Church of Trump

[CosmicCowboy]

That is really a stupid article.

[hater]

Spamming the Donald's threads are not helping your cause haters

[CosmicCowboy]

when a Liberal quotes Mark Levin as a valid source which he would totally disregard on any other subject but Fox News. Pathetic.

[boutons_deux]

That is really a stupid article.

Fox allowed the rise of Trump, has had him on dozens of times, let him spew, now they've got their very own Frankenstein monster making a (bigger) joke of the Repug Klown Kar.

btw, Rubio is 100% against abortion for any reason (let both mother and fetus die, rape, incest babies go full term), but his solution is morning-after pill, but Repugs/Christian Taliban call that abortion.

[SpursforSix]

Fox allowed the rise of Trump, has had him on dozens of times, let him spew, now they've got their very own Frankenstein monster making a (bigger) joke of the Repug Klown Kar.

btw, Rubio is 100% against abortion for any reason (let both mother and fetus die, rape, incest babies go full term), but his solution is morning-after pill, but Repugs/Christian Taliban call that abortion.

LOL. No. Obama allowed the rise of Trump. So you get what you get. I have no idea how Trump would do in the white house. But whatever he would do, it wouldn't be worse than the current administration.
If Trump becomes president, feel free to use any of the "Thanks Obama" gifs.

[CosmicCowboy]

Fox allowed the rise of Trump, has had him on dozens of times, let him spew, now they've got their very own Frankenstein monster making a (bigger) joke of the Repug Klown Kar.

btw, Rubio is 100% against abortion for any reason (let both mother and fetus die, rape, incest babies go full term), but his solution is morning-after pill, but Repugs/Christian Taliban call that abortion.

Stupid . Trumps been on the major networks, CNN, MSNBC, etc. too. He is an equal opportunity blowhard. Fox didn't "create" Trump.

[boutons_deux]

http://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/2...-marie-brenner

http://www.people.com/people/archive...116915,00.html

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...uring-sex.html

I remember Trump being trashed as a cheap, cheating chump for frantically trying to reduce is wealth so divorce from Ivana wouldn't cost him so much.

[SpursforSix]

I remember Trump being trashed as a cheap, cheating chump for frantically trying to reduce is wealth so divorce from Ivana wouldn't cost him so much.

I remember Obama being touted as the Transparent President for Hope and Change.

[CosmicCowboy]

I remember Obama being touted as the Transparent President for Hope and Change.

Don't forget he was going to stop the oceans from rising!

[SpursforSix]

Don't forget he was going to stop the oceans from rising!

He's got about 2 years to finish that.

[boutons_deux]

you guys got nothing on Obama

[hater]

you guys got nothing on Obama

Yup. Last 7 years speak for themselves

[Spurminator]

when a Liberal quotes Mark Levin as a valid source which he would totally disregard on any other subject but Fox News. Pathetic.

He's quoting Mark Levin to show conservative reaction. Same reason he's quoting Rush Limbaugh. That's the point of the article. It's not about a "valid source," these are quotes from conservative opinion-makers. Do you deny that there are a lot of FOX News viewers and conservatives who didn't like the way Trump was treated in the debate?

[RandomGuy]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...tm_source=SFFB
With Donald Trump's Rise, Fox News Reaps What It Sows

The cable news network that trained its audience to see media criticism of Republican politicians as evidence of bias is attacked for its coverage of Trump.

Fox News’ coverage of Donald Trump’s campaign has resembled the treatment that the real estate tycoon and reality TV star receives in “the mainstream media.” It is unlike the network’s coverage of unqualified populist favorites from past election cycles, like Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, and Herman Cain. And populists are taking notice.

Last week’s debate is a fine illustration.

Immediately after the candidates left the stage in Cleveland, Ohio, Fox News moderator and anchor Megyn Kelly threw the network’s coverage over to pollster Frank Luntz, who stood in a room with a small group of voters gathered to offer their impressions. “Megyn, we’re about to make some news tonight,” he said as he turned to the panel. His meaning quickly became apparent: Under questioning, most of the assembled voters revealed that they felt unfavorably about Trump’s performance.

“You know what happened?” one man said. “I liked him when I came in here, because he wasn’t a politician. But right now, he skirted around questions better than a lifelong politician ever had.” Said another, “I was really expecting him to do a lot better, but he just crashed and burned. He was mean, he was angry, he had no specifics, he was bombastic.” A third voter declared, “You know, he just let me down. I just expected him to rise to the occasion and look presidential. He didn’t.”

The reactions were confounding to me, even though they squared with the conventional wisdom that Trump’s demeanor had finally inflicted a fatal wound on his presidential prospects.

...

Perhaps engaging Trump supporters on substantive points would be fruitful; perhaps not. Either way, hoping that off-the-cuff comments about a McCain or a Kelly will discredit him—and play-acting as if that is the source of the dismay at his rise—isn’t working. Populists see through it. And they believe, sometimes correctly, that elites talk about them in ways that are equally insulting without ever having to apologize. Trump may yet implode. And I don’t see any way for him to win a general election. But if he doesn’t implode and GOP elites want to keep him from becoming their nominee or a third-party spoiler, they’ll need to offer winning arguments as to why he’s unqualified to a base that they’ve trained to be immune to media persuasion.

Karma is a Trump.

On the whole a fair analysis. Fox news viewers don't want to know what is wrong with their candidates. The fact that they got asked things that they would have to answer in a general election is a bad thing.

They want cardboard cutouts that parrot the right things to say, and never get asked the hard questions that a decent, conscientious voter would ask.

[RandomGuy]

That is really a stupid article.

How? Specifically?

[boutons_deux]

[boutons_deux]

Bristol Palin backs Trump, slams Fox News president for saying he only hired her mom because she was ‘hot’




http://www.rawstory.com/2015/08/bris...e+Raw+Story%29

Donny's support really ramping up!

[Clipper Nation]

Don't forget Trump Presidential (formerly known as the White House).

[SpursforSix]

On the whole a fair analysis. Fox news viewers don't want to know what is wrong with their candidates. The fact that they got asked things that they would have to answer in a general election is a bad thing.

They want cardboard cutouts that parrot the right things to say, and never get asked the hard questions that a decent, conscientious voter would ask.

I don't know how they were able to assemble that re ed a group of people to monitor for the debate. It was proof enough to me that Fox News isn't biased.

[boutons_deux]

"proof enough to me that Fox News isn't biased."

holy !

the debate was BUSINESS activity for Fox, selling corporate ads to 24M viewers. Fox knows one of these Klowns will be the candidate, they don't really care which one.

multi-year, money-polluted USA elections are BUSINESSES masquerading as democracy.

http://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2016-debate-schedule/2016-republican-primary-debate-schedule/

[SpursforSix]

"proof enough to me that Fox News isn't biased."

holy !

the debate was BUSINESS activity for Fox, selling corporate ads to 24M viewers. Fox knows one of these Klowns will be the candidate, they don't really care which one.

multi-year, money-polluted USA elections are BUSINESSES masquerading as democracy.

http://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2016-debate-schedule/2016-republican-primary-debate-schedule/

You expect a network to not try to make money? That has nothing to do with them being biased to any agenda.
My point was that if they wanted to cast the average Republican in a positive light, they could have done a better job of selecting their panel.

[boutons_deux]

You expect a network to not try to make money? That has nothing to do with them being biased to any agenda.
My point was that if they wanted to cast the average Republican in a positive light, they could have done a better job of selecting their panel.

you mean the panel of questioners? you don't think Ailes didn't know about the questions?

Fox is biased to the Repug/VRWC agenda: get Repugs elected at all levels everywhere.

[SpursforSix]

you mean the panel of questioners? you don't think Ailes didn't know about the questions?

Fox is biased to the Repug/VRWC agenda: get Repugs elected at all levels everywhere.

No. The public panel that they were questioning and monitoring about how the debate went.

[CosmicCowboy]

you mean the panel of questioners? you don't think Ailes didn't know about the questions?

Fox is biased to the Repug/VRWC agenda: get Repugs elected at all levels everywhere.

if you claim this then you have to acknowledge that all the other networks are biased to the Democrat agenda.

[CosmicCowboy]

Had to laugh