Jon Stewart slams ObamaCare roll out

[240 is Back]

That's just flat out incorrect.  Swing voters are independents.  Those are not the people glued to reality TV.  The low information folks are the ones who stay home on election day. 

The composite for a prototypical undecided voter is:

Female
Single
White
Employed
18-to-29 years old
Didn't graduate from college
Low income
Union household
Identifies as Protestant but doesn't go to church
Skipped the debate.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/undecided-voters-election-2012-10#ixzz2ieq5u5Wk

[whork]

Have you spent extensive time watching these stations? Where does your opinion come from? I used to watch msnbc constantly, then cnn, and fox.
Based on that I can honestly say msnbc is the most biased of all of them, by quite a good margin.I mean they now have AL SHARPTON with his own show...what more needs be said??

MSNBC is right after FOX.

The reason i say this is look at the debates Obama vs Romney and Biden vs Ryan.

In the first debate Obama got hammered MSNBC hammered Obama.


The opposite with Romney and FOX never happened.

[Option D]

I am surprised that option d wasn't the first one to post this video, since The Daily Show is his only source of political news and insight.

Why am I on your mind chief...i havent been on in like 2-3 months...

[dario73]

Why am I on your mind chief...i havent been on in like 2-3 months...

You must've posted, what, 89528958292859 jon stewart videos on this site. Hard to forget such zeal.

[Dos Equis]

It's like saying Hitler has a jew servant and thus was fair and balanced towards them.

They are a far right, or right leaning network, they have been found to be the biggest source of misinformation of all the news stations. Not one of the anchors is left leaning that I have seen.

Please don't suggest Fox is fair and balanced, when in fact the opposite has been proven to be true. You really take comfort in your alternate reality.

Whatever you say.  I watch portions of Fox and CNN almost every day.  I stand by what I said. 

[Dos Equis]

The composite for a prototypical undecided voter is:

Female
Single
White
Employed
18-to-29 years old
Didn't graduate from college
Low income
Union household
Identifies as Protestant but doesn't go to church
Skipped the debate.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/undecided-voters-election-2012-10#ixzz2ieq5u5Wk

And this establishes what?  Undecided voters are not necessarily the independents who decide presidential elections.  I don't even have to look at voter demographics to know 18-29 year olds don't decide presidential elections. 

[whork]

Whatever you say.  I watch portions of Fox and CNN almost every day.  I stand by what I said. 

In that case you are just stupid.

Even the people at FOX laughs at you.

Your a sad human being BB you have no business discussing politics with grown men.

[240 is Back]

And this establishes what?  Undecided voters are not necessarily the independents who decide presidential elections.  I don't even have to look at voter demographics to know 18-29 year olds don't decide presidential elections. 

Undecided voters are defined as the swing voters that decide elections:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swing_vote

They chose reagan, clinton, bush, obama, and they'll probably choose Cruz or Hilary or Perry in 2016.

Whoever gets them - and motivates them - wins.  Colleges didn't have obama fever in 2012, but tea party didn't have romney fever, so that was kinda  wash in 2012.  Obama won because of entitlements... and that's gonna be a built in 3 point advantage for dems going fwd, unfortunately.

Unless the swing voters get Cruz Fever in 2016, he can't win it.  I don't see Hilary enthusiasm being all that high, but it'll be there a bit.

[Dos Equis]

In that case you are just stupid.

Even the people at FOX laughs at you.

Your a sad human being BB you have no business discussing politics with grown men.

Yawn.   

[Dos Equis]

Undecided voters are defined as the swing voters that decide elections:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swing_vote

They chose reagan, clinton, bush, obama, and they'll probably choose Cruz or Hilary or Perry in 2016.

Whoever gets them - and motivates them - wins.  Colleges didn't have obama fever in 2012, but tea party didn't have romney fever, so that was kinda  wash in 2012.  Obama won because of entitlements... and that's gonna be a built in 3 point advantage for dems going fwd, unfortunately.

Unless the swing voters get Cruz Fever in 2016, he can't win it.  I don't see Hilary enthusiasm being all that high, but it'll be there a bit.

You're all over the place.  So now you give me a wiki link that doesn't support your contention that the demographics of undecided voters are largely young and uneducated people? 

What is the demographic of independent voters who actually decide presidential elections? 

[24KT]

Truth but he presents the news as they are he doesnt make them up and lie like FOX do.

Agreed. 

[RRKore]

I have no idea nor do I care whether political commenters were more profound than George Carlin.  I rely on comedians to make me laugh.  I don't depend on them for insightful political commentary. 

IMO, this is a nice, honest statement, BB. 

You are saying that regardless of the profundity of a political statement made by a comedian, you'd disregard it because of the source.  This approach probably works pretty well for you in most areas of your life but not when it comes to debating politics with others since I'm pretty sure it's a good example of that logical fallacy called "poisoning the well".

[RRKore]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/22/obamacare-website-programmers_n_4141411.html


booommmmmm


Fuck you every slimeball who voted for this creep

Seriously, thanks for not using the word, "skell".  For variety's sake, can I also request you find an alternative to "boom"?  Thanks.

[whork]

IMO, this is a nice, honest statement, BB. 

You are saying that regardless of the profundity of a political statement made by a comedian, you'd disregard it because of the source.  This approach probably works pretty well for you in most areas of your life but not when it comes to debating politics with others since I'm pretty sure it's a good example of that logical fallacy called "poisoning the well".

He rejects everything that comes out of peoples mouth if they are not FOX news host's.

This makes his information very limited and best and most of the time false.

He really has no place discussing politics let alone be a Mod.

[Dos Equis]

IMO, this is a nice, honest statement, BB. 

You are saying that regardless of the profundity of a political statement made by a comedian, you'd disregard it because of the source.  This approach probably works pretty well for you in most areas of your life but not when it comes to debating politics with others since I'm pretty sure it's a good example of that logical fallacy called "poisoning the well".

That's not what I said.  I said I don't rely on comedians for serious political commentary.  That doesn't mean a comedian cannot occasionally say something profound. 

Just like I watch movies purely for entertainment, but sometimes I hear something poignant from an actor.  Still, I don't rely on fictional movies for serious commentary. 

[Dos Equis]

He rejects everything that comes out of peoples mouth if they are not FOX news host's.

This makes his information very limited and best and most of the time false.

He really has no place discussing politics let alone be a Mod.