Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Alekei_Firebird

(320 posts)
Sun Oct 14, 2012, 10:10 AM Oct 2012

Use your common sense: Think of the prospective TV ratings for the debates

The VP debate between Biden and Ryan drew a crowd that nearly matched the Biden-Palin debate. In most circumstances, a Biden-Ryan debate is probably one of the least interesting events on TV, but thanks to Romney's "victory", it was must-see TV for around 50 million people.

The Tuesday debate between Obama and Romney promises to be widely watched as well.

Ah gee, you think it's any coincidence that the media has been so happy with a Romney resurgence that they've been pushing it relentlessly and citing dubious pollsters?

Just imagine what the TV ratings would've been for the next month had the first debate been called a draw (or narrow Romney win). And there's your answer.

5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Use your common sense: Think of the prospective TV ratings for the debates (Original Post) Alekei_Firebird Oct 2012 OP
Obama clearly lost the first debate exboyfil Oct 2012 #1
Sorry, a liar can never be considered to have won a debate. A liar is only that..a liar. shraby Oct 2012 #2
I already knew of Romney's BS, so maybe that's why Alekei_Firebird Oct 2012 #3
That is why Obama lost exboyfil Oct 2012 #4
There are NO ads during the debates. How do they make money without ads? KurtNYC Oct 2012 #5

exboyfil

(17,863 posts)
1. Obama clearly lost the first debate
Sun Oct 14, 2012, 10:17 AM
Oct 2012

I watched the entire debate, and he left much of what should have been said/defended unsaid/undefended. His stage presence was also weak. I was screaming at the television during the debate for him to answer some specific points which he never addressed.

That said a single debate is not a presidential campaign, and he has two more debates to rectify the situation. Biden obviously won the second debate on substance (still missed some opportunities) but overall covered everything he needed to cover. Unfortunately I think he cut Ryan off excessively and that did not sound good. Since I was taking notes and listening for part of the time from another room, I did not see the smiles so I can't comment on that.

My conclusions were drawn before seeing anyone in media talk about the debate.

Alekei_Firebird

(320 posts)
3. I already knew of Romney's BS, so maybe that's why
Sun Oct 14, 2012, 10:22 AM
Oct 2012

Perhaps that's the big difference between people like us and the average American voter. We already knew of Romney's BS (tax plan, and non-existent replacement plan for the ACA), so we didn't really need Obama to clearly lay out why Romney was full of it. But for people who haven't really been paying attention, or subscribe to that idiotic philosophy that lying in politics is ok because "both sides do it", Romney's lies went undetected or even forgiven.

exboyfil

(17,863 posts)
4. That is why Obama lost
Sun Oct 14, 2012, 10:42 AM
Oct 2012

A debate is a bubble in which the facts/arguments brought up at the time are considered.

I will give you my best example. Romney repeated at least twice the $60B for green energy. Obama never responded (he could have talked about in a complex economy some leakage of dollars could be expected but overall this is what the program did do). The second is cutting the budget by killing Big Bird (well Governor you are 1/2000 of the way towards closing the deficit by killing all of public broadcasting (Big Bird, NPR, Ken Burns documentaries, etc). Where is the other 1999/2000 (or some such argument).

KurtNYC

(14,549 posts)
5. There are NO ads during the debates. How do they make money without ads?
Sun Oct 14, 2012, 10:55 AM
Oct 2012

TV networks are owned by huge corporations who make their money in other areas. NBC is owned by GE who makes their money selling large military and electrical hardware to the Government. Ronald Reagan was a corporate spokesperson for GE before they made him President. GE runs Pat Buchanon and they have dabbled with Trump. They see Romney as a product just like Trump but also a means to an end -- increased military spending.

TV network barely make any money these days since there is so much advertising everywhere and TV audiences drop year by year as people go to the net, gaming, texting and Netflicks.

But my main point is what the Network owners want it much bigger than the ad revenue you are thinking about.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Use your common sense: Th...