Dem/Olberman Debate Pull Lowest Numbers Thus Far

[red states rule]

It seems Dems are as popular as Keith is. Hardly anyone bothered to watch both of them at the same time

Only 960,000 viewers had time to waste that night

http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/msnbc/aflcio_forum_ratings_lowest_yet_64737.asp

[red states rule]

Do you think Dems are now wishing they woud have had their debates of Fox News now?

[PostmodernProphet]

more aptly....do you think they are wishing they hadn't started the debates 12 months too early?....at this rate, Hillary is going to be lame duck before she even gets elected......

[stephanie]

more aptly....do you think they are wishing they hadn't started the debates 12 months too early?....at this rate, Hillary is going to be lame duck before she even gets elected......


That was funny..:lol:

[hjmick]

Olberman is a fucking hack. A failed sports reporter from L.A. who uses fake moral outrage and over the top commentary in the hopes of garnering higher ratings. Doing his best to live up to the one he claims to despise the most, the ever pious, slightly less annoying O'Reilly.

[theHawk]

Everytime I catch part of Olberman's show he has Bill O'Reilly as the "Worst Person" of the world winner. Olberman is the prime example of what a hate filled liberal will turn out to be.

[Hagbard Celine]

I think the reason viewer numbers were low is because everyone is starting to see how full of sh*t all our politicians are and nobody wants to hear their bs anymore. They'd rather watch old re-runs of Everybody Loves Raymond.

[theHawk]

I think the reason viewer numbers were low is because everyone is starting to see how full of sh*t all our politicians are and nobody wants to hear their bs anymore. They'd rather watch old re-runs of Everybody Loves Raymond.

Everybody Loves Raymond is hilarious. I never watched it when it was on air but I watch in syndication now when I can.

[stephanie]

I bet this musta been a big blow for Olbermans ego...

He's not as popular as he seems to think he.....:laugh2:

[LiberalNation]

Olberman sucks, I wanted watch his show to see them debate either. He's annoying as hell, along with Chris Mathew.

I like CNN.

[red states rule]

Everytime I catch part of Olberman's show he has Bill O'Reilly as the "Worst Person" of the world winner. Olberman is the prime example of what a hate filled liberal will turn out to be.

He is jealous of O'Reilly. Bill continues to kill hm in the ratings

[red states rule]

Olberman sucks, I wanted watch his show to see them debate either. He's annoying as hell, along with Chris Mathew.

I like CNN.

You are one of the very few people who do watch Clinton News Network

[red states rule]

Isn't this a shocker?

National Journal Editor: GOP Candidates Get Tougher Debate Questions Than Dems
By Noel Sheppard | August 12, 2007 - 12:42 ET

As the 2008 presidential campaign moves into high gear, a common conservative complaint has been that Democrat candidates have so far been largely asked softball questions by liberal moderators at their debates, while the Republicans have actually been vigorously challenged by media personalities in theirs.

On CNN's "Reliable Sources" Sunday morning, former Capitol Hill correspondent for ABC, and current contributing editor to the National Journal, Linda Douglass, made it quite clear that she agrees with such concerns.

Host Howard Kurtz, after playing a video clip of musician Melissa Etheridge asking Hillary Clinton (D-New York) a question at a recent debate, posed the following:

Linda Douglass, my question is with those kinds of personal, first-person, emotional queries, do we really need journalists at these debates? Aren't these questions sort of better than the kind of questions that reporters ask?

Douglass couldn't disagree more:

Well, there's been such an interesting contrast between the Democratic debates and the Republican debates in a couple of ways. Yes, it's true that at the Democratic debates, the YouTube debate, certainly the AFL-CIO debate, certainly the gay and lesbian activist debate, that you're really seeing voters who are important constituencies inside the Democratic Party asking the kinds of questions that they are particularly interested in. Teachers were able to ask questions at a teacher's debate. There have been a lot of specific constituency questions for the Democrats which is causing the Democrats to address those specific constituencies.

The Republicans on the other hand have not been asked questions by voters. But they are being asked questions by hard-nosed journalists such as George Stephanopoulos which cover the range of issues. And I actually think that we're seeing a more realistic display of Republican positions caught off guard not expecting the questions by a journalist than we sometimes are at the Democratic debates.

You're darned right, Linda. Thank you for being so honest with your assessment.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2007/08/12/national-journal-editor-gop-candidates-get-tougher-debate-questions-d

[Guernicaa]

Did anyone watch them on the LOGO/Human Rights Campaign Debate?