If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Center for Public Integrity)   The really, really, really big winners of the 2012 election? The media   (publicintegrity.org) divider line 13
    More: Asinine, elections in 2012, League of Conservation Voters, democratic groups, Center for Public Integrity, Americans for Job Security, Sunlight Foundation, PAC Restore Our Future, Center for Responsive Politics  
•       •       •

712 clicks; posted to Politics » on 16 Jan 2013 at 2:21 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



13 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-01-16 02:19:09 PM  
Mitt's big (and only) showing in the first debate was the media's bestest Christmas ever. After that, every talking head and pinheaded blogger was screaming, "It's a horse race, dammit!"

Turns out it was never really close at all. Still, the media finally had its close election, and they pharkt that chicken for all it was worth, and after it was over all that was left was a handful of bloody feathers.

/Karl Rove's meltdown on FOX remains must see TV.
//I was surprised that he actually bought into his own lies.
 
2013-01-16 02:24:12 PM  
Bigger winners than the democrats? C'mon.

The democrats seized on the population's disdain for the GOP and their archaic notions. The 2012 election showed that the GOP is just trending into total obscurity, and will probably go extinct soon.

And that's why the democrats took over control of the house of representatives, amiright?
 
2013-01-16 02:26:30 PM  
You know who else was a winner?

worldviewtonight.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-01-16 02:33:52 PM  
What's wrong with the obvious tag, subby?
 
2013-01-16 02:34:19 PM  
Media conglomerates have mostly given up on doing anything but going after ratings. They've cut newsrooms to the bone, and places like Gannett won't do mass layoffs. They'll let one or 2 go here and there and never refill the positions. Then they slowly purge the older people (real journalists) and then bring in interns and younger, cheaper, people to do more work with less resources. If you have a pre-made story ready to go, offer it to them. It is likely they'll take it and use it.

The Media wanted this to be a close contest. And they tried their damnedest. Nate Silver and the Princeton site stood firm in their numbers and this drove the media crazy. They tried to ignore these and went after anything that made the race close. Hell, Fox and company even had that stupid Skewed Numbers idiot playing with numbers- which caused Karl Rove's meltdown that had Romney biting his lip and fidgeting on election night ever so hopeful that he could somehow win.

Yes, the media won this election.

SevenizGud: And that's why the democrats took over control of the house of representatives, amiright?


Gerrymandering had a lot to do with it. Arizona is still fighting over the nonpartisan commission that set up our districts (which resulted in a Democratic majority going to Congress for the first time in a long time). The GOP *hated* this commission. Jan Brewer went apesh*t and fired the head of it because it wasn't fair (insert jpeg of Jim Carry as the police officer).
 
2013-01-16 02:46:16 PM  
Beneficiaries from Citizens United
The 2010 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that led to the creation of super PACs and free-spending political nonprofits added nearly $1 billion in new spending to the 2012 election. Nine of the top 10 beneficiaries were media buyers, which usually collect a 15 percent commission of the amount billed.


I saw/heard only a few political ads this year so maybe the sample size isn't big enough statistically, but I think the candidates should be asking for a refund en masse.
 
2013-01-16 03:24:32 PM  
Yeah, you can tell they made a lot of cash off the election by the way they've been throwing something very much like a heroin withdrawal fit trying to inflate arbitrary stories to the same level or popularity since the election ended.

I mean... really? Giving credence to the trillion-dollar coin idea? Trying to start a new fight over gun control even when only like two people in washington are really into it? Come on, guys, I know political ads are a cash cow, but learn to live with the normal ones in the off-season.
 
2013-01-16 03:40:19 PM  

Nadie_AZ: Media conglomerates have mostly given up on doing anything but going after ratings. They've cut newsrooms to the bone, and places like Gannett won't do mass layoffs. They'll let one or 2 go here and there and never refill the positions. Then they slowly purge the older people (real journalists) and then bring in interns and younger, cheaper, people to do more work with less resources. If you have a pre-made story ready to go, offer it to them. It is likely they'll take it and use it.

The Media wanted this to be a close contest. And they tried their damnedest. Nate Silver and the Princeton site stood firm in their numbers and this drove the media crazy. They tried to ignore these and went after anything that made the race close. Hell, Fox and company even had that stupid Skewed Numbers idiot playing with numbers- which caused Karl Rove's meltdown that had Romney biting his lip and fidgeting on election night ever so hopeful that he could somehow win.

Yes, the media won this election.


I wonder what the media's going to do next election when everyone reads 538 and skips the dog and pony, boolsheet show ?

/I just read Nate Silver's blog in the AM, and gave not a fark for the remainder of the day.
 
2013-01-16 09:52:36 PM  

Summer Glau's Love Slave: I wonder what the media's going to do next election when everyone reads 538 and skips the dog and pony, boolsheet show ?

/I just read Nate Silver's blog in the AM, and gave not a fark for the remainder of the day.


I had to turn off the TV after seeing how wild the media's predictions were compared to Nate's, and that was in 2008
 
2013-01-16 10:04:52 PM  

Summer Glau's Love Slave: I wonder what the media's going to do next election when everyone reads 538 and skips the dog and pony, boolsheet show ?

/I just read Nate Silver's blog in the AM, and gave not a fark for the remainder of the day.


The guy's analysis proved very accurate in 2008, although not quite as honed as last year. He also did a hell of a job on the midterms. Yet people still prefer to watch the hyperbole and ridiculous predictions from other sources. Even after his work in '08 and '10 the GOP noise machine still spent the final 6 weeks before the election badmouthing him, going so far as to dismiss everything he said because he didn't speak with enough bravado and act macho enough. Why would you think people will focus in on him next election? I think the people that were going to abandon the other sources for him already did so in '10 or '12.
 
2013-01-16 10:46:34 PM  
I could have probably stated that more succinctly: People that still watch FOX don't do it for facts. They do it to have someone validate their preconceived worldview. They'd rather be lied to than get the truth.
 
2013-01-17 12:14:55 AM  
The two biggest winners of all, in one image:
therecoveringpolitician.com
 
2013-01-17 02:36:11 AM  

Soup4Bonnie: I saw/heard only a few political ads this year so maybe the sample size isn't big enough statistically, but I think the candidates should be asking for a refund en masse.


Lucky you.. on the morning news show, on the lobby TV at work, they were about 80-90% of the ads in each ad break for months.
 
Displayed 13 of 13 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report