Menu
Forum
General Car Audio
Subwoofers
Speakers
Amplifiers
Head Units
Car Audio Build Logs
Wiring, Electrical and Installation
Enclosure Design & Construction
Car Audio Classifieds
Home Audio
Off-topic Discussion
The Lounge
What's new
Search forums
Gallery
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
Classifieds Member Feedback
SHOP
Shop Head Units
Shop Amplifiers
Shop Speakers
Shop Subwoofers
Shop eBay Car Audio
Log in / Register
Forum
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
Log in / Join
What’s new
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
General Car Audio
Subwoofers
Speakers
Amplifiers
Head Units
Car Audio Build Logs
Wiring, Electrical and Installation
Enclosure Design & Construction
Car Audio Classifieds
Home Audio
Off-topic Discussion
The Lounge
What's new
Search forums
Menu
Reply to thread
Forum
Off-topic Discussion
The Lounge
why that was nice
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="audioholic" data-source="post: 6247395" data-attributes="member: 549629"><p>So because Fox news has more viewers than any other news organization, this means their tactics are more 'effective'? That's circular logic, just as unfair as someone who claims that more viewers = more truth. And furthermore, it implies that Fox somehow is more devious than their counterparts... again merely based on the fact they have higher ratings.</p><p>The population does have a short memory for specifics, but they remember very well whom they like and dislike. The media has attempted to put as bad a taste in our mouths for Sanford as possible. This does not go away quickly. Sure by 2012 alot of people wont remember why, but they will remember they dont like the guy. If the memory of the population works as you claim, there would be no need for the presidential election process start well over a year before we actually vote.</p><p></p><p>I agree Reps want a family values candidate. Where we disagree is not with his supporters, but with his opposition. Again CNN was all over the Clinton angle of it didnt affect his ability to govern.... I dare you to find one piece of CNN coverage on the Sanford case that addresses this angle. Whether his supporters would buy it or not is not the point... the point is CNN has no desire to even attempt such a task, because it does not fit their own agenda. Im not claiming Fox does not do this as well. The difference between you and I is you are trying to claim the side you disagree with is somehow 'worse'.</p><p></p><p>And that's not even addressing the fact that, imo, its a sad state of affairs to say an entire section of our society finds family values and honesty unimportant to being the most powerful politician in our country.</p><p></p><p>There is no unbiased way to ask the question, again not the point. The point is they could, would and did chose to word the question in a manner that groomed an expected answer. Two examples:</p><p></p><p>1) "Would the president having a relationship with Monica Lewinski affect his ability to govern our country?"</p><p></p><p>2) "Would the president being caught being dishonest affect your view of his ability to effectively govern our country?"</p><p></p><p>Clinton did, after all, lie about it, quite blatantly. One form of the question poses it as merely a relationship with a woman, while the other highlights the dishonesty aspect of the scandal. Take a statistics class. Its easy to groom answers from people simply based on how you word the question.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="audioholic, post: 6247395, member: 549629"] So because Fox news has more viewers than any other news organization, this means their tactics are more 'effective'? That's circular logic, just as unfair as someone who claims that more viewers = more truth. And furthermore, it implies that Fox somehow is more devious than their counterparts... again merely based on the fact they have higher ratings. The population does have a short memory for specifics, but they remember very well whom they like and dislike. The media has attempted to put as bad a taste in our mouths for Sanford as possible. This does not go away quickly. Sure by 2012 alot of people wont remember why, but they will remember they dont like the guy. If the memory of the population works as you claim, there would be no need for the presidential election process start well over a year before we actually vote. I agree Reps want a family values candidate. Where we disagree is not with his supporters, but with his opposition. Again CNN was all over the Clinton angle of it didnt affect his ability to govern.... I dare you to find one piece of CNN coverage on the Sanford case that addresses this angle. Whether his supporters would buy it or not is not the point... the point is CNN has no desire to even attempt such a task, because it does not fit their own agenda. Im not claiming Fox does not do this as well. The difference between you and I is you are trying to claim the side you disagree with is somehow 'worse'. And that's not even addressing the fact that, imo, its a sad state of affairs to say an entire section of our society finds family values and honesty unimportant to being the most powerful politician in our country. There is no unbiased way to ask the question, again not the point. The point is they could, would and did chose to word the question in a manner that groomed an expected answer. Two examples: 1) "Would the president having a relationship with Monica Lewinski affect his ability to govern our country?" 2) "Would the president being caught being dishonest affect your view of his ability to effectively govern our country?" Clinton did, after all, lie about it, quite blatantly. One form of the question poses it as merely a relationship with a woman, while the other highlights the dishonesty aspect of the scandal. Take a statistics class. Its easy to groom answers from people simply based on how you word the question. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forum
Off-topic Discussion
The Lounge
why that was nice
Top
Menu
What's new
Forum list
