping to elect people who want to thwart the constitution so that minority rule can exist in perpetuity. That may (probably will) work in your favor in the short term.  I know you don’t think it will happen, but eventually those maniacs will come after the middle. The purity tests are already eroding the fairly right wing of the party. Just look at what Huffines has done to Abbott. We need to put the nuts down once and for all and then we can get down to the business of sorting reasonable disagreements.

[alincoln 2364]

1 hour ago, hobbes2702 said:

In what way at all is she similar to Palin other than being female and nominated for VP? 

They both fucked Glen Rice

[Sawbonz 27436]

Just now, alincoln said:

They both fucked Glen Rice

Why do you care who a politician is fucking?

[hobbes2702 12846]

Just now, alincoln said:

They both fucked Glen Rice

So you were talking out of your ass? Throwing shit and hoping it sticks?

[alincoln 2364]

Just now, hobbes2702 said:

So you were talking out of your ass? Throwing shit and hoping it sticks?

They were both chosen as VP nominees almost entirely based on their identity, had zero appeal to independents, have no chance of ever leading a presidential ticket, were immediately ignored by McCain/Biden following the general election, are walking gaffes, and are historically unpopular among the general electorate.