How Fox News works

[Orca of Peace 109]

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

What would proof look like? 

that's up to the people making the claim, don't you think?

[Orca of Peace 109]

2 minutes ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

9 minutes ago, Orca of Peace said:

the burden of proof is on those who claim the Russian meddling had a material impact on the election outcome, which it did not until proven otherwise. Can you do it?

I'm not claiming anything one way or another. You are.

you dont' understand how life works. When a claim is made, it's up to that person to show some substance. In other words, prove the affirmative. 

I'd like to know how Russian meddling, which i don't deny, actually produced verifiable results in Trump's favor. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23364]

Just now, Orca of Peace said:

that's up to the people making the claim, don't you think?

Point is, no matter how much evidence and supporting testimony I throw, you will just disregard and say it’s not enough to qualify as proof.  It’s intellectually disingenuous.

[Gengs1 2583]

Man if there are tapes of Hanity and Cohen, it has to be glorious, there is no way Hanity didn’t say some shit on them.

[Orca of Peace 109]

8 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Point is, no matter how much evidence and supporting testimony I throw, you will just disregard and say it’s not enough to qualify as proof.  It’s intellectually disingenuous.

your presumption is intellectually disingenuous. I will entertain any real hard facts. Now it's up to you to produce or STFU. 

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13554]

you dont' understand how life works. When a claim is made, it's up to that person to show some substance. In other words, prove the affirmative. 
I'd like to know how Russian meddling, which i don't deny, actually produced verifiable results in Trump's favor. 

You just wrote that the person making the claim is the same person that gets to determine what qualifies as proof. You are a fire hose of life lessons, Pelosi. I shall treasure them always.

[Gengs1 2583]

Just now, Orca of Peace said:

your presumption is intellectually disingenuous. I will entertain any real hard facts. Now it's up to you to produce or STFU. 

What are real hard facts?

 

I am sure ide this is you

 

 

[Js1 85141]

12 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Point is, no matter how much evidence and supporting testimony I throw, you will just disregard and say it’s not enough to qualify as proof.  It’s intellectually disingenuous.

Swam'd.

[Gengs1 2583]

Looks like Fox News will run the story and Democrats and Russia are working together against the idiot 

[Orca of Peace 109]

1 minute ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

13 minutes ago, Orca of Peace said:

you dont' understand how life works. When a claim is made, it's up to that person to show some substance. In other words, prove the affirmative. 
I'd like to know how Russian meddling, which i don't deny, actually produced verifiable results in Trump's favor. 

You just wrote that the person making the claim is the same person that gets to determine what qualifies as proof. You are a fire hose of life lessons, Pelosi. I shall treasure them always.

the person making the claim has to provide proof. Simple.  

[Orca of Peace 109]

show me the money! or in this case, show me how Russia made Trump the POTUS. Can anyone do it without the usual Surly immaturity? I don't think anyone can do it.

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13554]

the person making the claim has to provide proof. Simple.  

Okay. Prove you're a Democrat.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23364]

4 minutes ago, Orca of Peace said:

your presumption is intellectually disingenuous. I will entertain any real hard facts. Now it's up to you to produce or STFU. 

Just read the Mueller indictments on the Russians and decide for yourself.

https://www.justice.gov/file/1035477/download

https://www.justice.gov/file/1080281/download

Also this:

https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

And this:

https://www.google.com/amp/thehill.com/homenews/news/388939-clapper-no-doubt-russia-is-the-reason-trump-won%3famp

And this

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/opinions/without-the-russians-trump-wouldnt-have-won/2018/07/24/f4c87894-8f6b-11e8-bcd5-9d911c784c38_story.html

And this

 

[Orca of Peace 109]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Just read the Mueller indictments on the Russians and decide for yourself.

https://www.justice.gov/file/1035477/download

https://www.justice.gov/file/1080281/download

Also this:

https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

And this:

https://www.google.com/amp/thehill.com/homenews/news/388939-clapper-no-doubt-russia-is-the-reason-trump-won%3famp

And this

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/opinions/without-the-russians-trump-wouldnt-have-won/2018/07/24/f4c87894-8f6b-11e8-bcd5-9d911c784c38_story.html

And this

 

 

i never denied Russian meddling, but how many votes did it change in the grand scheme of things? A few hundred, a few thousand, millions?  Are there any metrics on that? Did it hand the Presidency to Donald J. Trump? 

[Gengs1 2583]

1 minute ago, Orca of Peace said:

 

i never denied Russian meddling, but how many votes did it change in the grand scheme of things? A few hundred, a few thousand, millions?  Are there any metrics on that? Did it hand the Presidency to Donald J. Trump? 

Even if provided you wouldn't believe them

[Orca of Peace 109]

2 minutes ago, Gengs1 said:

Even if provided you wouldn't believe them

I would

[Longhornfan1024 1707]

So orca of peace's assertion is that if someone shoots at me and misses, I shouldn't care because I wasn't hurt and the cops shouldn't care or arrest the person because I wasn't hurt.  

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

Orca:  "Advertising is a $70 billion dollar business.  But it would be impossible to prove that I bought a coke yesterday because coke decided to run an ad.  I can't prove it.  Coke can't prove it.  I guess Coca Cola just wasted those billions of dollars then.  What a dumb company. "

[TornACL 7682]

1 hour ago, Longhornfan1024 said:

So orca of peace's assertion is that if someone shoots at me and misses, I shouldn't care because I wasn't hurt and the cops shouldn't care or arrest the person because I wasn't hurt.  

The next pivot will be "Everyone does it, we've meddled in plenty of elections. This is just something that always happens. It's normal"

[HenryJames 65892]

The next pivot for Trump supporters is that they will be ok with Russian intervention because it prevented Hillary from becoming President.

[safe sex 11686]

Next? Isn't that already happening?

Edited July 25, 2018 by trauma babe

[Js1 85141]

5 minutes ago, trauma babe said:

Next? Isn't that already happening?

Pretty much yes.
 

"Who cares if Russia interfered? It means Hillary isn't president!"

[WhatTheBuck 28718]

2 hours ago, Orca of Peace said:

you dont' understand how life works. When a claim is made, it's up to that person to show some substance. In other words, prove the affirmative. 

I'd like to know how Russian meddling, which i don't deny, actually produced verifiable results in Trump's favor. 

Do you think advertising increases sales? Can you quantify exactly how much is due to the advertising and how much isn't? Or do you just know that it works?

It's not possible to know to what extent voters were influenced by Russia's campaign of misinformation on social media, hacking, dark money, etc. it's foolish to think it had no effect at all. 

[Orca of Peace 109]

2 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Do you think advertising increases sales? Can you quantify exactly how much is due to the advertising and how much isn't? Or do you just know that it works?

It's not possible to know to what extent voters were influenced by Russia's campaign of misinformation on social media, hacking, dark money, etc. it's foolish to think it had no effect at all. 

marketing departments carefully track ads and sales correlation.  Not sure that analogy works here. 

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

7 minutes ago, Orca of Peace said:

marketing departments carefully track ads and sales correlation.  Not sure that analogy works here. 

The analogy works 100%.  The only difference is the empirical proof.  You can't compare Trump v. Hillary elections with Russian propaganda versus Trump v. Hillary elections without Russian propaganda because there is no such thing as the latter.  That is why there is no 'proof.'  But you can take it on faith that advertising works, note that (illegal) advertising for Trump was done here, and accept that the needle was therefore moved.  But no one will ever be able to know the amount the needle moved.

[Biff Tannen 45504]

Y'all are feeding the troll

[WhatTheBuck 28718]

36 minutes ago, Orca of Peace said:

marketing departments carefully track ads and sales correlation.  Not sure that analogy works here. 

Think harder. You can do it. 

"Hold the pickle, hold the lettuce, special orders don't upset us. All we ask is that you let us serve it your way."

"Two all-beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, on a sesame seed bun."

Can you tell us exactly how each affected sales at Burger King and McDonald's? Can Burger King or McDonald's? If not, were those marketing campaigns a waste of money? Are all marketing campaigns a waste of money? Should  politicians stop running political ads altogether?

Check this out. I can still do this from memory. You'll have to trust me..."bun seed sesame a on, onions, pickles, cheese, lettuce, sauce special patties beef all two."

That got you a free, or at least discounted, Big Mac somewhere around 40 years ago. I don't remember exactly what the benefit was but I remember the promotion. The shit works. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23364]

 

[hobbes2702 12850]

8 hours ago, Orca of Peace said:

the burden of proof is on those who claim the Russian meddling had a material impact on the election outcome, which it did not until proven otherwise. Can you do it?

Don’t feed the trolls

[Post Oak 20188]

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

Oh Candace.  

[Message Board User 12389]

 

[Chuckie Finster 22600]

 

Oh wow, I just assumed she already worked there.

[Gil Bang 25901]

Respect where it's due

 

 

 

[Jive Turkey 12568]

Hannity has Roseanne Barr on right now.

[BrickHorn 18197]

On 7/25/2018 at 8:34 PM, Message Board User said:

 

Of course they did.  Because Fox caters to the Cult of Asshole, where the most important character trait is being a miserable, detestable prick.  That’s basically the right wing these days.

[Gil Bang 25901]

 

[Ted Lange 16054]

 

[tantric superman 4667]

Shep Smith did a nice job defending the CNN reporter who got banned.

[ChiTownDoc 21102]

On 7/25/2018 at 10:03 AM, HenryJames said:

The next pivot for Trump supporters is that they will be ok with Russian intervention because it prevented Hillary from becoming President.

Of course.  And the Russians hate gays, blacks, browns...I have a feeling that might sell well to the present day Party Numero Uno.  

[Gil Bang 25901]

4 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

Shep Smith did a nice job defending the CNN reporter who got banned.

He does a nice job on most things. 

 

 

[Pancho 44509]

Of course everyone else is discussing the breaking Cohen news and Laura ingraham is having a segment on people being mean to conservatives in public 

[JimmyJames 12271]

1 hour ago, Gil Bang said:

 

Alex was on Austin public accces in the 90s. If you understand that,  nothing more about him needs to be said. 

[Patrick Bateman 3903]

SIAP.

Seems like a great match for DTJ.

[Js1 85141]

Omg was she passing around dick pics from Trump Jr.?

Gross.

[kevwun 15669]

Is she getting whiskers in her next plastic surgery?

[Underdog 28458]

2 bagger. 

[Biff Tannen 45504]

She looks like the got damn Joker.

[Brisketexan 104688]

1 hour ago, Patrick Bateman said:

SIAP.

Seems like a great match for DTJ.

Would.....but I'd hate myself afterwards.

[SmokeyTheBear 5562]

2 hours ago, kevwun said:

Is she getting whiskers in her next plastic surgery?

[retread 2951]

It's glorious the level to which Hannity has been reduced. Tune in for Part II.