• 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!

Carlson Losing Advertisers Says He's Not Worried.

Do you understand the context in which he was speaking about. He was talking about the environmental aspect of migration, he talked about the study in Arizona that said for illegal immigrate that crosses the border they leave 6 pounds of trash in the desert on their journey, they destroy animal habitats and hurt endangered brushes and trees along their migration path. Which makes America dirtier.

At least the opposition to him should be truthful in which he clams the migration makes the country dirtier is in respect to the environment and is not a judgment on the people themselves.

I watch only FOX NEWS.

I would never soil myself by watching CNN or MSNBC.

But I never watch Mr. Carlson, so I did not know about his comment until now. Thanks for the explanation.


I do agree with other posters, however, that he should have known better than to have used that word. He must have known that his enemies would take it out of context.


*****


We have to admit that one reason the Central American countries are in such distress is the constant intervention by the United States in those countries during the 1950s and later. The United States regularly overthrew Central American governments for one reason or another.
 
If Fox does not support Tucker here to the hilt then they are useless, he did nothing wrong, it fact this an excellent example of speaking truth to power.
 
maybe he can get a job selling bow ties.
 
Good.

He's content enough with the loss of the advertisers and the advertisers are happy not to be seen as overtly associating themselves with him. Sounds like a win-win situation to me.[/QUOTE

Didn't the boycott against O'Reilly work to get rid of the sleazy a-hole? And didn't a boycott force Laura Ingraham to take a 'vacation'?

Advertising boycotts DO WORK. Just depends on how much Faux News values advertising revenue vs a multi-million dollar anchor who spews racist crap all the time. Hate to break it to the trump base - but you aren't in the majority.

The MAJORITY of Americans are NOT racist - THANK GOD!

How can you boycott something that you don't watch?
 
Would anyone buy that for a nickel??

Let me offer you a dime. I often read things that make one want to believe that only cons are Christians, or that only liberals care about the environment. Somehow I don't think this broad brush is what it appears to be.
 
Dude, you're the most intellectually inconsistent person here. Literally nothing you say makes a lick of sense when you compare it with anything else you've ever said.

Tho to be fair. He isn't as bad as trump.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Perhaps the "My Pillow" guy will step up and buy more time with Tucker's show.
 
How can you boycott something that you don't watch?

You do realize that most of the companies don't even know that they are advertising on Carlson's show right??? The ad business and the content biz are totally seperate entities in media. These two sides rarely talk to each other. That's why there aren't partisan commercials and that you see said boycotts in the first place. It's only until one of their clients gets in trouble do they figure out if they were advertising on their show and then have to make the determination to stop.
 
November 2018 Ratings: Fox News Remains at the Top of the Cable Heap in Total Day Viewers

https://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/november-2018-ratings-fox-news-remains-at-the-top-of-the-basic-cable-heap-in-total-viewers/386020

Fox News Channel continued its extraordinary streak as the most-watched network on basic cable for 29 months running. According to Nielsen data, FNC drew an average of 1.48 million viewers across the 24-hour day in November 2018, which is not only more than any other network on basic cable, but it’s also +3 percent vs. what it drew in November 2017.


Fox News finished No. 2 during prime time in November, behind only ESPN, a network that is thriving right now with college football and NFL programming. FNC posted +6 percent growth vs. November 2017 (2.44 million vs. 2.30 million).

Looks like Trump's little NFL boycott didn't pay off.
 
Teddy Roosevelt was pro environment.

Yes he was. Over 100 years ago. Except for a few here and there, most Republicans don't respect the environment. It was one of the problems I had all those decades that I supported them. Trump opened my eyes to just how disrespectful of the environment and animals most Republicans truly are.

I for one wish today's GOP was like TR's GOP. But given who is at the helm of the GOP, we all know there's a better chance I'll wake up tomorrow morning looking exactly like Cindy Crawford.
 


:doh

foxsimpson1.png


So what was Obama referring to in that clip with Wallace and Carlson if it wasn't race? Transportation funding?
 
Tucker Carlson is very effective and the Left cannot compete in a fair fight. The left has to resort to cheating to compete. They did this to Hannity and Limbaugh over the years and lost each time. There is a short term blip but it does not last. The Democrat party lynch mob tactics have not changed since the time of Jim Crow. Jim Crow has changed.

The bottom line has to do with economics. FOX is by far the top news outlet in terms of audience and revenues. Highest profits means they can afford to pay for the best people in news media. Half the books on the NY times best seller list come from FOX people. Doesn't Carlson have a book on the list called the Ship of Fools? This has made some people nervous.

CNN is near the bottom and ends up with the bottom of the barrel media people; 5th and 6th round draft pics. Fake news is the logical result when untalented people have to pretend to be competent day after day. They need to lie to compensate for poor investigating skills, or they need to read the script supplied by others; talking head.

Carlson is talented and self standing and can do the research needed to deal in the facts. This is what makes him popular and highly paid. The Democrats have nobody to compete with him in talent, so they need to the Lynch mob. The Democrats are getting nervous and feel the need to use classic Democrat KKK extreme measures. My advice to the Democrat is to work harder in journalism school and don't depend as much on being a con artist, so you can slide by. Maybe FOX will hire you if you improve.
 
So what was Obama referring to in that clip with Wallace and Carlson if it wasn't race? Transportation funding?

If you truly think it was about race, please explain your reasoning.
 
Can anyone explain Carlson’s comments?



The relevant issue starts about 12:34

Oddly enough the op has wildly misrepresented the subject.

Never seen that before.....:roll:
 
Do you understand the context in which he was speaking about. He was talking about the environmental aspect of migration, he talked about the study in Arizona that said for illegal immigrate that crosses the border they leave 6 pounds of trash in the desert on their journey, they destroy animal habitats and hurt endangered brushes and trees along their migration path. Which makes America dirtier.

At least the opposition to him should be truthful in which he clams the migration makes the country dirtier is in respect to the environment and is not a judgment on the people themselves.

Lol. Where should Andy Wheeler send the check?
 
If you truly think it was about race, please explain your reasoning.

I'd rather hear JG and your take on what Obama was referring to since it must have been something, right?
 
I'd rather hear JG and your take on what Obama was referring to since it must have been something, right?

Something such as...? "Dark times" means that people have faced times in their life that were bleak and full of trouble.

Does the word "dark" trigger you?
 
“We're not intimidated,” he said. “We plan to try to say what’s true until the last day. And the truth is unregulated mass immigration has badly hurt this country's natural landscape.”

This guy is so white supremacist that other white supremacists tell him to dial it the **** down.

By stating facts that makes him a racist, looks like you’re the one that pulled the race card, how is unregulated mass immigration racism?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
By stating facts that makes him a racist, looks like you’re the one that pulled the race card, how is unregulated mass immigration racism?

Carlson's obvious racist dog whistle is obvious.
 
Something such as...? "Dark times" means that people have faced times in their life that were bleak and full of trouble.

Does the word "dark" trigger you?

A lot depends on your audience.
Who was Obama speaking to?
 
A lot depends on your audience.
Who was Obama speaking to?

Not really. I think it more depends on projection in this case. You see something that likely isn't there due to your own projection.
 
Carlson is out spreading lies and fear mongering....He needs to be removed , I'd like to kick him in the face
 
Not really. I think it more depends on projection in this case. You see something that likely isn't there due to your own projection.

Your take is that talking about overcoming "far darker threats" while speaking to the Congressional Black Caucus had absolutely nothing to do with race.
Is that right?
So if he said "overcoming far darker threats" while addressing GLAAD he wouldn't be talking about the fight for gay rights?
 
Your take is that talking about overcoming "far darker threats" while speaking to the Congressional Black Caucus had absolutely nothing to do with race.
Is that right?

What was the actual context of the statement? It looks like the only context you care for is the audience itself because you then ask:

So if he said "overcoming far darker threats" while addressing GLAAD he wouldn't be talking about the fight for gay rights?

Depends on the context of the conversation. Not just the audience as you seem to assume here.
 
Back
Top Bottom