Are Sanders supporters that desperate to use FOX to support their views?

[liberal N proud]

2 posts in the last hour and I am sure we will see a dozen more before the night is over.

.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1264288


http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=826386

[rogerashton]

1. It is what it is. nt

[CaliforniaPeggy]

2. I had trouble reading your opening line. The word is DESPERATE.

And this: theiron is their own.

[liberal N proud]

4. Heading corrected

[NanceGreggs]

3. Yes, they are. n/t

[HerbChestnut]

5. FOX polls are just as accurate as any other pollster.

[liberal N proud]

6. We don't use FOX on DU

Never been considered a valid source without corroborated links. Then FOX is irrelevant.

[HerbChestnut]

8. I'm aware of FOX News' bias, but their polls are fine.

Go back and check previous results. They've always been in the same ballpark as other polls.

[liberal N proud]

10. If the information is accurate quote another source

[HerbChestnut]

13. How about pretty much every other poll out of NH in the last couple of months.

The one exception I can think of off the top of my head is the recent gravis poll, which had Bernie at 25%, and if you believe that one I've got a bridge for sale in Dubai.

[Scootaloo]

32. The poll was conducted by two polling companies; Shaw & Company research and Anderson Robbins

[liberal N proud]

35. Could have used another source?

Or is it only on FOX?

If that is the case then you have to wonder how valid it is.

[Scootaloo]

39. Read the post you linked. it's up on TheHill, and is aggregated by huffpo and RealClearPolitics

Do you have a complaint with the methodology of the poll or something? Or are you just shouting red herrings?

[Armstead]

41. Don't be petty. If this had shown Clinton in the lead would you be griping?

[liberal N proud]

43. About FOX yes!

I don't watch FOX, I don't click on FOX links, I leave establishments that choose to have FOX showing on TV's.

FOX is blocked on my TV's.

It's a FOX thing not Sanders.


You see I have not decided completely who to support, but if the Sanders supporters on this board are an indication of the whole, then I have to lean away.

[jeff47]

58. You don't seem to have added gripes for these threads yet...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251671083
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251671272
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251521645
http://www.democraticunderground.com/128038638
http://www.democraticunderground.com/110719397
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251618540
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251671798 (WaPo article talking about a Fox poll)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251491997
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251671656
http://www.democraticunderground.com/110719378#post2
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1107&pid=19382

[winter is coming]

62. Busted! Hypocrisy, thy name is liberal N proud. n/t

[jeff47]

63. Well, he's only been pointed to them for 2 hours. I'm sure he'll get right on it real soon. (nt)

[Duckhunter935]

80. Yep, lol

[Attorney in Texas]

101. LOL!

[Oilwellian]

68. Bwahaha!

[polly7]

99. LOL

No matter how old ......... I love that!

[liberal N proud]

71. Are they current?

I don't waste my time searching through old post on DU and digging up dirt. (or defending a non-trustworthy source)

Show me one that is posted current as within hours and I will call them out as well.

[Duckhunter935]

81. What does that have to do with the source

You are so upset about. Are those goal posts heavy?

[liberal N proud]

83. I don't troll old posts

PERIOD!

[Duckhunter935]

84. But you are upset about the source

And you have no issue with the many that were posted in favor of Hillary. Hypocritical in my opinion that you can't even bring yourself to criticize the source of those. I guess you did not care to comment on the source when they were posted, wonder why if it is so bad now?

[liberal N proud]

86. Show me a link of a post from TODAY with a story linked to FOX on Clinton?

TODAY!

Unless you or someone sympathizing with you suddenly posts one you can't.

BUT if you do and I see it, then I will question its source as well. Otherwise just bug off.

[Duckhunter935]

89. Yes I know hypocrisy sucks when pointed out

Not surprised you are somewhat angry. Have a great day, I am off to work.

[liberal N proud]

90. What because I don't see every post on DU?

And I don't troll old posts?

Really, that is hypocrisy?

[Duckhunter935]

91. No because you refuse to have any outrage at all

When the same source is used in support of Hillary and pointed out out to you. I have never heard that sources expire if they are more than a few days old. Learn something every day, thanks.

[liberal N proud]

92. LOL Talk about hypocrisy

You are funny as hell!

[Duckhunter935]

93. Do tell

[frylock]

109. Is there a shelf life on hypcorisy?

[jeff47]

100. Your OP is current. Still only claims Sanders supporters cite Fox.

And again, I stopped at 11 because I was well aware you would not display the integrity you claim to support. Not because I ran out of examples.

[pinebox]

97. Bwahahahahaha!

[Cha]

64. Not really.. and whoever cites fox "news".. loses.

[jeff47]

7. Well, it's good enough for Clinton supporters when the Fox poll has results they like. (nt)

[liberal N proud]

9. They all do it LOL

Hollow argument.

[jeff47]

15. Well, you don't complain on those threads.

Kinda odd if Fox is so unacceptable.

Btw, you might want to check on who actually did the poll - it wasn't Fox.

[liberal N proud]

16. Have not seen one

[jeff47]

18. Yes, willful blindness is a common affliction. (nt)

[liberal N proud]

24. I am sure can post some examples just to set me straight

[jeff47]

25. Why? You'd shut up here, and the next time something you don't like comes from Fox

you'll be back to shouting "FOX!!!!!" again. After ignoring several stories you like that happened to come from Fox too.

So what's the point? You are going to sting the frog no matter what.

[liberal N proud]

28. DU integrity

There was a time when the full force of DU would have come down on anyone using FOX as a source claiming it as a valid source. It appears that some either have forgotten what FOX is or prefer to publish garbage than fact.

Anyone citing Fox has no integrity in my opinion.


DU is not what it was and that is why many good people have left.

[jeff47]

42. Yeah, bullshit.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251671083
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251671272
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251521645
http://www.democraticunderground.com/128038638
http://www.democraticunderground.com/110719397
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251618540
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251671798 (WaPo article talking about a Fox poll)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251491997
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251671656
http://www.democraticunderground.com/110719378#post2
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1107&pid=19382

And at this point, I got bored.

Now, tell me again how no one ever cites Fox and Clinton supporters would never, ever, ever stoop to citing Fox.

And I'll see you again complaining about "integrity of DU" the next time.

Now, if you were actually concerned about the "integrity of DU", ya might edit your OP.

But you won't.

[liberal N proud]

44. Each one destroying the integrity this site once enjoyed

And once it is overrun with FOX threads, the site will become irrelevant.

[jeff47]

46. Feel free to correct the OP then. Perhaps start a new one in the Clinton group

since most of those are in the Clinton group.

After all, that's what integrity would require on your part.

[liberal N proud]

47. Why would I do that?

[jeff47]

51. Well, you claim that integrity is important to you.

And I've just demonstrated you unfairly slandered Sanders supporters on DU as "desperate" because of two threads.

I cited 11 by Clinton supporters, and only stopped because I was bored...and also because I am well aware that your outrage is phony, so more examples would be a waste of time.

Feel free to prove me wrong.

[Duckhunter935]

52. Sad isn't it

They just will not admit they have been caught and are wrong in their selective outrage.

[jeff47]

53. No, 100% expected. They'll leave this thread, let it sink

and then post the same bullshit "outrage" the next time.

You can't be sad when it's their nature.

[Oilwellian]

67. So is flailing on the floor

[Cha]

11. Hahahaha! Good Grief! fox says bernie's ahead. O-K.

[Autumn]

12. Hillary supporters have done it so the thing to do is petition the admins

to ban certain sites, Fox news among them. Not very democratic but boy do some DUers hate when some sites, not just Fox are used.

[liberal N proud]

20. Both sides do it? You too?

I have yet to see one but I am sure you will spend the next hour looking for them so you can point them out to set me straight.

[Autumn]

30. No I don't care enough about it to do that,

I'm capable of ignoring OPs I don't like .

[liberal N proud]

33. You don't want to stand behind your claim?

[Autumn]

37. Prove me wrong. I have no complaints about posters on

either side using sites I don't like.

[liberal N proud]

45. You are the one making the claim

Not me!

[Autumn]

48. I'm not the one bothered by it, but I'm bored with this so have a nice night. nt

[OilemFirchen]

14. I don't see the problem posting Fox News polls.

I would, on the other hand, find it hilarious if they are being promoted by those who decry the PTBOligarcyMSMTurdWayPollsAreUsedToInfluenceOpinions crowd.

Thank dogs that's not happening.

[mcar]

17. It's really kind of sad

Right wing sources are regularly touted on DU these days.

[liberal N proud]

22. Makes you wonder where that comes from

[jeff47]

54. Are these sad?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251671083
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251671272
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251521645
http://www.democraticunderground.com/128038638
http://www.democraticunderground.com/110719397
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251618540
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251671798 (WaPo article talking about a Fox poll)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251491997
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251671656
http://www.democraticunderground.com/110719378#post2
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1107&pid=19382

[DemocratSinceBirth]

19. I was roasted for posting a Gravis Poll .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251816259


Gravis is more/less/same as dirty as Murdoch/FOX?

[liberal N proud]

21. Yet there are FOX defenders on this and others I have seen

[DemocratSinceBirth]

23. All I will say is I was roasted for citing a Gravis Poll

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251816259


Who has more of a vested interest in and power to move opinion: FOX or Gravis ?

[MrWendel]

29. Foxes motto is...

don't let facts get in the way of a good argument. In this case don't let the source (and its credibility) get in the way of a good argument either.

[MrWendel]

26. F@$* Yes.

[Scootaloo]

27. I think it's ironic that you try to accuse others of desperation with this post.

[liberal N proud]

31. Why?

Your funny

[Scootaloo]

36. Because it reeks of desperation.

And it's "you're."

[liberal N proud]

49. ?

And it's "you're." ?????

[Scootaloo]

50. grammar policing

[MrWendel]

34. If people are going to throw crap up against the wall....

to see if it sticks, why not use the biggest piece of crap in Fox News?

And yes, it is soaked and stinks in desperation.

[notadmblnd]

38. I don't see anything saying that the OP is a Sanders supporter

nt

[Bjorn Against]

40. We do have an actual Fox News pundit that posts on this site but he is not a Bernie supporter

[stevenleser]

111. No, you don't. I'm not a Fox News pundit anymore than Bernie is

We're both guests when we appear. If I'm a "Fox News pundit" then Bernie Sanders is one too.

[Bjorn Against]

112. Bernie Sanders is a US Senator, you are a pundit

Don't try to pretend you have the same role as a Senator does. Senators are elected and one of their duties is to communicate to the people through the media. A Senator is not the same thing as a pundit, you are a pundit Bernie Sanders is not.

[stevenleser]

113. No, that's obfuscation. In television media, you're either an employee or you are a guest.

There are different kinds of employees, but if you aren't one, you are a guest. I'm a guest when I appear. Sanders is a guest when he appears, President Obama is a guest when he appears, Paul Krugman is a guest when he appears. Various actors, actresses who go on fox to talk about their latest movies and all of that are guests too. All of us non-Fox employees have the same status.

So whatever you say about me appearing you are saying about all the above.

Your problem is that you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to media but you are making pronouncements despite that.

Your best bet is to stop making statements about things you know nothing about.

[Bjorn Against]

114. No, sorry but you do not have the same status as a US Senator

Bernie is an elected official whose duty is to represent all the citizens of his state. Once you get elected to the Senate you can claim to have the same status as him, until then your roles are very different.

[stevenleser]

115. Yes, I absolutely do in terms of media. We're both guests. Pure and simple.

The fact that he is a senator makes no difference as to his status on Fox and that's what your initial comment was about.

Again, you're talking about things you don't know anything about.

[Bjorn Against]

116. Sorry, but not all guests are guests for the same reasons

I know very well what I am talking about when I say that you are no Bernie Sanders.

[stevenleser]

117. And now you are flailing and making your lack of knowledge even more clear

Lol, you mean Sanders, Dennis Rodman, and Mitch Lobel, and I were brought on as guests for different reasons?

As funny as it sounds, no we weren't. We were all brought in to discuss our opinions on a subject as subject matter experts. And we were all guests.

And you are still talking about things you know nothing about.

[Bjorn Against]

118. So you consider yourself and Dennis Rodman to be "subject matter experts"?

Thanks for providing me with a good laugh this evening.

[Trajan]

55. Hah ... I'm a Sanders supporter

And I've never posted a link to Fox News. EVER!

So, it appears your math is off a bit ...

However, someone appears to be desperate to impugn the reputations of Sanders supporters by lying about the predominance of Fox News links posted by said supporters ... We are thousands here, and you found two? ...

Oh Geez! Who knew that Sanders supporters love Fox so much! ... What a bunch of right wingers!

[Trajan]

56. And for that bit of nonsense

You get ignored, forever ...

You used to be cool, but now you are gone ...

[MaggieD]

57. Yes

[Number23]

59. I wish I was surprised but I've just seen post after post, including one OP that was damn near

hysterical in its delusional "declaration" that Sanders and his supporters were "winning" despite ALL evidence to the contrary.

So it appears that some people have reached the grieving stage of their support right now. Which means that pretty much everything is on the table and unfortunately, that appears to include Fox News, Drudge, Washington Times and Lord knows what else.

[Hekate]

60. It's seriously awful. It used be unthinkable to use RW sources here; a matter of pride....

.....if nothing else.

[jeff47]

61. Like these?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251671083
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251671272
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251521645
http://www.democraticunderground.com/128038638
http://www.democraticunderground.com/110719397
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251618540
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251671798 (WaPo article talking about a Fox poll)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251491997
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251671656
http://www.democraticunderground.com/110719378#post2
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1107&pid=19382

[840high]

66. ...^ that

[Ed Suspicious]

76. This is like the most beautiful pie in the face.

[liberal N proud]

69. It was about posting facts, maintaining an integrity about what gets posted here

And FOX, Drudge and other are not considered trustworthy and therefore nothing posted from those sites is considered valid.

[Ed Suspicious]

77. See post #61.

[840high]

65. Had it been something

favorable for Hillary we would have never heard from you.

[liberal N proud]

70. I have been here a long time and I would most likely have called out anyone posting from FOX

had I seen it!

HAD I SEEN IT!

[Ed Suspicious]

78. The land of opportunity is in post #58.

[liberal N proud]

82. Yea - I am not going back in time and digging things up

I only work in the now!

Going back and tagging on old posts is just trolling and I don't troll.

[Ed Suspicious]

85. Riiggghhtt.

[liberal N proud]

87. Ignore

[Ed Suspicious]

88. Lemme return the favor.

[SidDithers]

72. Any port in a storm...nt

Sid

[in_cog_ni_to]

73. Every network is CORPORATE OWNED, so there's zero differences between CNN, MSNBC, FOX, CBS, ABC OR

NBC. NONE. They all work for their corporate owners. One is just as bad as all the others. They've all become Fox News.

[liberal N proud]

74. They are all the same is a hollow argument and one I always here when...

when no one can support their position with valid evidence.

It is the same line the republicans use when they can't justify their candidate or elected official, they will say that same line - "They are all the Same"

Bull!

[Ed Suspicious]

79. Not all the same, but used in the same way when it fits your purposes. See post #58.

[NurseJackie]

75. It's a convenient way to express one's frustration and reveal one's cynicism, but it's not true.

[Attorney in Texas]

94. If you use polling aggregation from Real Clear Politics or Huffington Post's Pollster, then you are

using polls conducted by Fox News.

[Attorney in Texas]

95. Did you boycott all discussion of the 1st Republican debate just because it was on Fox News?

[Attorney in Texas]

96. When a Republican candidate says something moronic to Chris Wallace on his Sunday show, should we

ignore that comment because it was aired on Fox News?

[pinebox]

98. Lots of prejudice here

As liberals, I thought we'd be past that.
Who the hell cares where it comes from as long as it's factual. That makes us no better than the other side.

[840high]

102. ...+1

[JTFrog]

110. The people who started this website care. Many members of this website care.

Many of us joined and donated to DU because this has historically been a place to escape the fucking crazy right wing propaganda machine. The older version of DU used to state this in plain English. But there is still this in the new TOS:

From the TOS;

Don't be a wingnut (right-wing or extreme-fringe).

Democratic Underground is an online community for politically liberal people who understand the importance of working within the system to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of political office. Teabaggers, Neo-cons, Dittoheads, Paulites, Freepers, Birthers, and right-wingers in general are not welcome here. Neither are certain extreme-fringe left-wingers, including advocates of violent political/social change, hard-line communists, terrorist-apologists, America-haters, kooks, crackpots, LaRouchies, and the like.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

103. Are the polls accurate?

Not that I give any weight to polls from any source when it comes to my vote, but what makes Fox polls any different than Gallup or Pew?

[liberal N proud]

106. If they were accurate, there would be multiple sources to which you could post from

Then; first you have verified the accuracy of the article and second, you have another source other than FOX to post from. And DUers of old will trust.

We don't trust FOX!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

108. Meh. A poll is a poll, is a poll.

There are no facts, only interpretations. Friedrich Nietsche

[Todays_Illusion]

104. If the other news liars refuse to air and publish any good news about Sanders, why not post from

the only source available?

[liberal N proud]

105. If only one source is publishing anything, is it trustworthy?

And coming from FOX, it tends not to be. History has proven that!

But the sheeple who watch/listen to or read FOX don't know they are being fed a pile of crap.

Always verify anything with more than one source. You may only post on DU from one source but check to see is someone else is saying the same thing. Then you have a source better than FOX to post the link to.

[Todays_Illusion]

107. I don't think you can show me anything from any source that is "trustworthy" or truthy. The major

issue with Fox is they serve all that hate and fear and division.