Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Rasmussen Report shows 51% believe media after Palin.

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 07:13 AM
link   
www.rasmussenreports.com... _has_better_experience_than_obama


Over half of U.S. voters (51%) think reporters are trying to hurt Sarah Palin with their news coverage, and 24% say those stories make them more likely to vote for Republican presidential candidate John McCain in November.

Thirty-nine percent (39%) also believe the GOP vice presidential nominee has better experience to be president of the United States than Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama.


As if its not obvious, propagandists like Chris Mathews and Keith Olberman continue to play it off like they have no idea who made these charges. Still claiming "it wasn't us".

I've noticed a lot of that news has stopped since Palin put the media in their place the other night!




posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 08:02 AM
link   
The justifiable coverage of her lack of experience and improper vetting has stopped because intelligent people recognize that the pandering Right is twisting it into a tactic in order to garner sympathy and focus on her narrative rather than her credentials.

Generally speaking, people are onto Rove's polarizing tactics.



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 08:05 AM
link   
I believe that on November 5th, the Democrats in this country can thank the MSM for getting McCain+Palin elected.

Would that be considered Irony, Karma or both?



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 08:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by kosmicjack
The justifiable coverage of her lack of experience and improper vetting has stopped because intelligent people recognize that the pandering Right is twisting it into a tactic in order to garner sympathy and focus on her narrative rather than her credentials.


I really get a kick out of this. Justifiable? If you think it's prudent to question the experience of Palin then it's even more prudent to question the experience of Obama. Palin is more suited for the job than he is. She has been in government longer and her experience is mostly executive branch which directly relates to the job.



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 08:29 AM
link   
I really love this new neo-con talking point..."executive experience"

I'm sure there are blue collar workers across America that have pretty strong opinions on the executives they work for, you know the ones making millions while they run companies into the ground.

Just because you are management doesn't mean you corner the market on good ideas or strategies to get the job done. I mean look at George Bush - Governor, oil man, Baseball team owner and he has run this country straight into the ground.

Besides, many of our early Presidents and founding fathers didn't necessarily have "executive experience" but were farmers and professional statesmen who had ideals and principles about freedom and liberty.

It's the height of hypocrisy and irony that the GOP is using the elitist rally cry of "executive experience" all the while calling Obama an elitist.
I really hope to hear some push back on this very soon.

[edit on 5/9/2008 by kosmicjack]



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 08:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by kosmicjack
The justifiable coverage of her lack of experience and improper vetting has stopped because intelligent people recognize that the pandering Right is twisting it into a tactic in order to garner sympathy and focus on her narrative rather than her credentials.

Generally speaking, people are onto Rove's polarizing tactics.


No, most people can see that the media did all it could to downplay Obama's experience. All of a sudden it does matter and on top of that the media is claiming Obama has more! You don't see a problem with that? Its so incredibly obvious that the MSM is letting its opinions take place of fact.


Generally speaking, people are onto Rove's polarizing tactics.


Yeah, well we're on to the democrat's media tactics.

-Downplay Obama's negatives
-Exaggerate and confirm McCain's.



[edit on 5-9-2008 by Dronetek]



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 08:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Dronetek
 


The MSM are basically the biggest snakes in American politics, regardless of who they happen to be bashing at the moment. They love nothing more than to tear someone down, whether that person deserves it or not, and I really don't think Sarah Palin does.

The public sees what's going on. By a 10-1 margin, they think the media is trying to hurt Palin rather than help, and this was BEFORE her speech Wednesday night. I think its even more hilarious that even after all the Palin bashing, all the screeching from the media, and even before she introduced herself properly to the American people on Wednesday, she was only trailing Barack Obama by 10% on the question of experience...and only 5% among unaffiliateds.

The American people know what's going on. The polls have shown it repeatedly. They know the media is in the tank for Obama. But don't worry. If he's elected, he'll get his from the media. They'll turn on him faster than you can snap your fingers. Again, they love nothing more than building someone up so they can tear them down.



[edit on 5-9-2008 by vor78]



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 08:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by kosmicjack
I really love this new neo-con talking point..."executive experience"


*SIGH* First of all, I'm not a neo-con and I didn't get my "talking point"s from anyone. You assume too much.

Secondly, you seem to have overlooked the fact that it's the democrats that started this argument. I guess you're OK with them attacking her for lack of experience. However, when they fight back and show that she has more relevant experience (more experience period, really) than Obama that's not OK, right? The evidence does seem to indicate that she is more qualified for President that the democrat candidate is.

It's a shame that any debate on this forum has become a "pigeon hole - fest". You're guilty of it here. I wish people could argue the issues logically instead of calling eachother names and assuming that everyone with a different opinion is either a neo-con or a flaming liberal.



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 08:54 AM
link   
Expect that number to continue to rise as this sham of an election continues. If the media had a shred of honesty and integrity it would just come right out and say, "Hey, we hope to God Almighty that the omnipotent Messiah Obama get's elected - we endorse him 10,000%!" THAT would at least be believeable.

The MSM had better come to grips with the fact that are becoming marginalized by the internet, largely because NO ONE in America (except for the 2% of mouth-breathing liberals too stupid to realize that their Marxist Socialist ideas have failed EVERY single time they've been implemented) agrees with them.

Most of us in "Flyover" country - as those elitist scags believe we are - are in complete opposition to what they stand for. Somehow they have forgotten that the HEARTLAND still holds the majority of the voting power in this nation and they will be reminded by it a.) After the election and b.) as their news ratings continue to tank!



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 08:55 AM
link   
reply to post by BlueTriangle
 


* SIGH* Evidently you need to pay more attention when reading posts. I did not call you a neo-con. Great rhetorical tactic though!


1) My post was "at large" not a reply to you .
2) GOP strategists and talking heads all over the MSM are using the term "excutive experience" to frame the debate.



[edit on 5/9/2008 by kosmicjack]



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 08:56 AM
link   
This effect is just people wanting a positive white person, in politics. Do not like her, but understand, peoples needs for a positive white person at this time in politics.



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 09:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by kosmicjack

* SIGH* Evidently you need to pay more attention when reading posts. I did not call you a neo-con. Great rhetorical tactic though!



So exactly what was your intent by stating that I'm using neo-con talking points. It sure seems to me that you're writing off the whole thing based on your assumption of me being a brainwashed neo-con.

Edit: OK, guess we're playing edit tag now. Your original post was a direct reply to my post and even quoted part of it. You can see why I would assume it was not an "at large" post and was directed at me. I'm guessing you just clicked reply on my message and meant the entire thread...I've done that many times myself.

[edit on 5-9-2008 by BlueTriangle]



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 09:02 AM
link   
Maybe I can clear this whole "Executive Experience" thing up for those too dim to grasp it - SHE WAS THE HEAD OF SOMETHING BIG - LIKE A STATE! Obama has been the head of NOTHING! Is that clear enough!?


Edited to add: Palin is a candidate for VICE PRESIDENT, not President by the way. And she STILL has more experience RUNNING SOMETHING BIG - LIKE A STATE, than Obama has AND he IS running for President. I can't make this any more clear so hopefully this explains it.

[edit on 5-9-2008 by kozmo]



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 09:13 AM
link   
Umm...no. I did not need to delete anything as it wasn't there to delete. I did however add the third paragraph in that post and amend my statements in my third post, as you are obviously defensive about the issue.

Besides the reply function doesn't seem to be working for me this morning. Suffice it to say, I did not call you a neo-con, nor do I know or care if you are one or not. I was refering to talking points. Let's don't derail the thread any further.

[edit on 5/9/2008 by kosmicjack]



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 09:14 AM
link   
There's no story linked to it yet, but Drudge has the following up on their website:

Rasmussen: Palin more popular than Obama or McCain...Developing...

Its not the headline, mind you, but its going to be very, very interesting to see what the polls say on Monday or Tuesday, folks, after this fully sets in. Even Rasmussen was on Fox News yesterday saying that the full effect of the RNC wouldn't be felt until early next week.

[edit on 5-9-2008 by vor78]



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 09:15 AM
link   
Yeah Kozmo - we get it.

We just disagree.



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 09:23 AM
link   
You know, old uncle charlie had an expression:

If you don't want the media to mercilessly crucify you before an entire nation, you might want to hold back on the old daily insults against it.

But what does he know, right?


It's called a reaction.



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 09:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by schrodingers dog
You know, old uncle charlie had an expression:

If you don't want the media to mercilessly crucify you before an entire nation, you might want to hold back on the old daily insults against it.

But what does he know, right?


It's called a reaction.


So, you think the media has a right to get personally offended and slant its reporting based on that?

I agree, the media feels personally insulted when someone goes after Obama. You can see it in their body language and the way they talk. That doesn't however, give them the right to lie and produce propaganda instead of fact based news.



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 09:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Dronetek
 


Absolutely.

Speaking of such. Has anyone seen that interview with Newt Gingrich where he made that poor reporter squirm when he took him to task on this whole Palin experience issue?



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 09:34 AM
link   
reply to post by nyk537
 


Ask and ye shall receive.



[edit on 5-9-2008 by vor78]





new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join