So Fewer and Fewer Millions Now Agree! (Watching GOP Debates Is A Non-Starter!)

[mascale]

RNC, and Conservatives and Liberals alike--and GOP Candidates: Agree that the first two debates were fair, and famously of a Conservative organization,and with Conservative panel interviewers even included. The viewership was at 23 and 24 million. Then it dropped off to 14 million for the third round. Even before the third debate started, there was decision in the making. The candidates stink!

CNBC's GOP debate draws in 14 million viewers

If arithmetic were a skill, anyone would actually conclude that nobody wanted to watch the Republican candidates anymore. So RNC, and their candidates, are in the awkward position of actually blaming that on the on the Democrats(?), clearly who were not involved. The reduced audience decision mainly comes after their debate, and Secretary Clinton's testimony at the Republican hearings.

The main bias is noted from the Critique From The Claque at CNBC. These candidates stink! Even the definition of what constitutes an issue for a Republican, stinks! And following an older George Cohan kind of comment, issue stink aside,. . . "And as for the candidates. . .That goes without saying!" Actually, RNC and the candidates have managed to so-state!

No one wants to watch them, anymore! That is admittedly arithmetic, apparently not a GOP strong suit. Even before the third debate started, there was a decision in the making!

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(Many likely saw lots of promotion of the third debate on all the newscasts and ads. No one tuned in to watch(?)!)

 

[DarkFury]

You are comparing CNBC to FOX that's like a VW to a Vette.
Nice try but total fail.

 

[mascale]

Dark Fury poster seems to claim that I myself compared the options, and selected CNBC for the Third Debate, when actually it was RNC, and with the apparent consent of their candidates. Those are the stupid losers, apparently like DarkFury poster wants to be regarded, who created the comparison, doing the event.

The outcome is that nobody watched them, and after seeing two debates already, and after the Democratic Party Debate, and the self-admitted Secretary Clinton witchunt hearings. Fox famously cut the Republican Hearings off the air, and not being Democrats.

People do have a capability of sensing stupid wastes of time. That appears to happen even at Fox.

Mostly, Senator Cruz just avoided answering the direct question put to him, and some suggest that the evasion may have helped in the polls, among stupid potential voters. Governor Christie would go on later to ridicule everyone. Governor Kasich did so right at the event, itself: Live and In person.

"Claque" comes to mind as the basis of the booing, "Critique." Those were not Democrats. It would not be said the Fox and CNN were pandering to Democrats.

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(Better than chocolate, are some Brownie recipes, according maybe to Senator Cruz!)

 

[bodecea]

You are comparing CNBC to FOX that's like a VW to a Vette.
Nice try but total fail.

The viewership dropped BEFORE you could even complain about CNBC.

 

[bedowin62]

Actually more and more agree dont watch CNBC


poor left-wing idiot! lol libs are losers who lie to themselves!


Fox Business Picks Up First-Ever Monthly Total Viewer Win ...
www.adweek.com/tvnewser/fox-business...cnbc/273168

• Cached

Adweek
Loading...
Sep 29, 2015 - For the first time ever, a Fox Business Network program has topped a CNBC ... In addition, Dobbs earned his highest-rated telecast of the year on Sept. .... It was just a few shows that did better than some CNBC shows for

 

[bedowin62]

actually idiot you meant to say that it took a slate of Republicans to make CNBC see record viewership FOR THAT STATION, regardless of what the other debates rated.

lol libs are complete idiots that lie to themselves!!

CNBC's debate draws record 14 million viewers - well short ...
money.cnn.com/2015/10/.../cnbc-republican-debate-ratings/

• Cached

CNNMoney
Loading...
4 days ago - CNBC's GOP debate was significantly lower-rated than the previous debates of the ... by the Fox Business Network, a rival of CNBC's, on November 10. ..... And this was never more obvious than last night at the Republican

 

[bedowin62]

how many of the threads started by left-wingers on this website, in this Politics section, are about Republican candidates, Republican policies, the Republican Party, and how many started by left-wingers are about their own candidates, Democrat Party policies/ideology???????????????????

left-wing idiot is bragging about how useless it is to tune into or see what republicans are doing......................with a thread talking about what Republicans are doing


idiots and hypocrites

 

[Misty]

RNC, and Conservatives and Liberals alike--and GOP Candidates: Agree that the first two debates were fair, and famously of a Conservative organization,and with Conservative panel interviewers even included. The viewership was at 23 and 24 million. Then it dropped off to 14 million for the third round. Even before the third debate started, there was decision in the making. The candidates stink!

CNBC's GOP debate draws in 14 million viewers

If arithmetic were a skill, anyone would actually conclude that nobody wanted to watch the Republican candidates anymore. So RNC, and their candidates, are in the awkward position of actually blaming that on the on the Democrats(?), clearly who were not involved. The reduced audience decision mainly comes after their debate, and Secretary Clinton's testimony at the Republican hearings.

The main bias is noted from the Critique From The Claque at CNBC. These candidates stink! Even the definition of what constitutes an issue for a Republican, stinks! And following an older George Cohan kind of comment, issue stink aside,. . . "And as for the candidates. . .That goes without saying!" Actually, RNC and the candidates have managed to so-state!

No one wants to watch them, anymore! That is admittedly arithmetic, apparently not a GOP strong suit. Even before the third debate started, there was a decision in the making!

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(Many likely saw lots of promotion of the third debate on all the newscasts and ads. No one tuned in to watch(?)!)

CNBC doesn't even run on most cable tv. Lol the republican debate brought in more viewers than they've ever had.

Good try but no soap.

 

[Defiant1]

RNC, and Conservatives and Liberals alike--and GOP Candidates: Agree that the first two debates were fair, and famously of a Conservative organization,and with Conservative panel interviewers even included. The viewership was at 23 and 24 million. Then it dropped off to 14 million for the third round. Even before the third debate started, there was decision in the making. The candidates stink!

CNBC's GOP debate draws in 14 million viewers

If arithmetic were a skill, anyone would actually conclude that nobody wanted to watch the Republican candidates anymore. So RNC, and their candidates, are in the awkward position of actually blaming that on the on the Democrats(?), clearly who were not involved. The reduced audience decision mainly comes after their debate, and Secretary Clinton's testimony at the Republican hearings.

The main bias is noted from the Critique From The Claque at CNBC. These candidates stink! Even the definition of what constitutes an issue for a Republican, stinks! And following an older George Cohan kind of comment, issue stink aside,. . . "And as for the candidates. . .That goes without saying!" Actually, RNC and the candidates have managed to so-state!

No one wants to watch them, anymore! That is admittedly arithmetic, apparently not a GOP strong suit. Even before the third debate started, there was a decision in the making!

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(Many likely saw lots of promotion of the third debate on all the newscasts and ads. No one tuned in to watch(?)!)

I don't watch CNBC.

I watched the highlights later on FOX.

 

[bedowin62]

RNC, and Conservatives and Liberals alike--and GOP Candidates: Agree that the first two debates were fair, and famously of a Conservative organization,and with Conservative panel interviewers even included. The viewership was at 23 and 24 million. Then it dropped off to 14 million for the third round. Even before the third debate started, there was decision in the making. The candidates stink!

CNBC's GOP debate draws in 14 million viewers

If arithmetic were a skill, anyone would actually conclude that nobody wanted to watch the Republican candidates anymore. So RNC, and their candidates, are in the awkward position of actually blaming that on the on the Democrats(?), clearly who were not involved. The reduced audience decision mainly comes after their debate, and Secretary Clinton's testimony at the Republican hearings.

The main bias is noted from the Critique From The Claque at CNBC. These candidates stink! Even the definition of what constitutes an issue for a Republican, stinks! And following an older George Cohan kind of comment, issue stink aside,. . . "And as for the candidates. . .That goes without saying!" Actually, RNC and the candidates have managed to so-state!

No one wants to watch them, anymore! That is admittedly arithmetic, apparently not a GOP strong suit. Even before the third debate started, there was a decision in the making!

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(Many likely saw lots of promotion of the third debate on all the newscasts and ads. No one tuned in to watch(?)!)

CNBC doesn't even run on most cable tv. Lol the republican debate brought in more viewers than they've ever had.

Good try but no soap.

exactly!! only a left-wing nutjob contorting himself, straining to fit a narrative in the face of facts; takes a RECORD VIEWERSHIP on a left-leaning station that featured right-wingers, and tries to spin it into a completely different message because it came in under the rating of the other left-leaning station and the right-leaning station.

what will this idiot have to say when the next Republican debate on Fox also outdoes this one? what will it say about his theory of fading interest in republican candidates? is his own post about REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES proof of waning interest in REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES?

LOL idiots and hypocrites

 

[easyt65]

Out of everything going on in the US and in the world the best question liberal media can ask Hillary during their debate is 'how screwed would America be without you', the best questions they can ask GOP candidates are "He said this about you -what do you want to say about him' and 'what's your take on Fantasy Football'.

Maybe Liberals should spend less time worry about what America's / the GOP's reaction is to their 'attempted rating boosters' and focus more on coming up with some worthwhile questions.

Speaking of Ratings, the 1st debate scored the liberal media station's highest ratings ever...and it only took Conservatives / the GOP to appear on their station to make it happen. NBC is now pissed that they won't be getting their chance to have the GOP on their station so they can get big ratings, too. (Blame CNBC, NBC!).

 

[mascale]

14 million is 10 million fewer than watched the other two debates, and cnbc is in fact fully distributed.
______________________________________
The Observer asked CNBC why it was opting to follow Fox News’ livestreaming example rather than that of CNN. A CNBC spokesperson wrote via email, “CNBC is fully distributed.”

Translation of “fully distributed”: the channel reaches the homes of pretty much everyone subscribed to cable.
_____________________________________

People found other programming. The CNBC debate likely highlighted the deep divide between what the electorate thinks are issues, compared with what the Claque in the studio audience thought were the relevant issues, supposedly about economics. CNBC is famous for its business coverage. One poster in this thread even noted that actually only once upon a time, has FOX business channel been able to compete.. . .like of like the news division.

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(RNC candidate staffers maybe came to studio, fully loaded, in Colorado(?)!)

 

[tinydancer]

What was the debate on CNN? Something like 15.3 for the old white very white socialist Dems. Wow not even one person of color.

 

[tinydancer]

I love Cruz's summation of the so called Dem debate. Which of you are the most handsome or pretty and care more deeply?

 

[Stephanie]

at least they have debates. the Democrat party thinks so LITTLE of you in their base, they would only ALLOW SIX whole debates so you all can make up your minds with that. and holy smokes they are already DOWN to only, THREE people running for President.
just wow oh wow your choices are so out there how will you ever decide? and if you don't agree with SIX debates and only THREE people to choose from, well the DNC is telling you all , tough shit.

you should talk about Republicans. you belong to a party who see you as nothing but sheep or slaves. they know you will vote for whoever they throw at you.

 

[Rustic]

RNC, and Conservatives and Liberals alike--and GOP Candidates: Agree that the first two debates were fair, and famously of a Conservative organization,and with Conservative panel interviewers even included. The viewership was at 23 and 24 million. Then it dropped off to 14 million for the third round. Even before the third debate started, there was decision in the making. The candidates stink!

CNBC's GOP debate draws in 14 million viewers

If arithmetic were a skill, anyone would actually conclude that nobody wanted to watch the Republican candidates anymore. So RNC, and their candidates, are in the awkward position of actually blaming that on the on the Democrats(?), clearly who were not involved. The reduced audience decision mainly comes after their debate, and Secretary Clinton's testimony at the Republican hearings.

The main bias is noted from the Critique From The Claque at CNBC. These candidates stink! Even the definition of what constitutes an issue for a Republican, stinks! And following an older George Cohan kind of comment, issue stink aside,. . . "And as for the candidates. . .That goes without saying!" Actually, RNC and the candidates have managed to so-state!

No one wants to watch them, anymore! That is admittedly arithmetic, apparently not a GOP strong suit. Even before the third debate started, there was a decision in the making!

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(Many likely saw lots of promotion of the third debate on all the newscasts and ads. No one tuned in to watch(?)!)

Of course, no one watches nbc networks....

 

[mikegriffith1]

RNC, and Conservatives and Liberals alike--and GOP Candidates: Agree that the first two debates were fair, and famously of a Conservative organization,and with Conservative panel interviewers even included. The viewership was at 23 and 24 million. Then it dropped off to 14 million for the third round. Even before the third debate started, there was decision in the making. The candidates stink!

CNBC's GOP debate draws in 14 million viewers

If arithmetic were a skill, anyone would actually conclude that nobody wanted to watch the Republican candidates anymore. So RNC, and their candidates, are in the awkward position of actually blaming that on the on the Democrats(?), clearly who were not involved. The reduced audience decision mainly comes after their debate, and Secretary Clinton's testimony at the Republican hearings.

The main bias is noted from the Critique From The Claque at CNBC. These candidates stink! Even the definition of what constitutes an issue for a Republican, stinks! And following an older George Cohan kind of comment, issue stink aside,. . . "And as for the candidates. . .That goes without saying!" Actually, RNC and the candidates have managed to so-state!

No one wants to watch them, anymore! That is admittedly arithmetic, apparently not a GOP strong suit. Even before the third debate started, there was a decision in the making!

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(Many likely saw lots of promotion of the third debate on all the newscasts and ads. No one tuned in to watch(?)!)

Are you really this clueless? The three CNBC moderators who asked most of the questions are all Democrats and/or always vote Democrat.

It's funny to see you guys so upset over the fact that Republican candidates are finally demanding something close to the same treatment that Democratic candidates have received at their debates for decades.

By the way, why is the DNC authorizing so few debates? Why are the Republicans having a lot more debates than the Dems are? Who is that doesn't want to debate?

 

[mascale]

Mostly in the United States, there is secret ballot. It is not likely that anyone knows how all of the people at work in the industry companies voted. The Republicans are different about it. there is even the nowhere famous Republican, who planned to spend his term in office in the "Undisclosed Location." To ice that, he did go on record to further shoot a lawyer in the face. At GOP, likely that was called, "The Great Debate(?)!"

The GOP, having won the so many legislative seats in the midterms, has mostly now turned to, "None of the Above," considering them for the Presidential nomination.

Secretary Clinton has returned to favorite status on the Democratic side. It is not shown that any of the GOP hopefuls had to go on record, in a House Committee Hearing, for eleven hours straight, and on television: Defending their tenures in office. Secretary Clinton famously won, at that hearing. The Republican contenders have even refused to ask for equal--anyone notes, for certain.

Senator Cruz wasn't even planning to allow equal time at the CNBC debate, using his own response time to refuse to answer, and then apparently begging for unlimited time to drown out everybody else. The rulers of Cuba, in fact, also tend to be like that.

And so anyone is left with clear public record: Of just how hated the Republicans elected to office. . . really are(?)!

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
("Who Was That Mascale, Anyway!?!" "He's the Lo-o-o-ne, White Man! Tune In, And See if he's dead yet!)