ADVERTISEMENT

This might be a little tougher than Putin thought...

His max viewership is approx 1% of the population at 3.2M

I think his influence is vastly over rated.

C'mon. He has caused a ton of damage with his lies to millions of viewers. Don't toss that away like it's nothing. When RUSSIA talks about him on their state television, as someone helpful to the cause, it's a big effing deal. Don't make Tucker your hill. He's causing a ton of damage.
 
C'mon. He has caused a ton of damage with his lies to millions of viewers. Don't toss that away like it's nothing. When RUSSIA talks about him on their state television, as someone helpful to the cause, it's a big effing deal. Don't make Tucker your hill. He's causing a ton of damage.
He also has the ear of some very influential US policy makers(current and past). That shouldn't be minimized.
 
C'mon. He has caused a ton of damage with his lies to millions of viewers. Don't toss that away like it's nothing. When RUSSIA talks about him on their state television, as someone helpful to the cause, it's a big effing deal. Don't make Tucker your hill. He's causing a ton of damage.
I didn’t toss it away like it was nothing. I said his influence has been exaggerated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: timinatoria
Human suffering obviously takes precedence but how sad is this...

According to the charity UAnimals, the shelter's 485 dogs remained locked in their cages from the beginning of the war in late February until the beginning of April, after Russian soldiers left Borodyanka and charity volunteers were able to return to the shelter. During that time, the dogs were left without any food or water, the charity said. By the time the volunteers finally gained access to the building on April 1, all but 150 of the 485 animals had died.

I saw that and thought that the human carnage is bad enough, but when you inflame the dog lovers you’ve truly lost it.
 
He’s deplorable.

His influence is exaggerated.

Both can be true.
And u can be wrong too. Tucker was able to get a personal meeting at Mar-La-Go with Trump during the first few months of Coronavirus. Tucker convinced Trump to change course on how he was handling it. Not experts from CDC, business leaders, etc. That's messed up.
 
This is it in terms of a red line, right? A "dirty" chemical bomb?

 
  • Wow
Reactions: Joes Place
He’s deplorable.

His influence is exaggerated.

Both can be true.
300-plus million people live in America.
Tucker Carlson was one of maybe, what, 100 or so with a DIRECT LINE TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

I don't think his influence was exaggerated at all. On the contrary, it has likely been de-emphasized far more than it should have been.
 
His max viewership is approx 1% of the population at 3.2M
Have you already forgotten how Russian Troll Farms amplify messages (inclusive of the ones from him) across multiple media platforms?

If those 3.2M post to simply reach 5 other people, you have 15M. If those 15M each reach out to 5 people, you have 75M. If those 75M reach out to 5 people each, you've covered well over half the country (even with "redundancies").

Propaganda spreading works just like ponzi schemes; geometrically.
 
And u can be wrong too. Tucker was able to get a personal meeting at Mar-La-Go with Trump during the first few months of Coronavirus. Tucker convinced Trump to change course on how he was handling it. Not experts from CDC, business leaders, etc. That's messed up.
True, I could be.

How did Carlson change Trumps handling of Covid?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: binsfeldcyhawk2
300-plus million people live in America.
Tucker Carlson was one of maybe, what, 100 or so with a DIRECT LINE TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

I don't think his influence was exaggerated at all. On the contrary, it has likely been de-emphasized far more than it should have been.
I think the direct line has been cut....don't see Joe taking his calls.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hawkeyetraveler
Have you already forgotten how Russian Troll Farms amplify messages (inclusive of the ones from him) across multiple media platforms?

If those 3.2M post to simply reach 5 other people, you have 15M. If those 15M each reach out to 5 people, you have 75M. If those 75M reach out to 5 people each, you've covered well over half the country (even with "redundancies").

Propaganda spreading works just like ponzi schemes; geometrically.
Joe, the only place I see Tucker Carlson clips are on here and Twitter....and they're almost universally blasting something he said.

He's a great foil for the D's...a bogeyman. He should pay for the free advertising...
 
I think the direct line has been cut....don't see Joe taking his calls.
And for the record, I'd be disgusted and alarmed if Joe Biden was soliciting policy advice from Keith Olbermann or Rachel Maddow as well.

That is NOT an acceptable function of someone in the 4th Estate, regardless of whether they are an opinion-slinger or not.
 
Rachel Maddow
Speaking of Rachel, this picture blew my mind
RACHEL-MADDOW-YEARBOOK-PHOTO.jpg
 
And for the record, I'd be disgusted and alarmed if Joe Biden was soliciting policy advice from Keith Olbermann or Rachel Maddow as well.

That is NOT an acceptable function of someone in the 4th Estate, regardless of whether they are an opinion-slinger or not.
Agree....how do you feel about Psaki negotiating a deal with MSNBC while she's still the press secretary.....for arguments sake.
 
Agree....how do you feel about Psaki negotiating a deal with MSNBC while she's still the press secretary.....for arguments sake.
I think there is general understanding that the natural "next job" for any White House press flak is to find a home as a news pundit. Doesn't really bother me.

Now, once she is IN that job, she should be ethically obligated to no longer set policy and must stick solely to commentating on it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: binsfeldcyhawk2
I think there is general understanding that the natural "next job" for any White House press flak is to find a home as a news pundit. Doesn't really bother me.

Now, once she is IN that job, she should be ethically obligated to no longer set policy and must stick solely to commentating on it.
Fair enough...

I think it's a conflict of interest while you're in the job but as you say...it's what they do. Every Trump press secretary got a gig on Fox it seems..
 
Did you ignore what I quoted for some reason?

I was responding to the notion that Russia was poorer than Ukraine:

I get the sense that Ukraine, not exactly a wealthy nation, seemed like a wealth nation to the average Russian soldier, to put in perspective how poor Russia is

Ukraine is, per capita, a poorer nation than Albania.
 
Did you ignore what I quoted for some reason?

I was responding to the notion that Russia was poorer than Ukraine:

I get the sense that Ukraine, not exactly a wealthy nation, seemed like a wealth nation to the average Russian soldier, to put in perspective how poor Russia is

Ukraine is, per capita, a poorer nation than Albania.
Sorry, missed that. My bad.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT