• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2016 |OT8| No, Donald. You don't.

Status
Not open for further replies.
200k were streaming on YouTube last night

That's a lot

Also these numbers don't include PBS and a few other smaller nets, so we won't get the full picture until tonight.

Ultimately, both final nights of the convention are going to have been viewed by a similarly large amount of people in a metric that means little in terms of November.

So by watching on CSPAN I didn't help?

A lot of the smaller nets aren't counted in that 28 million number. PBS + those will probably push it past 30 million.
 

gcubed

Member
Also these numbers don't include PBS and a few other smaller nets, so we won't get the full picture until tonight.

Ultimately, both final nights of the convention are going to have been viewed by a similarly large amount of people in a metric that means little in terms of November.

I can see a decent make up of liberal view on PBS or CSPAN to avoid Jeffery Lord and whatever flavor of the day was on MSNBC
 
I can see a decent make up of liberal view on PBS or CSPAN to avoid Jeffery Lord and whatever flavor of the day was on MSNBC

Also, it does not include Univision. When it's all said and done, they will be at parity. Also, some of those broadcast numbers need to be time-shifted since it went out of primetime.
 

Angry Grimace

Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
It isn't surprising that a relatively stock politician like Hillary gets less viewers than a shock n' awe reality show candidate like Trump.
 
Something does have to explain why the numbers for both conventions were lower than the past. Whether it's all the other ways to watch or people just waiting for bits and pieces to be shown online/on tv the next day. There is a change occurring on how people absorb these things.
 
It isn't surprising that a relatively stock politician like Hillary gets less viewers than a shock n' awe reality show candidate like Trump.

Again, it's likely when you tally all the viewership in, she probably will get the same or higher than Trump. Finals don't come out until the afternoon.

Something does have to explain why the numbers for both conventions were lower than the past. Whether it's all the other ways to watch or people just waiting for bits and pieces to be shown online/on tv the next day.

These are two unpopular candidates.
 
This is unreal (from the 4th decision)

CojRgKxWgAECVIX.jpg:large
 
I can't resist defending the decision. So many people completely misunderstand what it held, let alone understanding why that holding was the correct one.

Plenty of people smarter than you or I think it was the wrong decision. Arrogance is unbecoming.

Also, I think Buckley v. Valeo is wrong. People can disagree on stuff.
 

Goodstyle

Member
I can't resist defending the decision. So many people completely misunderstand what it held, let alone understanding why that holding was the correct one.

I want to take your post as a sincere divergence of opinion based on your own legitimate views on the matter, but the Antonin Scalia avatar makes it hard to take you seriously on this.
 

pigeon

Banned
Something does have to explain why the numbers for both conventions were lower than the past. Whether it's all the other ways to watch or people just waiting for bits and pieces to be shown online/on tv the next day. There is a change occurring on how people absorb these things.

TV is dead, streaming is forever.
 
Something does have to explain why the numbers for both conventions were lower than the past. Whether it's all the other ways to watch or people just waiting for bits and pieces to be shown online/on tv the next day. There is a change occurring on how people absorb these things.

Conventions are usually later, late August-early September.
 

Angry Grimace

Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
I mean, the likelihood that Hillary was going to say anything crazy was pretty low whereas the odds that Trump might call Hillary a bitch on live television were far higher.

It's the same reason the debates will draw record ratings, and why Trump has a lot to lose in the debates.
 

StoOgE

First tragedy, then farce.
Something does have to explain why the numbers for both conventions were lower than the past. Whether it's all the other ways to watch or people just waiting for bits and pieces to be shown online/on tv the next day. There is a change occurring on how people absorb these things.

It's also pretty early in the year because of when the Olympics are. 4 and 8 years ago the Olympics were earlier in the Summer and pushed the conventions to closer to the general election.

The August Olympics pushed these both way up in the cycle when less people are engaged.

They are also less popular candidates which I'm sure plays a role
 

Dan

No longer boycotting the Wolfenstein franchise
For some reason I can't even fathom the conventions being any later than they were this year. It feels like they took forever to happen.
 
Something does have to explain why the numbers for both conventions were lower than the past. Whether it's all the other ways to watch or people just waiting for bits and pieces to be shown online/on tv the next day. There is a change occurring on how people absorb these things.

I think that many people will only ever see the highlights or speakers they are interested in given youtube video and facebook video. 4 nights of 3-5 hours of programming is a lot to ask of a society that is used to impulsively seeing anything they want at any time.
 

studyguy

Member
I mean, the likelihood that Hillary was going to say anything crazy was pretty low whereas the odds that Trump might call Hillary a bitch on live television were far higher.

It's the same reason the debates will draw record ratings, and why Trump has a lot to lose in the debates.

I would put Trump saying something legitimately offensive or some slur at a debate as plausible. Do I expect it? Nah, but definitely possible to slip and go one step too far.

If he was gonna call someone a bitch to their face he's had plenty of chances to already to Megan Kelly and others. I don't expect anything more than a tasteless dig at looks tbh.
 
So, over on Discord, we think we cracked why Trump is always talking about boning his daughter. Basically, there's something called genetic sexual attraction where you're attracted to people in your family, and it's believed that this is counteracted by a form of reverse sexual imprinting called the Westermarck effect. Basically, people who you spend formative years around are people you tend not to want to plow. So when you grow up with your siblings and family members, you grow up normal, but if you're apart a lot, you never experience that reverse imprinting so then when you meet, it's fuck city because you're so overwhelmingly hot to each other.

So, basically Trump was such an negligent absentee father that his brain never taught him that he shouldn't mack on Ivanka.

Use this information as you will.
 

Metaphoreus

This is semantics, and nothing more
Plenty of people smarter than you or I think it was the wrong decision. Arrogance is unbecoming.

Also, I think Buckley v. Valeo is wrong. People can disagree on stuff.

It isn't arrogance to recognize that people don't know what the case was about, or what the holding was. Neither is it arrogance to believe that it was correct and defend it's correctness. If that were truly your position, I don't see how you could tolerate participating in this thread, where basically everyone presents their beliefs as correct, even though there are plenty of people smarter than them who believe otherwise.

I want to take your post as a sincere divergence of opinion based on your own legitimate views on the matter, but the Antonin Scalia avatar makes it hard to take you seriously on this.

So turn off avatars.
 

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
Btw, what's all this talk about states like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Minnesota trending red? Is it cause Obama won those states by smaller margins in 2012 than he did in 2008? I figured that was just due to people not being as excited to vote for him the second time around.
 
Btw, what's all this talk about states like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Minnesota trending red? Is it cause Obama won those states by smaller margins in 2012 than he did in 2008? I figured that was just due to people not being as excited to vote for him the second time around.

Large non college white population especially PA. Due to economy lagging not enough migration instate
 

Maledict

Member
So 61 percent of Republicans think that's ok?

Oh really?

Surprised it's not higher to be honest. Politics in the USA is so partisan now, especially on the R side, that it doesn't matter what people say. You're not fighting for principles or ideals, you are fighting for your team and whatever your team does is good and whatever the other team does is bad.

Plus, you know, all the racism, homophobia, sexism and general bigotry. That's the other big part.
 
Wouldn't there be two Ls in anally
Ya no idea why my phone dropped one of the l's. But you're right should have been two.

Just all the obsession over ratings takes me back to freaking out that Entetprise was going to be canceled or something

Also there are Hillarys America ads all over mobile right now sad!
 
Diablosing over a 10% difference in preliminary ratings might be a new low in here, which is saying something.

A ton of people watched both speeches. More will watch some or all of it today. The TV ratings are lower overall compared to previous years because cable is dying.
 

PBY

Banned
Don't understand the ratings thing.

I fully expected the RNC to have waaaaaaaay more viewers than the DNC.

Shit, I watched way more of the RNC.
 
Reuters/Ipsos +5 hillary poll is extremely confusing. It was conducted between 25 and 28, and it has Hillary's and Obama's favs plummeting. Noisy as shit poll.
 
Quick question that my bf asked and I think o know the answer to. If there is a 50/50 tie in the senate which party is given the leadership? Is it the party that holds the White House since the Veep is President of the Senste and would be the tie breaker as needed?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom