Johnny Coli Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 Yeah, he's really awesome at finding a few ways of obscuring the fact the BO's total audience is approximately four times the size of his own (which is in Nancy Grace territory). Key demographics? You mean young people, who generally don't vote as much as older people?And how weird is it that the guy takes time out of his "news" show to reassure viewers that he is popular and relevant? "I found a demographic where I'm not being massacred. So there." 830597[/snapback] You're completely wrong with that statement. Youth turnout in election biggest in 20 years Young Americans voted in the largest numbers in at least 20 years in congressional elections, energized by the Iraq war and giving a boost to Democrats, pollsters said on Wednesday. About 24 percent of Americans under the age of 30, or at least 10 million young voters, cast ballots in Tuesday's elections that saw Democrats make big gains in Congress. That was up 4 percentage points from the last mid-term elections in 2002. Young people are voting, and they vote Dem. Rock the Vote, a youth-and-civics group, said young voters favored Democrats by a 22-point margin, nearly three times the margin Democrats earned among other age groups and dealing a potentially decisive blow to Republicans in tight races. Olbermann's numbers for the young viewer demographic are going up. Salon interview MSNBC host Keith Olbermann has been building ratings for his nightly show, "Countdown," and has become a darling of the liberal half of the Internet, by tacking to the left while most of cable's chattering class veers right. His 3-year-old show continues to add viewers, especially the young ones that advertisers crave; the numbers for such conservative warhorses as Bill O'Reilly, with whom Olbermann has pursued a long-running feud, are down, as are the ratings for the Fox News Channel generally. The ones that don't watch his show watch the clips of his commentaries on Youtube (the most popular are the ones where he beats-down O'Reilly). So, the underlying premise of your post suggesting that his ratings aren't significant, and that his viewers are young and don't vote, is entirely wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted November 9, 2006 Author Share Posted November 9, 2006 did Olberdick play this to: That was then....This is now. 830893[/snapback] That is all very cute...but as we know, a lot changed after the war started. What Olbermans' show was referring to, was our president (the one returning dignity to the white house), as well as Rush, admitt that they are a bunch of liars, who will say anything to get the election results to come out the way they wish. From Limbaugh, it is no big deal, he has been lying through his teeth, ratehr transparently, for years. Coming from Bush, though, I think this is rather alarming. Not so much that he lied (all politicians lie), just his reasoning is absent of any attempt at sugar coating ("I lied because I was campaigning" is pretty much what he said), so you really have to wonder how far this guy will go, to get things his way. Maybe lie about the reasons for attacking another country? BTW, since his harshest critics on the PPP board apparently don't watch Olberman, you would be surprised to know that he has been pretty rough on Democrats as well...Hillary Clinton has become a running joke for him...Bush just gets most of the bashing, because he has been such a miserable !@#$ up, and irresponisible...he deserves it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 You're completely wrong with that statement. Youth turnout in election biggest in 20 years Young people are voting, and they vote Dem. Olbermann's numbers for the young viewer demographic are going up. Salon interview The ones that don't watch his show watch the clips of his commentaries on Youtube (the most popular are the ones where he beats-down O'Reilly). So, the underlying premise of your post suggesting that his ratings aren't significant, and that his viewers are young and don't vote, is entirely wrong. 830963[/snapback] 24% turnout. Wow, that's almost 1/2 of a majority of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 24% turnout. Wow, that's almost 1/2 of a majority of them. 830988[/snapback] I would defiantely say that getting 1 out of every 4 people in that age group to vote in a non-presidential election year is pretty damn good. I'd say 10 million is a pretty significant amount. You'll have to ask Karl Rove if he agrees...if you can find him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 I would defiantely say that getting 1 out of every 4 people in that age group to vote in a non-presidential election year is pretty damn good. I'd say 10 million is a pretty significant amount. You'll have to ask Karl Rove if he agrees...if you can find him. 831006[/snapback] That wouldn't make SnR's comment "completely wrong" though, would it? Typically, off year elections get ~40% voter turnout, which is significantly higher than 24%. Elderly voters typically have ~60% turnout rate in off year elections and ~20MM voters. That is, even with 20 year highs in off-year turnout for under 30 voters, voters in general turn out in higher propotion than under 30's and elderly voters turn out in significantly higher #'s and %ages than young voters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 So, the underlying premise of your post suggesting that his ratings aren't significant, and that his viewers are young and don't vote, is entirely wrong. 830963[/snapback] I didn't say his viewers "don't vote", I said they "don't vote as much as older people" which is still true. His ratings aren't that good. Period. And that's even with his gains, much of which have come in the past year as we've gotten closer to the 2006 elections. The big winner in TV ratings over the past year is Glenn Beck, whose ratings at HLN are 200% higher than HLN's same time slot one year ago before Beck took over. But, then again, Beck is conservative so he doesn't get all the puff pieces about him in major newspapers that Olbermann gets for some reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 He is catering to a much smaller demographic, one that can tell the difference between fact and opinion.... 830891[/snapback] But can't find Mexico on a map. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 I think all the anti-abortion people should be forced to adopt a minimum of two orphans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 I think all the anti-abortion people should be forced to adopt a minimum of two orphans. 831089[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 I think all the anti-abortion people should be forced to adopt a minimum of two orphans. 831089[/snapback] Nice! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 Olbermann's numbers for the young viewer demographic are going up. He has two viewers instead of one now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 I think all the anti-abortion people should be forced to adopt a minimum of two orphans. 831089[/snapback] Hmmmm, that's not a bad idea. How much are they going for on the black market? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 I think all the anti-abortion people should be forced to adopt a minimum of two orphans. 831089[/snapback] That's funny, but at the same time it's true. Too many jackass couples in this country who'll spend thousands of dollars to get pregnant when there are tons of kids who could use a good home. And how come Madonna hasn't bought a kid lately? It's been over a week.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 Hmmmm, that's not a bad idea. How much are they going for on the black market? 831099[/snapback] If you got one with blue eyes that would be happy in Colombia, PM me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiwi Bills fan Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 You know what? The "Right" can just f!@#$ off. These a'holes were brutal to anyone that questioned them. (The Politicians and their brutal supporters.) Trust me... I know. Turnaround is fair game. Let the investigations begin! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey Balls Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 And don't think for a moment that they won't, or they shouldn't. Payback....this time it's for real. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 And don't think for a moment that they won't, or they shouldn't.Payback....this time it's for real. 831201[/snapback] Yeah, and the Dem's hands are clean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 Hmmmm, that's not a bad idea. How much are they going for on the black market? 831099[/snapback] You'll have to ask Madonna and Angelina Jolie. They grabbed a few off the black market, right? Its amazing how much press time you get for a couple of hundred grand on the black market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 You'll have to ask Madonna and Angelina Jolie. They grabbed a few off the black market, right? Its amazing how much press time you get for a couple of hundred grand on the black market. 831207[/snapback] Couple hundred grand........each! I sure hope my two aren't on back order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EC-Bills Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 That's funny, but at the same time it's true. Too many jackass couples in this country who'll spend thousands of dollars to get pregnant when there are tons of kids who could use a good home. And how come Madonna hasn't bought a kid lately? It's been over a week.... 831177[/snapback] Yes, there are plenty of kids who could use a good home. However, next time try walking in a couple's shoes who are having trouble trying to have a baby on their own. You might actually learn something as opposed to spouting off that they are jackasses. Adoption is not an easy process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts