I think it would be insanity to even attempt to limit one's vote because they were new to a state. Allowing free movement from place to place is one of our basic freedoms. That doesn't mean that it can't come with certain requirements that would ensure one truly has moved such that they would not be able to vote in multiple locations. There is a legal distinction between one's domicile and and one's residence although they can be and for most of us are the same place. You can only have one domicile - it is typically where you file your tax returns and VOTE. Multiple residency is accomplished by having properties in multiple locations and where one spends time. Thus, it can be multiple places.
OOTB's Political Thread . ..
- Thread starter BillyL
- Start date
If we are speaking truth, accurate voting rolls help everyone. Some are concerned about rolls being outdated and therefore having the potential of being manipulated to impact election integrity. Some are concerned about rolls being updated and therefore potentially excluding someone from exercising their voting rights. There are simply solutions to resolving such situations, but the argument is that potential voters are disenfranchised by such steps. The irony is that incorrect rolls also disenfranchise voters. As such, I don't believe those that oppose updating voting rolls are really concerned about disenfranchisement as much as they are concerned about winning.
Depends on whether you consider those three to be legitimate need anchors who have a legal and ethical responsibility to tell their viewers the truth or just entertainment hucksters like Limbaugh who may say vile things on a daily basis but are not required to to educate.
If Fox News does consider itself legitimate, then it was wrong in promoting/giving life to something they knew was bullshit. That goes for all major news stations.
I don't think it's coincidental that you picked the term huckster and gave an example of Limbaugh. You could just as easily have picked Lemon, Stelter, Cuomo, etc. Fox's entertainment personalities just do it much better.
A news anchor with an opinion isn’t anything new. Cronkite had one and he’s universally revered. Limbaugh to me is in a different category because again, he’s not under any obligation to be truthful.
Edit: Also Limbaugh was a huckster and he was human garbage personified.
CNN, Fox, NBC, etc have another set of standards they have to follow. And while they’ve all dropped the ball when it comes to fair coverage on various topics, the 2020 election was one of the more egregious examples of a news organization selling out integrity for profit and popularity among their viewers.
Last edited:
Fox can say whatever they want to say, but they can't be outraged when they get hit with a libel lawsuit and look stupid. I'm actually glad this happened. I don't have any issue with Fox, but I think it's good because it will cause news outlets to think twice about publishing things.
I didn't read the article, but all this information coming out about what happened behind the scenes at Fox is true. You can read the article I posted the other day with the quotes or the actual deposition that was linked in it.
my remarks were directed at that which I replied to. 'All this information' means little when a writer frames it according to his or her intent, or the quoted do likewise, and the context is mostly missing....so forgive me if I remain skeptical of anything put forth as the truth.
CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, etc… knew that the Steele Dossier was BS, they knew that Hunter’s laptop was real, and yet they ran with their false narrative for years. Are they going to be punished or held accountable? No, because they’re Democrats just like 90% of the MSM.
this makes no sense, but I'm used to that from you.
you really aren't very bright. You don't realize that by reminding me of what I freely admit to, which is that I detest having a dimwitted dork as president, you are just reinforcing my displeasure on my behalf.
Unlike you, I don't have a 'team' that I mindlessly defend and rationalize. I have a country that I live in and accordingly want the best for, and I support those who I believe will best provide for that. You on the other hand would vote for Stalin if he was running as a democrat, and then play the infantile nanny nanny boo boo game if he was somehow elected.
Why don't you admit that you have severe TDS. You are the kind of fool who enables those who have us where we are.
I’m asking you if you think they should be held accountable for intentionally lying repeatedly? You seem to feel Fox should be. It’s a simple question. I want all our politicians and the news media to be held accountable, regardless of political affiliation, not just conservatives. Is that wrong or do you disagree?
I would be in favor of requiring a disclaimer at the beginning of a program saying “this program is meant as entertainment only, it is not a news program” or something along those lines.
The above were mostly mum when the first story broke because nothing could verify the veracity. Same reason AJ doesn't write articles on unproven rumors about coaches or players.
They eventually began discussing it when more facts were found.
You hold them accountable by changing the channel, lowering their ratings, and decreasing ad revenue. It’ll be interesting to see where faux news ratings go.
This is a basis for at least a 90 day ban, sir. Putting the msm and AJ in back to back sentences . . . . . .
You asked and answered your own question in the previous post, so I didn't know you were asking me anything. The examples you gave aren't exactly apples to apples, but I'll pretend they are. They all should be held accountable if they did what Fox did. I'll ask you a question now. Do you think bad behavior is justified if someone else has done the same thing? Nevermind, I already know what your real answer is.
But people like Carlson and Scarborough are decidedly not a "news anchor". This is the basic heart of the problem. Refusing to acknowledge that they are entertainment programs based on topics in the news is what leads to stupid ideas like wanting a disclaimer at the beginning of the program. When the viewer, of any network, is too dense to realize the type of show they are watching, no disclaimer will change their perception of its content.
You can't do that unless you know what they are doing. If this lawsuit didn't happen, no one would know what was going on. I'm hoping that a potential billion dollar payment will make all news organizations second guess themselves before they put out questionable stories or at the very least present it in a less biased way. That's the good that could come out of this.
And therein is the rub. It's what's wrong with Section 230 protection of the social media/tech sites. They intentionally control the content with their suspension policies, misinformation labeling and algorithms, but want protection from liability claiming they just put out what others publish. In other words, they want it both ways. This is why I find it so annoying when one fails to consider the source of anything - always. The NYT, WaPo's are just as biased as others, they just hide it a little better. Fox, CNN, they all have a slant. Viewer/reader beware.
You don't have to be a news anchor to be held libel. I'm not sure why you are trying so hard to let Carlson off the hook. He ****ed up. He should own it.
Don't put words in my mouth, or keyboard, as I am not letting anyone off the hook. Unlike yourself, I don't automatically assume that Carlson is "on the hook" here. There is nothing whatsoever defamatory about holding a personal belief while hosting an entertainment show that has guests on that hold different views. I will follow the case against them with interest and we will see what happens. Fortunately, I won't have to give it a ton of effort as I can expect OOTB to link developments as they occur.
They are all having issues as of the moment. Everyone's numbers are down despite the headline.
www.forbes.com
CNN Hits 10-Year Low As Fox News Glides To Victory In Cable News Ratings
February marked CNN’s lowest-rated month in a decade, with the network’s prime time lineup dropping 42% in the key demo of viewers 25-54.
www.forbes.com
I'm not automatically assuming anything. I'm following the story and looking at the facts. You seem to want to ignore them or deflect. The law says you can't do what Fox did. Even their CEO has said, under oath, they were pushing a story even though they knew it was a lie.
No, but he did break the story and write a delicious piece on Pete Nance, Coach Davis, and lemon Oreos a few days ago. Talk about influencers, I'm going by Publix today and get me a box. True story.
Lemon Oreos For The Win!
Hubert Davis had a surprise for forward Pete Nance on Saturday, and now lemon Oreos are now a thing with the Tar Heels.
Last edited:
I bet you like to be double stuffed.No, but he did break the story and write a delicious piece on Pete Nance, Coach Davis, and lemon Oreos a few days ago. Talk about influencers, I'm going by Publix today and get me a box. True story.
Lemon Oreos For The Win!
Hubert Davis had a surprise for forward Pete Nance on Saturday, and now lemon Oreos are now a thing with the Tar Heels.northcarolina.rivals.com
Exactly. If you don't like it, don't pay any attention to it.
However, as far as FOX ratings, I believe they will do nothing but climb.
Lastly, the hoopla of FOX catching shit for this above MSNBC, CNN and the like is humorous to me and simply reinforcing what all of us already knew - the left controls the media and subsequently, the narrative.
I'm a teacher and she's one of the absolute worst people in America. Liberal bitch.
“They all should be held accountable if they did what Fox did.” So you believe that Fox knowingly pushed a false narrative. That is exactly what CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC all did when they pushed the Russian collusion/Hunter’s laptop is fake” lies. They knew early on that the Steele dossier was garbage, he admitted it himself. They also knew early on that Hunter’s laptop was not fake. Yet they put out disinformation to mitigate the potential harm to their party of choice. They should be held accountable for irresponsible journalism that may have influenced our election process. All social media platforms should be held accountable for knowingly putting false information out there under the guise of news. And no, I don’t believe one wrong justifies another. I’m more open minded than that. I simply want a level media playing field, the one we’re playing on now is canted heavily to the left.
Last edited:
I don't think you understand the law and/or the facts of the case. You certainly understand how to deflect though.
Who doesn't, but Publix was sold out and I had to settle for the regular stuff. Would you like to swallow my cream filling?
Says the severely TDS infected individual that can't resist bringing up Trump every time someone points out how retarded the current President is.
Well done, Sport.
The whole Dominion thing, the Hunter lap top thing - neither really seems like a big deal to me. It's widely known that Tucker Carlson is a blowhard, anyone relying on him for factual news is a moron with cognitive abilities below that which should be considered a "reasonable person". That said, if he gets nailed on this anyway, who gives a fvck.
The media lies that seem like more of a big deal was how many outlets were pushing the wet-market natural contraction of Covid as the only possible scenario, and insinuating the lab leak possibility was deranged alt-right Qanon conspiracy theory. Obviously, the latter has now been shown to be the leading theory amongst the Intelligence agencies. I guess question is whether those media outlets deserve punishment there, or is the massive egg on their collective faces enough?
The media lies that seem like more of a big deal was how many outlets were pushing the wet-market natural contraction of Covid as the only possible scenario, and insinuating the lab leak possibility was deranged alt-right Qanon conspiracy theory. Obviously, the latter has now been shown to be the leading theory amongst the Intelligence agencies. I guess question is whether those media outlets deserve punishment there, or is the massive egg on their collective faces enough?
This could also potentially backfire. As ratings tank, these news channels could go for extreme measures to keep viewers. Kind of what Fox did during the 2020 election when viewers got pissed at them for initially doing their jobs and started shifting en masse to OAN and Newsmax.
Whether that's the intent or not, both those guys are who millions of people turn to for news. To say Carlson (in this case since he's part of the company getting sued) is just pure entertainment doesn't hold up to scrutiny in my opinion since he's breaking down and giving commentary on political topics like an anchor or analyst. And it misses the overall mark. He knowingly promoted election conspiracies he knew was false. Now he can deal with the consequences.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
THI Podcast: Inside Takes From Mack Brown's Final Press Conference
- Latest: andrew jones
-
-
-
-
