US Politics Thread

[Kieran]

See Kieran, my impression is that many western European countries are far more liberal than Americans in general, are tou saying in Ireland most college students are WOKE liberals?

No I didn’t say that. But there are students who reflect leftist propaganda in general, including all the bad ideas - they think it’s the compassionate team, and they done even question the lunacy and unsuitability of the modern left to govern.

But to my broader point, I find many college students insufferably smug about their intellectual prowess, or maybe im just reflecting back on myself. ; )

I would correct that to say they are insufferably smug because they think they own intellectual prowess. I tend to like young people and I know so many who aren’t woke, and who agree with me that a functioning, civilised society knows it needs both liberals and conservatives in collaboration and open minded negotiation…

 

[Moxie]

As I mentioned, I haven’t followed the firings yet today, so do you know why Carlson was fired?

A couple more ideas have been posited today. Maybe you've heard them. His criticisms of upper management.The pending lawsuit against him and Fox by Abby Grossberg, which is mostly about creating a terribly sexist work environment. (Many accounts today of his liberal use of the c-word, including by a male fellow journalist from NPR who heard him use it, and (cautioned, I'm guessing?) "Tucker, what are you doing?" Carlson's response: "What? She is."

But a lawyer wrote a letter to the editor in today's NY Times suggesting something interesting: Since Fox is likely insured for a certain amount of that settlement, the insurance company/companies may consider Carlson too much of a liability. He didn't say this, but in the film business, for example, actors have to be insurable. Various things like age, health issues, drug problems can make insurance companies refuse to cover costs if they hold up production. Carlson is on-screen talent, and you can see why insurers might find him a risk not worth taking anymore. I was looking for the business-angle decision, and this might be it. As banal as that. I think everything plays into it, though. But he was their big star and moneymaker.

 

[Federberg]

A couple more ideas have been posited today. Maybe you've heard them. His criticisms of upper management.The pending lawsuit against him and Fox by Abby Grossberg, which is mostly about creating a terribly sexist work environment. (Many accounts today of his liberal use of the c-word, including by a male fellow journalist from NPR who heard him use it, and (cautioned, I'm guessing?) "Tucker, what are you doing?" Carlson's response: "What? She is."

But a lawyer wrote a letter to the editor in today's NY Times suggesting something interesting: Since Fox is likely insured for a certain amount of that settlement, the insurance company/companies may consider Carlson too much of a liability. He didn't say this, but in the film business, for example, actors have to be insurable. Various things like age, health issues, drug problems can make insurance companies refuse to cover costs if they hold up production. Carlson is on-screen talent, and you can see why insurers might find him a risk not worth taking anymore. I was looking for the business-angle decision, and this might be it. As banal as that. I think everything plays into it, though. But he was their big star and moneymaker.

it's really hard to believe though. As is the Vanity Fair article that Rupert Murdoch fired him because of some religious speech he made on Friday. The man made too much money for them! I have a feeling this is good news for Tucker though. He can set up on social media platforms and potentially earn more than he currently does. And no doubt he'll take viewership away from Fox at the same time

 

[Moxie]

it's really hard to believe though. As is the Vanity Fair article that Rupert Murdoch fired him because of some religious speech he made on Friday. The man made too much money for them! I have a feeling this is good news for Tucker though. He can set up on social media platforms and potentially earn more than he currently does. And no doubt he'll take viewership away from Fox at the same time

Actually, I've offered several reasons posited, so which do you find hard to believe? Or is it just hard to believe in general that they dumped him? Why do you think they fired him, because it IS shocking, given how popular he was. He also breeched the rift between Fox News and the Trump loyalists who were mad at Fox for calling Arizona (and the election) for Biden, ahead of anyone else. Tucker brought 'em back.

Some say Fox may be distancing itself from his extra-inflammatory and screwy rhetoric, but I don't believe that. As to Tuck, I don't think any platform will give him the influence or exposure of an 8pm slot on Fox, so I don't see it as "good news" for him. But I'm sure he'll land on his feet. Russia Times offered him a job via Twitter within the first minutes of the news breaking.

 

[Federberg]

Actually, I've offered several reasons posited, so which do you find hard to believe? Or is it just hard to believe in general that they dumped him? Why do you think they fired him, because it IS shocking, given how popular he was. He also breeched the rift between Fox News and the Trump loyalists who were mad at Fox for calling Arizona (and the election) for Biden, ahead of anyone else. Tucker brought 'em back.

Some say Fox may be distancing itself from his extra-inflammatory and screwy rhetoric, but I don't believe that. As to Tuck, I don't think any platform will give him the influence or exposure of an 8pm slot on Fox, so I don't see it as "good news" for him. But I'm sure he'll land on his feet. Russia Times offered him a job via Twitter within the first minutes of the news breaking.

well I'm sceptical the use of the 'c' word gets over the threshold, but to be fair I've just seen a Wall Street Journal article about that very thing. Fox News is a bottom line company. It seems to me that holding on to the conservative base is of vital importance to them. It's worth the temporary pain of high payouts in my view. I personally have no idea why they did it, I'm truly clueless. All I'm saying is that I haven't heard anything that rings true. I guess in time we'll find out. If we see some significant change in strategy it'll probably make it all make sense.

As for alternative platforms... this is where your focus on MSM blinds you to the bigger picture. Tucker has the ability to match the reach of folks like Joe Rogen and Russell Brand. I don't think there's any doubt he can make as much doing that as he did on Fox News. The. only difference is that he would have no editorial oversight. He would be massively influential.

 

[Jelenafan]

One thing i read that couild have some plausible cred is that Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch were not pleased with some of Tucker’s direct criticism of Fox News Management, which could be seen as circling back to criticism of them.

Monetarily going the Meghan Kelly, Bill O’Reilly podcast route he could be making even more bucks. Othetr options are Syndicated talk show, etc. While he won’t have to have the same editorial oversight as in Fox News he may not have such a broad base number of viewers that he got there.

Bill O’ Reilly actually had higher ratings when he was let go by Fox and by all accounts hes doing quite well with his revenue streams these days.

 

[Moxie]

well I'm sceptical the use of the 'c' word gets over the threshold, but to be fair I've just seen a Wall Street Journal article about that very thing. Fox News is a bottom line company. It seems to me that holding on to the conservative base is of vital importance to them. It's worth the temporary pain of high payouts in my view. I personally have no idea why they did it, I'm truly clueless. All I'm saying is that I haven't heard anything that rings true. I guess in time we'll find out. If we see some significant change in strategy it'll probably make it all make sense.

As for alternative platforms... this is where your focus on MSM blinds you to the bigger picture. Tucker has the ability to match the reach of folks like Joe Rogen and Russell Brand. I don't think there's any doubt he can make as much doing that as he did on Fox News. The. only difference is that he would have no editorial oversight. He would be massively influential.

No, actually, I'm with you...I think the use of the c-word is the about the least plausible, at Fox, though I mentioned that because of the lawsuit, which IS possible, as Tuck gets to be a financial liability as much as a cash cow. That's why I think the insurance angle is interesting. What if they refused to insure him against lawsuits anymore? This is the US...everything starts with the insurance being in place. The other one is that it came to light how much he's criticized upper management. He helped humiliate Fox a LOT in that Dominion lawsuit, besides helping cost them a lot dough. I'm inclined to think it's an accumulation of things...just curious to wonder which ones tipped the scale.

 

[Moxie]

One thing i read that couild have some plausible cred is that Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch were not pleased with some of Tucker’s direct criticism of Fox News Management, which could be seen as circling back to criticism of them.

Monetarily going the Meghan Kelly, Bill O’Reilly podcast route he could be making even more bucks. Othetr options are Syndicated talk show, etc. While he won’t have to have the same editorial oversight as in Fox News he may not have such a broad base number of viewers that he got there.

Bill O’ Reilly actually had higher ratings when he was let go by Fox and by all accounts hes doing quite well with his revenue streams these days.

I do agree about the criticisms that came to light.

It bears remembering that Carlson is independently wealthy, so the question of how he does financially post-Fox is not really relevant. I think it's about influence, I'm sure, if you'd ask him, but you and Federberg seem to think he'll find just as big an audience, if not bigger?

 

[tented]

I do agree about the criticisms that came to light.

It bears remembering that Carlson is independently wealthy, so the question of how he does financially post-Fox is not really relevant. I think it's about influence, I'm sure, if you'd ask him, but you and Federberg seem to think he'll find just as big an audience, if not bigger?

I heard he was making around $20 million/year, and Fox is paying out the rest of the contract. In other words, he does not need money; he has more than enough to last him a lifetime after that many years on Fox.

It’s no longer about money for him — it’s about exposure. He has gotten used to having millions of viewers, and will feel a kind of withdrawal when he’s no longer being seen nightly. @Federberg is correct that there are non-MSM avenues he could now follow which could get him millions of followers. It’s estimated that Joe Rogan has 11 millions listeners per episode on Spotify, and signed a contract with them for something like $100 million.

 

[Jelenafan]

I do agree about the criticisms that came to light.

It bears remembering that Carlson is independently wealthy, so the question of how he does financially post-Fox is not really relevant. I think it's about influence, I'm sure, if you'd ask him, but you and Federberg seem to think he'll find just as big an audience, if not bigger?

On the contrary, in my post I said he probably won’t have the same broadbase audience he has now.

Bill O’Reilly does quite well and has his podcasts but relatively speaking, its more “niche” compared to the audience he had at FOX.

As to “influence”, well that we wont know until he lands on his feet , though it sometimes is a chicken/egg scenario: Fox and Tucker fed on each other for success, the timing of the Trump presidency, etc. Will any other platform give him the base he has now?

As to the money he makes being “ irrelevant”, well this being America its always relevant. ; )

 

[Federberg]

I heard he was making around $20 million/year, and Fox is paying out the rest of the contract. In other words, he does not need money; he has more than enough to last him a lifetime after that many years on Fox.

It’s no longer about money for him — it’s about exposure. He has gotten used to having millions of viewers, and will feel a kind of withdrawal when he’s no longer being seen nightly. @Federberg is correct that there are non-MSM avenues he could now follow which could get him millions of followers. It’s estimated that Joe Rogan has 11 millions listeners per episode on Spotify, and signed a contract with them for something like $100 million.

yup that's exactly where I see it going. I do agree that money isn't the issue. But.. he could create a followership that leaves Fox News in the dust. I think it's influence he wants. Just look at Ben Shapiro, he absolutely dominates on Facebook. I could see Carlson going down that route using YouTube, Facebook and Rumble. He would be a monster

 

[Federberg]

just to put it in context. Meghan Kelly has almost 1 million viewers on YouTube. Ben Shapiro has 5.6m. These are huge numbers. Shapiro is basically destroying cable tv. He is making an insane amount of money. But leaving money aside... his reach.. his influence is beyond belief. He's half the size of the Fox News Youtube numbers, and that's going straight his pocket. There comes a tipping point where real damage gets done to these cable tv channels

 

[Moxie]

I heard he was making around $20 million/year, and Fox is paying out the rest of the contract. In other words, he does not need money; he has more than enough to last him a lifetime after that many years on Fox.

It’s no longer about money for him — it’s about exposure. He has gotten used to having millions of viewers, and will feel a kind of withdrawal when he’s no longer being seen nightly. @Federberg is correct that there are non-MSM avenues he could now follow which could get him millions of followers. It’s estimated that Joe Rogan has 11 millions listeners per episode on Spotify, and signed a contract with them for something like $100 million.

Tucker comes from family money, even if he never worked a day. His mother, who cut him out, but he got the money anyway, died worth $90M, and his stepmother, who adopted him, is heiress to the Swanson fortune. Google says he's worth $370M, but I think we all agree it's not about that. Hell, he's probably still trying to get back at Jon Stewart for humiliating him on Crossfire.

 

[Federberg]

what's Don Lemon going to do? NBC? I hear that his contentious interview of Vivek Ramaswamy might have precipitated the termination. Typical identity politics stuff...a non-African American is not allowed to talk about African American history according to the Lemon...

 

[Federberg]

This says it all doesn’t it?

 

[Federberg]

what's Don Lemon going to do? NBC? I hear that his contentious interview of Vivek Ramaswamy might have precipitated the termination. Typical identity politics stuff...a non-African American is not allowed to talk about African American history according to the Lemon...

hmmm....

 

[tented]

Tucker comes from family money, even if he never worked a day. His mother, who cut him out, but he got the money anyway, died worth $90M, and his stepmother, who adopted him, is heiress to the Swanson fortune. Google says he's worth $370M, but I think we all agree it's not about that. Hell, he's probably still trying to get back at Jon Stewart for humiliating him on Crossfire.

Now that’s too funny: I just watched that clip from Crossfire a few hours ago. It’s been almost 20 years, and it holds up perfectly. If anything, it was prophetic.

 

[Fiero425]

Now that’s too funny: I just watched that clip from Crossfire a few hours ago. It’s been almost 20 years, and it holds up perfectly. If anything, it was prophetic.

I'm guessing you're referencing John Stewart excoriating Tucker on the old "Crossfire" show on CNN! I never missed it going back to old men Pat Buchannan & Tom Braden back in the 80's! The most I saw was w/ "The Prince of Darkness," Robert Novak & Michael Kinsley while Buchanan was working in the White House for Reagan as the Comm. Dir.! I was sorry to see all those political shows get eliminated like "The Capitol Gang!"

 

[Jelenafan]

what's Don Lemon going to do? NBC? I hear that his contentious interview of Vivek Ramaswamy might have precipitated the termination. Typical identity politics stuff...a non-African American is not allowed to talk about African American history according to the Lemon...

Don Lemon's arrogance and entitlement oozed off the screen and unlike Tucker, there was no ratings uptick or popularity factor to take into account and give them pause. CNN could have fired him simply because his numbers were constantly declining, but yea, that interview was so cringe worthy, apparently a lot of his colleagues were so fed up with him and his on screen antics. The "Bro" Cuomo/Lemon duo is gone.

 

[Moxie]

Now that’s too funny: I just watched that clip from Crossfire a few hours ago. It’s been almost 20 years, and it holds up perfectly. If anything, it was prophetic.

That was one of the best things ever. I'm going to watch it again, now that you say it was prophetic. I was thinking about how Tucker gave up the bowtie, when he, like Trump, became another "fake populist." Man of the people! And both born with the silver spoon. I just figured out why he loathes Trump...not for his policies, or anything. It's just because Carlson is a snob, and Trump didn't come from enough money, nor old enough money.