Like em or not , FoxNews is #1 . That's fact . Ok now , many Democratic candidates have made many disparaging remarks about Fox , and some have even gone so far as to demand that Fox give equal airtime to the left . . . .which is bs anyway imo . (btw , I don't think CNN should be forced to give equal time to the right either)
Edwards and others have refused to even appear on Fox , and most of the Democratic candidates won't participate in a Fox sponsored debate . . . .. . . won't participate on the #1 most watched news in the country .
Considering the above , and the over-whelming popularity of Fox amongst AMERICANS . . . . . Do You Think The Democratic Party candidates are shooting themselves in the foot ?
Don't get me wrong , I don't mind if they do , but doncha think the American public will be wise enough come election time , to see that the Democrats are avoiding confrontation on their views ?
And doncha think a LEADER should be willing to confront ALL sides ?
2007-08-09 05:08:11 · 34 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Some of you are fools . I am biased . . . and so are you . I asked if we could put our bias aside for this one question .
2007-08-09 05:32:26 · update #1
Here's a funny one for ya . Some of you say you disagree with Fox but watch it anyways (a slight implication of being a dem) and then you say "Why would they want to go on a network whose viewers are predisposed against them . Ahhhhh , the epitome of hypocrisy and denial . Good job .
2007-08-09 05:37:18 · update #2
My, how the fur flies here today! Did you all know that more people watched Fox (New's coverage of the Minnesota bridge collapse) than any other channel? So it's just not coverage of politics that draws folks to Fox News. My 'take' on the liberals is the big word 'FEAR'. What do they have to fear by coming on Fox? You name it! They fear being unable to answer hard questions. What kind of a leader of this great nation would fear questions? They OUGHT to fear the real enemy! If they had nothing to fear they would be glad to come on Fox News! Plain and simple.
Wasn't it the Democrat F.D. Roosevelt who said, 'we have nothing to fear but fear itself'? That would be good for modern Democrats to think about. Is the upcoming election so vital that they let fear direct their steps? Talk about control......this is one of their ways to 'control' how folks view them. Sad.....
Then there was President Harry Truman, another Democrat. Can you imagine him turning down a chance to come on Fox News? That man was fearless! He would have welcomed such a challenge!
'WIMPS' are not needed to head up this great nation. Where are those who are true patriots?
The Fairness Doctrine is designed to silence conservative talk radio......and to continue to silence the 'other side' of us. How long will we put up with this ??? Enough is enough already!
2007-08-09 10:26:54 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I would think that candidates would want face time in front of as many people as possible. Trying to freeze out Fox News isn't smart given it's viewership. Not everyone who watches Fox is a dyed in the wool conservative and in order to win any Presidential election you're going to need to get some of those more moderate people.
Also, by not going on Fox news, they have no way to control the debate. O'Reilly and Hannity can offer up anything they want on a candidate and without that candidate there to represent their views the picture they get is pretty one sided.
A candidate that is bold enough to go on Fox wins either way. If they have a good outing on Fox then they can potentially pick up moderate swing votes. If they have a bad outing they can chalk it up to Fox news bias and get the sympathy for the attempt.
2007-08-09 05:27:14 · answer #2 · answered by Deep Thought 5 · 5⤊ 0⤋
Its another of the far left conspiracy theories on how Fox somehow is the propaganda arm of the administration. Usually in propaganda cases the government has controlled all other media outlets so the public only hears from the propaganda wing of government. Democrats seem to forget that in the idiotic tactics concerning Fox News. Fox has liberals on as a regular part of their programs - Lanny Davis, Eleanor Clift, Susan Estrich, Alan Colmes, etc. while the mainstream media never has a conservative host on or even as a regular part of their agenda of left wing ramblings. Its is proof that the Democrats if the would ever put the fairness doctrine back in only intend to bring down right wing talk show hosts and prop up left wing hosts that lose money for any radio show. The mainstream media of the major networks and the major newspapers are losing viewership and readership everyday since they do not make an attempt to show both sides of an issues. It really does not matter to me if Democrats are so stupid as to stay off the Fox network and just go on programs that they get softball questions from. But to me it is a tactic to promote the Fairness Doctrine and nothing more.
2007-08-09 05:20:56 · answer #3 · answered by ALASPADA 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Fox isn't #1 because it's the most liked, it's because it's the most viewed. Many Democrats, including myself, watch Fox.. we add to the ratings.. that doesn't mean we necessarily like it though. They would be walking into a trap by agreeing to let Fox run a debate for them.. and while I would have more respect for someone that could walk into an obvious trap and walk out the victor.. I don't lose respect for someone for simply avoiding the trap. I would think that many people see it this way also. If so, then they aren't shooting themselves in the foot. But if not that many see it as I do.. then yes, it is possible that they are... and losing a few toes in the process.
2007-08-09 05:19:00 · answer #4 · answered by pip 7 · 7⤊ 1⤋
I do not see why people assume just because any channel has high ratings or does well in polls, that it means that they are the 'best" source for anything. I view Fox just as I view all other news networks, as entertainment. All networks show their personal bias, whether it leans right or left. While some channels bias' may be more apparent than others, they all are biased. If you want to be a truly informed individual, you must realize the need to get your information from more than one source, with more than one perspective.
That being said, why would a candidate wish to appear on a channel, show, or debate whose moderators and audience are already predisposed to be against their views and beliefs?
***EDIT***
No where did I state that I watch Fox, or any other news channel for that matter. I feel that they are all biased in one way or another. You call me out as a hypocrite, yet you are the one who consistently slams anyone who does not agree with your particular viewpoint, then comes back and call for everyone to "put your political bias aside". Please, do not try to put words into my mouth that were never there to begin with. Furthermore, I find it quite ironic that you judge my politics, when nowhere in this response have I said anything about my affiliation.
Go ahead and give me all the TD you want, it really doesn't matter to me, in fact lets try to go for a record.
2007-08-09 05:23:43 · answer #5 · answered by What's The Point 3 · 5⤊ 2⤋
Yes they are because they are cutting themselves off a large chunk of voters.
They don't have to agree with Fox but when they start picking the outlets it draws lots of questions.
If they get to the White House makes me wonder if they are going to do the same.
Liberals were all upset with Bush because he had conservative talk show hosts for a meeting.
Yet those same people can't seem to understand why people upset that DNC will talk with Fox News.
There is a reason why Fox is #1 is because they are hearing a different side of the news.
I don't want a president who decides she/he will take questions from and cutting off debate.
I hope they do come around but if they don't they will have sealed their fate.
2007-08-09 06:10:11 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
The Democratic candidates made the right decision to leave Fox alone.
I concur that Fox News Channel has a lot of viewers. However, Fox viewers aren't likely to vote for a Democratic candidate in any case. So, the exposure doesn't have a lot of upside for the candidates.
As for downside, since the channel gets to ask the questions, you get to field questions like:
"Isn't disagreeing with the President's policies during time of war giving aid and comfort to the enemy?"
"How many times are you going to raise taxes?"
This was a calculated decisions. The downsides of appearing on Fox outweighed the upsides.
Really, I'm waiting for someone to ask the Republican candidates questions like:
"President Bush has a 28% approval rating. Which of President Bush's policies made a majority of Americans turn against him?"
"You are a member of the Republican Party, the same as our current President. What are the top three things that you and he disagree?"
The format is simple. To attack candidates, you invite them to throw themselves under the bus. You state something widely unpopular, and try to tie your victim to it. There is no evidence that Fox would give the Democratic candidates an opportunity to expand information.
In fact, during the last election, the debate I thought was best was the town hall, where individual citizens provided questions.
2007-08-09 05:28:15 · answer #7 · answered by John T 6 · 3⤊ 3⤋
All bias aside I would assume that exposure of one's views to the public is what an election is all about. If you are confident of your ideas then the greatest possible exposure would be preferred.
I can see where, during the primary season it might be wise for the Democrats to avoid Fox as it is a possibility that many of their followers would not be the viewers of Fox and therefore while they would be exposed to the greatest number of viewers they would be the wrong viewers. How their ideas play in the more conservative viewership doesn't really matter...yet.
Once we get to the general election I would be very surprised to see this continue.
Think of it this way. I wouldn't sell feminine hygiene products on Spike, I would rather sell them on Oxygen. You have to think of the target market.
Bias put back on: The Democrats are gutless wimps to have done this.
2007-08-09 05:18:00 · answer #8 · answered by Matt W 6 · 6⤊ 1⤋
It would show against their view on media control. That i what they are betting on. If they win the President race, they will control all 3 branches of Government and could put penalties against the Fox news channel for not bowing to the liberal side. This should hurt the Democrats in the election, but, they will invent scandals at Fox before that in order to get people to turn against Fox.
Stay tuned to Fox " You Decide "
2007-08-09 05:19:25 · answer #9 · answered by meathead 5 · 4⤊ 1⤋
i do no longer believe any of the present Democrat applicants. Lieberman seems to be the only Democrat who knows the possibility. Oh, it incredibly is optimal, he's not a Democrat anymore! Many Liberals are rapid to indicate out that 9/11 replaced into Bush's fault, sometimes actually, and however the terrorist framework were occurring for years. Clinton had some opportunities he exceeded on. (we are actually not completely specific, with the aid of fact various the data is caught in Sandy Burglar's pants.) i think of he exceeded, with the aid of fact he did no longer prefer the international questioning we've been the aggressors. it style of feels as though Democrats are greater nerve-racking approximately what the international thinks approximately us, fairly than nerve-racking approximately preserving us.
2016-10-01 23:37:11 · answer #10 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋