We the Sheeple

Why McCain's victories are losses for Talk Radio

from JoeUser Forums
Ann Coulter chanting "VOTE ROMNEY" on FOX News yesterday.

Rush Limbaugh detailing for his entire three hours exactly why a McCain nomination will destroy the Republican Party.

Sean Hannity repeating the same four talking points over and over and over... oh wait, that's normal. But those talking points are about how horrible a senator and president McCain has been and will be, respectively.

Well, just another Super Tuesday has come and gone. And the conservative punditry is ablaze, fueled by the figure of John McCain burning in effigy. These talk-show hosts blast his voting record, the bills he's sponsored, the somewhat shady alliances he's forged with Democrats like Russ Feingold, (gasp!) John Kerry, (even gaspier) Teddy Kennedy, and (gaspiest) Hillary Clinton.

Yet for all their bluster and umbrage, people are voting for John McCain in droves. Outside the political bellwether states like North Dakota and Utah, nobody seems to prefer the pundits' choice, Mitt Romney.

Why not? Is talk radio not as influential as it likes to think it is? Or are people listening but not following? The Talkies want people to see McCain as he really is, but could he possibly be that bad?

Talk radio does have McCain pegged on some fronts. John McCain is certainly a Washington insider, which people naturally (and rightly) distrust. And he has voted against the Bush tax cuts, vowed to close Gitmo, and bought into global warming hook, line, and sinker. But there must be something to McCain toward which people are gravitating, or else he wouldn't be winning.

So how is it that talk radio can't sway the masses? Are the masses swayable? And if they are, is it Rush, Sean, Ann, and the minor-league pundits who will shape the rest of the parade toward the Republican nomination? Considering more than half the states voting yesterday went with John McCain, obviously not everyone sees McCain as the threat Rush Limbaugh says he is. Apparently this message is being transmitted but not received. So are the voters of America sheep for following the McCain bandwagon? Or are they sheep if they vote with the pundits?
17,301 views 38 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
"We the Sheeple, in order to form a more moderate union..."
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top

You miss the issue just as most do.  It has nothing to do with influence, perceived, real, imagined, or claimed.  It is a dog fight.  You note the diatribes (I wont say talking points as some of these people are not Republicans, but all are conservative), but miss the fact that the audience is fighting back.  The audience is not going to bail on them, and after the dog fight, they will still be there as will the hosts.

This is really the first time since Talk radio came in vogue (and indeed the first time since 1980) that there is a real dog fight and not a coronation on the republican side.  And just like the democrat cat scratching going on, come November, the old wounds are going to be forgotten as whoever is the nominee will receive the support from the opposition of their party once more.

The Conservative Christians of the right are threatening boycott, and I am sure some will.  Maybe even enough to make a difference.  But by no means will all of them boycott.  because the alternative between McCain and Obama/Hillary is too great for them to ignore.

I think most of the perception that talk radio has lost its zing is from the fact that they have been very vociferous in defending (not supporting) Bush due to the irrational hatred leveled at him from the left.  If you listen to the shows, when they are not defending him from a left wingnut, they are blasting him for not being a conservative.  Thus it will be with McCain if he is elected as well.  He will get blasted just as Bush.  Whether he will be defended will depend upon how the left deals with him.

Star Control: Origins
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
You miss the issue just as most do.

Ouch! Come out swinging, why don't you? ::

And just like the democrat cat scratching going on, come November, the old wounds are going to be forgotten as whoever is the nominee will receive the support from the opposition of their party once more.

Listening to the bile and contempt spewed by Sean, Rush, and Ann yesterday about how "a vote for McCain will change the party forever" can you believe the two sides of the party can ever reconcile? James Dobson already came out and said he'd never vote for McCain -- and while neither you nor I may listen to the good Dr. Dobson, there are a lot of sheeple who do.

So who's the Right choice? Is McCain really that bad? Is Romney really the savior of the conservative movement? And has Talk Radio indeed lost its "zing"? I think the pundit classes have a say in how the race can be shaped from this point on, but I think it's too late.
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
Listening to the bile and contempt spewed by Sean, Rush, and Ann yesterday about how "a vote for McCain will change the party forever" can you believe the two sides of the party can ever reconcile?


Never reconcile? Destroy the party? One can only hope . . .
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top

Ouch! Come out swinging, why don't you?

Sorry, did not mean to come off so harsh.

Is McCain really that bad?

No, but he is not as "conservative" as Romney.  They have a choice now.  They will not in November. So they are trying to voice and influence the selection now.  As are all the rest.

Is Romney really the savior of the conservative movement?

Not by a long shot, but he is the most conservative of the remainder.  And that is why they are pushing for him.

So who's the Right choice?

None of the above, but we have to accept no one is going to give us 100% of what we want, just as they have accepted, and will accept it.

Wait to September.  The only ones who will still be bringing this stuff up is the opposition

Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
No, but he is not as "conservative" as Romney. They have a choice now. They will not in November. So they are trying to voice and influence the selection now. As are all the rest.

Clearly McCain has to have something going for him, otherwise all these states wouldn't be lining up behind him.

Maybe I'm getting closer to your original statement: Do the pundits really know what's best? Or are they so out-of-touch with Mr. and Mrs. Millard America (of Young America, MN) and so bloated with their own self-importance that they cannot see who's the best candidate? Is McCain what the people want or what they need?
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top

The Swan Song has been played for Rush Limbaugh's show every presidential election cycle since he came on the national scene.  When Clinton won, they said he was through because he didn't have a Republican president to prop up anymore.    When "W" won, they said he was through because he didn't have Clinton to kick around anymore. 

Meanwhile, Rush's show gets high ratings in liberal markets, even in the few markets their own Air America was available.

But more to your point...

The only difference between Hillary and McCain is their names, their sex and the little letter after their names.  I notice McCain likes to "reach across the aisle", but I notice he never expected the democrats he supported to "reach across the aisle" for some Republicans once in awhile.  I also noticed he never bent over backwards to reach his own side of the aisle either.

McCain has done a lot of things for which we should all look up to him... Almost none of them were done by Sen. McCain though.

 

Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
The Swan Song has been played for Rush Limbaugh's show every presidential election cycle since he came on the national scene.

Oh, I'm not saying it's over for conservative talk radio, not by a long shot. The dittoheads will keep listening and callers will still proclaim Hannity a "great American". But last night's results tell me that Talk Radio doesn't have the influence they think they have.
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top

Do the pundits really know what's best?

I think I see the problem. The answer is a resounding NO.  They only know what is best for themselves.  Each has an agenda and is trying to push it.  The big difference is that some are honest about having an agenda (talk radio), and some are just deceptive and trying to fool (not do what is best) the rest of us.

Or are they so out-of-touch with Mr. and Mrs. Millard America (of Young America, MN) and so bloated with their own self-importance that they cannot see who's the best candidate? Is McCain what the people want or what they need?

There is no Mr. and Mrs. America.  There are millions of them.  Some are more conservative, some are less.  Some are liberal, some are moderate.  Talk radio plays to a section of the country that was not only ignored, but denigrated for many years by the MSM - hard core conservatives.  But they are hardly in the majority.  You see it here, where many who will never vote for Hillary or Obama, still trash talk talk radio.  Because while they are conservative, they are not as conservative as the talk show hosts.

McCain, as others have alluded to, is appealing to many moderates, as well as some conservatives, and that is why he is doing so well.  The conservative vote is being split (indeed, if you add Romney and Huckabee, it bests McCain).  It is not that everyone loves him, just that more people do than either (not both) of the other main contenders.

Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
one thing funny. I heard that Limbaurgh (I can't spell his name) said that: "The Republican establishment is behind McCain, and that's the only reason why he wins. The true Republican people DON'T WANT HIM"

(or something like that. It's hearsay I've read on this forum)

But the more I see it, the more I watch republican voters choosing him, and the more I see republican-controled media bashing him. The more I see high-standing republican (a.k.a. the establishment) trying to make him loose.

I think McCain is not liked by a lot BECAUSE he's not liked by the establishment.
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
Oh, I'm not saying it's over for conservative talk radio, not by a long shot. The dittoheads will keep listening and callers will still proclaim Hannity a "great American". But last night's results tell me that Talk Radio doesn't have the influence they think they have.
End of quote


That's the point, they never claimed to have that much control.

The dittoheads will keep listening
End of quote


If it's only 'dittoheads' listening, why does Rush's show get better ratings than Air America, even in liberal markets?
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
If it's only 'dittoheads' listening, why does Rush's show get better ratings than Air America, even in liberal markets?

'Cause there's a whole darn lot of them out there, even if they still vote for McCain.

Besides, I didn't say that ONLY the dittoheads will keep listening. There will still be an audience for Rush beyond the diehard dittoheads. But Rush and the conservative Talk Radio gods overestimated their influence with Mr. and Mrs. Millard America.
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
(or something like that. It's hearsay I've read on this forum)
End of quote


You can actually go to his site and get it from the horses mouth. I beleive that is the gist of what he did say.

To understand Rush, you have to understand he is a conservative that wants Republicans to be such, not a Republican who wants all conservatives to be so. As such, he does jump all over what he calls RINOs. IN truth to him, a RINO is a non-conservative Republican - like Olympia Snow et. al.

Hannity on the other hand is a republican. So "speak no evil" of republicans is his motto and his "concern" about McCain has been much more muted than Rush's.
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
And he has voted against the Bush tax cuts, vowed to close Gitmo, and bought into global warming hook, line, and sinker.
End of quote


These are somehow bad things?

~Zoo
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top
These are somehow bad things?

~Zoo
End of quote


some conservative can't put into their mind that their exact view of what is the best conservative attitude is not the same than other's.
Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top

singrdave,

You ask why certain pundits seem to be having a waning effect on the masses as of late- letsa take a closer look-

Ann Coulter- advocated invading muslim countries, killing their leaders and forcibly converting everyone to christianity. Yup, real christian of her. She has used every opportunity to spurn hatred towards anyone and everyone who does not toe the neocon line, regardless of their reasoning, even going so far as saying that liberals are the real terrorists and should be thrown in places like Gitmo. And she has been given such expansive media access because she is a renowned expert on the subject of..........? Please tell me, I'd like to know!

Rush Limbaugh- one of the biggest advocates of the Iraq war, yet he himself has never worn the uniform. Did get a deferment from vietnam due to a pimple on his ass (technically it was a boil if ya wanna get specific). So, although he has never worn the uniform or fought for his country he has the gall to tell other people they need to go and fight and die while he sits in his cushy chair. And to top it off he attacks and smears veterans who actually did fight in the war, and spoke out against it once they were no longer in uniform (fulfilling their legal obligations as ya can't speak against uncle sam while working for him) And he is an expert on the subject of.......? Same as above, please let me know why this "expert" has a microphone!

Sean Hannity..... ah seany boy. He's the least worst of the three so-called 'pundits' here but I'd like to know the reason why he has a licence to pontificate to the masses. Same as Glenn Beck- why have these men been given a voice in the national media?

The answer is, because they say the things their paymasters want them to say, and do it with a glib, smug, sensational style that for some passes as a form of charm. They are not experts in any way shape or form. They do not deserve to have their voice broadcast to every corner of the union across different media. The upside of this is that the news has been filled with so many talking heads, so many gasbags that love to share their opinions with us (instead of real investigative journalism like the old days) that people are finally catching on. People are catching on that many of these talking head experts are anything but, and so they are tuning out and maybe, hopefully forming their own opinions rather than depend of some vacuous media personalities to tell them what they should believe! At least one can hope....

 

 

Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
And he has voted against the Bush tax cuts, vowed to close Gitmo, and bought into global warming hook, line, and sinker.


These are somehow bad things?

~Zoo
End of quote


To some yes. Taxes are all about control. Who has it. A true conservative (and I am not saying any running are or are not) wants more money in the pockets of those who make it. Higher taxes mean more government which is bad.

Closing Gitmo is just fluff. It does not address the underlying issue and is a nice campaign slogan but shows no depth in thought to those espousing it. It is neither conservative or liberal.

Global warming is a sham - not the actual issue, but the political one. It has nothing to do with what is happening in the world, and what is causing it, and everything to do with who again has control over your life. So again, it is a liberal versus conservative issue
Reply #18 from JoeUser Forums Top
The answer is, because they say the things their paymasters want them to say


You have it backwards. Regardless of any other qualifications, they have their jobs because they say what the paymasters (i.e., the advertisers and by extension the audience) want to hear.

That was demonstrated loudly and convincingly by the failure Air America and greenstone.
Reply #19 from JoeUser Forums Top
The answer is, because they say the things their paymasters want them to say, and do it with a glib, smug, sensational style that for some passes as a form of charm. They are not experts in any way shape or form. They do not deserve to have their voice broadcast to every corner of the union across different media. The upside of this is that the news has been filled with so many talking heads, so many gasbags that love to share their opinions with us (instead of real investigative journalism like the old days) that people are finally catching on. People are catching on that many of these talking head experts are anything but, and so they are tuning out and maybe, hopefully forming their own opinions rather than depend of some vacuous media personalities to tell them what they should believe! At least one can hope....
End of quote


Preach it, brother. Amen and amen!
Reply #20 from JoeUser Forums Top
These are somehow bad things?
End of quote


Absolutely.
Reply #21 from JoeUser Forums Top
Conservative talk radio has never had the "influence" that it's detractors have claimed (remember the talk about "doing something about Rush Limbaugh" in Congress? from Hillary, even?) or that it's supporters have sometimes assumed. It spoke to some deep concerns and covictions that were already held by the electorate. That electorate has become disillusioned by the failure of politicians espousing conservative principles to "walk the talk." I certainly have. I support McCain's position on Iraq, but on virtually every other important issue he is an out-and-out socialist, more liberal Democrat than centrist Republican. He has no respect for exercising individual freedoms or freedom of political speech. His approach to election "reform" has amounted to doing everything possible to stack the deck in favor of incumbents. His stance on illegal immigration is a disgrace to our Constitution, not that he cares that much about the document, and an affront to every legal immigrant. An election between him and either Clinton or Obama will be about nothing more than the war on terror and health care, since there are virtually no differences among the three of them otherwise.

Other than that, I really like the guy. I suspect his real support is a mile wide and an inch deep once push comes to shove. There's not a candidate running I could feel good about voting for.
Reply #22 from JoeUser Forums Top

Conservative talk radio has never had the "influence" that it's detractors have claimed (remember the talk about "doing something about Rush Limbaugh" in Congress? from Hillary, even?) or that it's supporters have sometimes assumed. It spoke to some deep concerns and covictions that were already held by the electorate.

What he said (and better than I).

Reply #23 from JoeUser Forums Top
Diawa:
Other than that, I really like the guy. I suspect his real support is a mile wide and an inch deep once push comes to shove. There's not a candidate running I could feel good about voting for.
End of quote


That's the thing, I like him too. I would love to meet him, and I have a lot of respect for him as a person. I just don't think much of him as a politician and even less as a presidential candidate.
Reply #24 from JoeUser Forums Top
And to top it off he attacks and smears veterans who actually did fight in the war, and spoke out against it once they were no longer in uniform


Let's be very clear. I may not agree with Rush (or anyone else spouting their opinions on air) but the real issue is this....WHY CAN'T they "attack" or "smear" someone JUST because they were military? Is it okay to trash other people and just not "veterans"? C'mon, that's ridiculous. I want the leadership of my country to have a record that can withstand intense scrutiny. Don't give someone a by just because they served in the military. Short of bashing a soldier BECAUSE they were in service to their country....all's fair in love and war (Politics too!)
Reply #25 from JoeUser Forums Top
Life:
Let's be very clear. I may not agree with Rush (or anyone else spouting their opinions on air) but the real issue is this....WHY CAN'T they "attack" or "smear" someone JUST because they were military? Is it okay to trash other people and just not "veterans"? C'mon, that's ridiculous. I want the leadership of my country to have a record that can withstand intense scrutiny. Don't give someone a by just because they served in the military. Short of bashing a soldier BECAUSE they were in service to their country....all's fair in love and war (Politics too!)
End of quote


True! We all know military members we would be excited to vote for if they ran for public office... but we all know plenty of military members who wouldn't get our vote even for Dog Catcher.

Vet status is a plus, but is in no way the end all be all of a person's qualifications.