2020 Election

The ones who went on to get a forestry degree were the real Hippies. The ones who became hedge fund managers were the fake … never had their heart in it.

 

Yes, Alexandra Ocasio Cortez is in tune with young people, so is Bernie Sanders, so is Elizabeth Warren, so is Ron Wyden, so is Ilhan Omar, and Rashida Tlaib.

 

On the other hand, as restrictions get eased and disaster does strike, you will have a hell of a lot of people asking why we were so quick to end the lockdowns.

The only way to find out is to ask them. That, of course, has been done. But if you disregard the answers, then of course there's no way to be "in tune".

Why would you think the guy who was in the Oval Office calling the shots and blew it would be the preferred choice? Your posts increasingly boil down to."Stand by your man!"

 

Unfortunately, they are not known for their voting prowess... Lol. They never go!

 

Meteorology? For predicting the future. That's the example to go with?

 

400,000 years of humans, I'm sure stoners in America in the 1960s were the very first to "question cultural norms"

 

Here in Oklahoma we treat meteorology with a certain respect. Sure it's inexact, but not taking it seriously can get us killed.

 

Key difference is Trump voters actuly believe in him. Even when confronted with evidence because it's a cult an outside force must always be the blame not Trump himself.

Biden voters admit his faults and admit that a rigged system forces the choice. Like Clinton no one likes him they just pick a team.

I know which is one is sadder

One thing I have noticed with Trump voters it's that they use the mistakes of others to excuse theirs. The old everyone does it approach. So it's good that Biden has dirt it absolves you of your own poor moral choices. You really need to think the other side is as blind as you. It's interesting to me how a shady past, and an old man saying strange things all of the sudden matter. It's as if you have been under a rock.

 

I missed being a real hippie by a couple of years, although I did visit the Haight, in '67. My goal was to become a forest ranger, but after getting my B.A and having been told that I would have to get an M.A., I gave up on reaching that goal. I was burned out on college life.

 

glad you agree with me.

 

I don't know about that missing it by two years. Hippy-ness was from 1964 or maybe earlier with Dylan followers. And it went on into the 1970s. There were rock festivals all over the Midwest, with bands like Jethro Tull. Canned Heat was gone but we got the Police and Dire Straits big time in the eighties? One of my favorite bands was Steely Dan. Donald Fagan kept producing solo a couple of years after that.

 

No dude, Trump will do better with the economy, it's as simple as that.

Biden will just be a puppet, and you'll really have the likes of Pelosi in charge and ,4 years later she'll mysteriously be $200 million richer

 

No, dude. Trump will screw it up.

 

hahahahaha. put the bong down.

 

Groundless charge from the supporter of the Kleptocrat in Chief!

 

Biby

I’m still not sure what your argument as again you don’t seem to be disputing what I about the dominance of the right in UK newspaper industry.

As I said - The largest selling national newspapers in the UK are

List of newspapers in the United Kingdom by circulation - Wikipedia

So I removed local papers like Metro and Evening Standard then listed the top selling

The Sun has a circulation of over 1.2 million and the Daily Mail one of over 1.1million

The ‘I’ (the Independent stopped printing in 2016) has 215,932 and the Guardian is even smaller at just 126,879

When talking about ‘dominance’ as in reach and influence then the Sun and Mail are way ahead in circulation the Guardian and I are beaten by the Daily Star which I don’t even rate as a ‘newspaper’.

Well I found this report from Ofcom done in 2018 that puts it at 40%

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0024/116529/news-consumption-2018.pdf

The difficulty is online here is something about online figures fro 2013 the right leaning news outlets is

Daily Mail 40%, Telegraph 13%, Sun 9%

With middle or left ones at

Guardian 24%, Indpendent 5%, Mirror 7%

So the right still dominate with 62% to 36%

Here is something from 2018


In that the right wing still dominates although the Guardian is doing better.

 

Bilby

I don’t disagree but many of those that are paid as ‘journalists’ by these outlets are political hacks or commentators that basically kept on as ‘retainers’ (dictionary meaning dependent or follower of someone of rank). It’s a way og giving money to people so they don’t have to do other things and can just concentrate on promoting a certain political viewpoint.

Take Boris Johnson he got employed by the Times through right wing connections straight out of college but was let go after lying - but some other right wing paper owners - the Barclay brothers - took him on at the Telegraph and they didn’t care him making things up as the papers Brussels correspondent as long as they fitted in with their Eurosceptic slant. He has been retained by the billionaire owners of the Telegraph ever since and received £250,000 for writing a weekly Telegraph column, for many years although he described that payment as "chicken feed". Just having tpo write one column a weekgive you a lot of extra time to concentrate on your political career and promote your right wing views.

As an aside at one time Boris was also an editor of the Spectator another publication owned by the Barclay brothers as is Mary Wakefield the wife of Dominic Cummings.

 

Bil

It is well known that print newspapers are on the decline and they have found it difficult to monetarise their websites.

But they still have a way of dominating the news cycle and agenda getting referenced and then talked about in other news media outlets like television, radio and even online. And those outlets use journalist from the newspapers as pundits on their shows.

And think of the way such papers ‘go after’ left wing politicians while giving a soft ride to right wing ones and how that gets fixed in the public’s consciousness even today. Corbyn was an easy target but Miliband eating a bacon sandwich while Boris get stuck up a wipewire or many affairs are not pushed and then you have the none reaction over Priti Patel getting confused over numbers and the huge fuss made when Diane Abbot does it.

The thing about newspapers for the pushing of wealth’s interests was that they also made money then they broke even and increasingly they are beginning to lose money but the wealthy can sometimes put up with that to retain the influence it gives them, I’m not sure how long that is sustainable so I expect an increasing move to supporting online pundits and the setting up of corporate sponsored ‘think tanks’

How the right’s radical thinktanks reshaped the Conservative party

 

The media and the Election

Bilby and me have been discussing the Uk media and political influence, but I think it has a similar prominence in the US, or do you think i’m wrong?

It seems from where I am that US Newspaper have not got the hold they have in the UK but TV seems to have that role You have your Fox news but what about the influence of Sinclair and as this article points out the majority of outlets are not exactly run by people with a left wing or even progressive slant.

These 15 Billionaires Own America's News Media Companies

I cited a article on the rise of influence of right wing think tanks in the UK and it seesm to me that this is much more advanced in the US as the piece points out

Libertarian thinktanks in the US, such as the Heritage Foundation and the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) have had this sort of close relationship with incoming Republican administrations for years, furnishing them with staff and readymade policies.

What are your thoughts?