Don't you mean "wa wa wa"? Isn't that what Cha-Chi used to say on Happy Days?

And I didn't make up the Alyssa Milano thing, she tweeted it. She might have been drunk, or painting indoors with the windows closed at the time, but she tweeted it. She's all kinds of smart.

I didn't say all Clinton voters Jim.

So Jim follows Alyssa Milano on Twitter? It's all coming together then...

No - but Baio is low hanging fruit.

And yes I know she tweeted it - I saw it and linked to it...

Not necessarily - twitter users have a habit of replicating good and bad tweets - but you already know this

I've actually never been on twitter, they were making fun of her on Fox. Deservedly so.

You were watching Fox, I'm astounded.

I can't watch Hannity. Most of the others, are better than everyone else's best. In any event, they appear to have reported this one correctly, did they not?

You are unaware, or are denying, that a liberal said something laughably stupid. We're all astounded.

I don't think you have to look very far to find people saying stupid things. Reporting on matters of insignificance is pretty lame though. I'd pay more attention to what those in influential positions are spouting off on.

"I don't think you have to look very far to find people saying stupid things"

True enough, but I can spot that and ignore it. I'm looking for people saying smart things, and there's more of that on Fox, than on any other network. It's the only network where thoughtful liberals and thoughtful conservatives are each given the chance to make their case. Brett Baier's show at 6:00 would very regularly have Charles Krauthammer and Juan Williams together. Watching a segment with those two guys, is how you learn.

The other networks don't come close, the other networks have almost nothing other than hosts who are the left-wing equivalent of Sean Hannity. On Fox, he's an outlier in terms of his thoughtless ideology. On the other networks, 90% of the hosts are pure ideologues. The ratings speak for themselves.

Using this ignorant logic,can we assume that guys like yourself,Pete,and WD40 follow Trump on that platform?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I don't watch Fox



Saw it on the twitters

Juan Williams is a token lefty for the network. They rarely even let him speak. I see conservatives all the time on the other networks.

The difference is, even if there's bias against Trump...they don't just make crap up like on Fox.

I don't have a Twitter account, never used it.

"Juan Williams is a token lefty for the network. They rarely even let him speak"

You have no idea what you're talking about. He has hosted the prime time shows when the hosts are out.

"I see conservatives all the time on the other networks."

Me too. And they are attacked, not allowed to make their case. On Fox, liberals are often told, "that's a good point".

spence, by the way, do you know why juan williams is at fox? he was at NPR. but the liberals there, despite all their claims about tolerance, inclusiveness, and concern for minorities, threw his black azz to the curb the first time he said something that disagreed with liberalism. at fox he hosts a show. so who is more open minded?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It’s a shame you missed my point.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Thats why as an independent voter , I am flexible I am not beholden to any partys position.. I understand a stupid idea is just that
reguardless what party floats the idea

I even liked Bob dole.. and nancy pelosi should ride off into the sunset..with Waters taking away republicans 2nd best vote getter next to maxine waters 2 women and a black women who could they attack if that trifecta was absent ??? you would still have what your team calls the Hollywood elite to make fun of but seeing the only people who pay attention to them seems to be you and other conservatives

its such a novel idea... lets present the ideas of people not elected by the people who have no power in policy as Leaders of a movement and re sell it (LIE) thats part of the Liberal agenda and the base takes the hook every time ..

unless of course their name ends in Ivanka Trump or K. Kardashian

case in point

US midterms: Ivanka Trump ‘to be dispatched to suburban districts’ where president's hardline policies are turning off supporters funny how that works

"Status threat, not economic hardship, explains the 2016 presidential vote"
And here is the research paper, with the who and why
http://www.pnas.org/content/115/19/E4330[/QUOTE]

Your link was a lengthy and difficult read. But I did plod through it. Can't say it was worth it. What is it with psycho-babblers who can only speak in jargon with labels denoting supposedly hidden underlying causes rather than using plain language to discuss the obvious?

Anyway, the article totally debunks Spence's characterization of Trump's rallies being represented by stuff like shirts with "I'd rather be a Russian than a Democrat", and QAnon being everywhere. And it supports what I said about them being attended by diverse American crowds. According to your article, Trump voters were not just uneducated, anti-immigrant, sexist, racist, bigots. Your article says that "Voters who shifted to become Trump voters between the two elections [2012 and 2016] seem to have done so because of increasing distance between their own views and those of the Democratic candidate on trade, immigration, and China as well as due to the decreasing distance between their own views and those of the Republican candidate." In addition, those who sensed a rising threat to their dominant group status, were particularly likely to shift in support of Trump. And that the Democrat position on trade became far less tenable to the average American than the Republican position.

Trump ralliers are mostly average Americans not fringe kooks.

As far as the dominant status threat, that seems to be an obvious motivation. What dominant group anywhere in the world would not fear a threat to their status if the obvious trend in demographics portends and end to their dominance? And the minorities that will become the future's dominant status may well fear the same threat.

Your article identifies the current dominant status as being, white, men, Christian. Well, both parties have significant voters with those identities. And they are not kooks or fringe lunatics.