• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

A great read with every stat and study about our good friend FOX News

jbander said:
It only looks like it leans to the left when your that far of in da da land in the outer boundaries of the right
Click to expand...
If that's true then half the population is in the outer boundaries of the right, because that's how many people say that the MSM has a liberal bias. You also have to consider the people who don't pay enough attention to notice a bias.
 
Johnson said:
When I hit about 30, I began operating with an acceptance that any of my opinions or views could be completely wrong based on facts I had been previously ignorant of. It was difficult at first, since admitting that level of personal ignorance seems almost contrary to human nature, but once I got accustomed to it, I've found it's a great way to live.

Edit: #feeltheme lol
Click to expand...

I always have a little bit of doubt about every opinion, including my own.
 
"a stronger emotional need for an outlet like Fox, where they can find affirmation and escape factual challenges to their beliefs."

Puh-lease. This exactly describes the lefts need for GroupThink. Also, it describes the liberals need for the basement sub forum.
 
MrWonka said:
I guess I don't really see the point of it. Everyone who's going to understand the book already knows this is how these people think. The people who really need to understand it will likely reject it for the same reasons they reject everything else.
Click to expand...
Well thats hard to argue against, point taken,
 
mpg said:
If that's true then half the population is in the outer boundaries of the right, because that's how many people say that the MSM has a liberal bias. You also have to consider the people who don't pay enough attention to notice a bias.
Click to expand...
Paranoia is a prerequisite to be a regressive, from Tri lateral commissions to Masons , to a commie behind every corner , to government is evil ,to all Newspapers,news groups and all sources of information is liberal. to everyone that doesn't grovel at the feet of their masters being liars. To hatred to everything that the old white mans hate party find uncomfortable because of their ignorance of the situation or person ,including Homophobia , hatred of teacher, government worker, Muslims , Mexicans, Blacks , women, the poor. SO I'm not ever surprised at what the right comes out against.
 
Last edited:
jbander said:
Paranoia is a prerequisite to be a regressive, from Tri lateral commissions to Masons , to a commie behind every corner , to government is evil ,to all Newspapers,news groups and all sources of information is liberal. to everyone that doesn't grovel at the feet of their masters being liars. To hatred to everything that the old white mans hate party find uncomfortable because of their ignorance of the situation or person ,including Homophobia , hatred of teacher, government worker, Muslims , Mexicans, Blacks , women, the poor. SO I'm not ever surprised at what the right comes out against.
Click to expand...
Majority in U.S. Continues to Distrust the Media, Perceive Bias
 
jbander said:
I know of only one study that looked into it, It was pundifacts, it seems to be associated to politifacts. There process to do this study is reasonable, but the outcome destroys FOX CRAP NEWS and Rush Fatty, Fox lies 60% of the time and Rush lies 85% of the time. Both being the poorest by far.
Click to expand...
There was a thread about that. Even punditfact admitted that their methods were arbitrary and unscientific. Even if Fox lied 10x more than any other network, that still wouldn't be anywhere near 60% lies. If they were lying 60% of the time they'd have to be lying about things like what day it is and who's the POTUS.
 
jbander said:
THE REPUBLICAN BRAIN.

The Core Thesis: Authoritarian people have a stronger emotional need for an outlet like Fox, where they can find affirmation and escape factual challenges to their beliefs.
Insights from Chris Mooney’s book The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science and Reality.
That's just the beginning there are unarguable facts and a few that can be argued but it puts FOX News where it belongs and how it is needed by the right.
Click to expand...

The irony here is that you spelled out your own emotional need for affirmation and an escape from factual challenges.

I'll read this book if you read A CONFLICT OF VISIONS. Deal?
 
mpg said:
There was a thread about that. Even punditfact admitted that their methods were arbitrary and unscientific. Even if Fox lied 10x more than any other network, that still wouldn't be anywhere near 60% lies. If they were lying 60% of the time they'd have to be lying about things like what day it is and who's the POTUS.
Click to expand...
Not true there study is sound , I'm only dealing with your scewed as far as your own argument is concerned. They didn't judge by what day they said it was, Bogus.
 
jmotivator said:
The irony here is that you spelled out your own emotional need for affirmation and an escape from factual challenges.

I'll read this book if you read A CONFLICT OF VISIONS. Deal?
Click to expand...
Funny I didn't have to go far, the first thing I looked at "KIRKUS REVIEW

A broadly sweeping philosophical analysis, Sowell's new book performs a useful service for people interested in contemporary politics: it attempts to lay out objectively the basic differences between the liberal and conservative visions. Sometimes cogent, the book falls short, however, of objectivity; its conservative biases and obfuscations are readily apparent from the start." Funny
 
jmotivator said:
The irony here is that you spelled out your own emotional need for affirmation and an escape from factual challenges.

I'll read this book if you read A CONFLICT OF VISIONS. Deal?
Click to expand...
BY the way your answer is like a 5 year old , "it isn't me it's you" " no it isn't me it is you" E real weak link response
 
jbander said:
Funny I didn't have to go far, the first thing I looked at "KIRKUS REVIEW

A broadly sweeping philosophical analysis, Sowell's new book performs a useful service for people interested in contemporary politics: it attempts to lay out objectively the basic differences between the liberal and conservative visions. Sometimes cogent, the book falls short, however, of objectivity; its conservative biases and obfuscations are readily apparent from the start." Funny
Click to expand...

So the answer is no, then. I figured as much.

Also, are you claiming the book your are asking us to read doesn't have a political lean? :roll:
 
Last edited:
jbander said:
BY the way your answer is like a 5 year old , "it isn't me it's you" " no it isn't me it is you" E real weak link response
Click to expand...

Nope, my response is pointing out the irony in your post. Your post was ironically like a 5 year old who doesn't understand irony.
 
jbander said:
THE REPUBLICAN BRAIN.

The Core Thesis: Authoritarian people have a stronger emotional need for an outlet like Fox, where they can find affirmation and escape factual challenges to their beliefs.
Insights from Chris Mooney’s book The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science and Reality.
That's just the beginning there are unarguable facts and a few that can be argued but it puts FOX News where it belongs and how it is needed by the right.
Click to expand...

At least Republicans have a brain, right?
 
jmotivator said:
So the answer is no, then. I figured as much.

Also, are you claiming the book your are asking us to read doesn't have a political lean? :roll:
Click to expand...
Don't know ,if it is logical I really don't care what the lean is. The comment I gave you is from a long list of charges of not being logical and a few examples. So Do I have to read it , nope I don't have the time.
 
jmotivator said:
Nope, my response is pointing out the irony in your post. Your post was ironically like a 5 year old who doesn't understand irony.
Click to expand...
Wow You have a point then, if I was you I would just move onto another thread, maybe one like the book says supports your color of bull****.
 
jbander said:
Don't know ,if it is logical I really don't care what the lean is. The comment I gave you is from a long list of charges of not being logical and a few examples. So Do I have to read it , nope I don't have the time.
Click to expand...

Does your source of criticism have a lean? I mean you realize you are trying to justify judging a book without reading it, correct? You do realize that your position is in fact bias?
 
jbander said:
Wow You have a point then, if I was you I would just move onto another thread, maybe one like the book says supports your color of bull****.
Click to expand...

If it's all the same to you, I'll stay here and discuss with you about how you manage to display willful ignorance and your own bias in an attempt to expose the bias of other sources. It's fun.
 
jbander said:
There you go, you should appreciate the study I presented to see where the worse of that bias lies. Actually something that thinking people have always been able to judge.
Click to expand...
You obviously didn't read the link.
 
jbander said:
Not true there study is sound , I'm only dealing with your scewed as far as your own argument is concerned. They didn't judge by what day they said it was, Bogus.
Click to expand...
They didn't take their own findings seriously yet you do.
 
mpg said:
They didn't take their own findings seriously yet you do.
Click to expand...
I told you what their finding was, I believe it because I know for a fact that any study that include you regressives will automatically be negative about darn near everything, except the direction you disperse your hate. I've never seen a more negative, cup half full, paranoid and pessimistic group of hater in my lifetime.
 
jbander said:
I told you what their finding was, I believe it because I know for a fact that any study that include you regressives will automatically be negative about darn near everything, except the direction you disperse your hate. I've never seen a more negative, cup half full, paranoid and pessimistic group of hater in my lifetime.
Click to expand...

Confirmation bias.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom