Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Fox News’ GOP Debate: Ratings Magnate
An audience of 24 million watched last night’s Republican Presidential Debate on Fox News, according to figures released this afternoon by Nielsen. That’s more viewers than any non-sports event in the history of cable television. Included are 7.9 million in the Adults 25-54 demographic sought by advertisers in the news demo.
Past primary debates with high ratings typically happened closer to the actual voting, an audience of 7.63 million in Iowa on December 12, 2011, and 7.53 million on January 5, 2008 in Manchester, N.H., both on ABC.
More than tripling the best audience of a broadcast competitor, and doing so in the normally low-rated midsummer season is a major triumph for Fox News and CEO Roger Ailes. Over-delivery against probable ad agency estimates makes FNC look like a great bargain for advertisers and media buyers alike, and bodes well for pricing of the network in the upcoming campaign season. Expect much back-slapping among agency media buyers who put their clients in the broadcast.
The magnet for the event, of course, was media superstar Donald Trump. Just remember: the exposure also extends to the entire GOP field, and to FNC and its anchors including Megyn Kelly.
While callers to Rush Limbaugh’s radio program today were livid about attack questions directed at Trump, conservatives should remember that giving a heavy sampling of new viewers a taste of Fox News is probably a good thing overall. Kelly’s first question about Trump’s past words for certain women was not exactly what Charles Krauthammer would have asked, but The Donald’s ad-lib about Rosie O’Donnell broke the tension, and let audiences know that this wasn’t going to be a C-SPAN snooze-fest, but an evening of raucous entertainment worth watching.
Along the way, the nation’s celebrity-attuned “low information voters” learned plenty about foreign policy, national security, immigration, and the shortcomings of Democrats. A spoonful of Trump — and some equally entertaining moments courtesy of Chris Christie and Dr. Ben Carson — made the political medicine go down easily. Candidates such as Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, and John Kasich, who had suffered from underexposure among lightly attentive political viewers, are now known to the 24 million, and to others watching highlights online and elsewhere.
Those mired in the humorless, gravitas grip of political consultants and paid professional pundits — all too eager to write off the billionaire showman and “get serious” — may want to re-consider at least their timetable for dismissing him. I’m sure that CNN, holder of the sequel rights in a debate scheduled for Wednesday, Sept. 16 at the Reagan Library, will want to save space front and center for the man the masses came to watch.
Published in Entertainment
From your fingertips to G**’s ears…
Trump is not strong. He is aggressive.
OK maybe not a graceful way….
Kingmaker: Unless the rules are changed for 2016, most Republican primaries are winner take all. I’m having trouble envisioning how we get to the convention with someone who has a plurality but not a majority.
Run third party: I’m not sure about this. If Donald’s current campaign is one of branding and enhancing the Trump brand, I worry that he really believes he could be president because of the intoxicating effect of the crowds and public attention. If he rationalizes a primary vote which does not anoint him as the Republican candidate, I could see him running third party. Trump had a reputation for an abhorrence of shaking hands ala Howard Hughes’ because of a fear of disease. When I saw him shaking every hand in sight beginning several weeks ago on TV clips I knew he was serious about this run. If he is really serious about this run, would a defeat for the nomination allow his ego to admit it and support the person who won? I just don’t know.
It probably depends on how soon he realizes he’s losing. If it drags out to the bitter end and he wins a primary state or two, then yes. If his support plummets rather quickly, and he realizes politics is actually hard and not necessarily always fun, maybe reality will set in.
But I don’t think he’ll ever announce that he’s not going third-party. He’ll hang it over everyone’s head to the end. We won’t know until the ballot registration deadline.
The pre-Florida primaries are proportional, the later ones, including some big ones which could be won by more centrist contenders, winner take all. It will go to the convention if no one has 50% of the delegates when all the primaries and other machinations are over.
The early states could winnow out a dozen candidates, and still leave us with 3-5 different multiple primary winners including Trump, Rubio, Bush, Cruz and Kasich (or Walker) for example. If Trump leads in delegates with 25% (having won a big blue state) and Bush is narrowly second, I don’t think Trump would then accept Bush as the nominee, and the non-establishment wing might be none too pleased, either. Hello, 3rd Party.
But if Bush leads in delegates, with Trump and others close behind and the non-establishment wing clamoring for anyone but Jeb, then Trump might be willing to play kingmaker to one of the others, and become a populist hero.
I don’t think these ifs will happen, I think and hope Rubio will catch fire and win the nomination outright, but it’s a conceivable narrative.
That is the scenario I think most likely explains his candidacy. Why pay money to a bunch of goofy middle men when you can be the middle man yourself?
Meh- remember 2012? Everyone had a month or two of being on fire. Try to be calm. Trump is probably clinically diagnosable with some personality disorder at least. That will come through for most eventually.
The Presidency is no stranger to personality disorders. Ranking them by severity would be an interesting challenge for the historians among us.
That made me laugh out loud- thanks for the day’s levity!
There are lots of letters the further back you go in time, so plenty of material to work with… not a substitute for an actual clinical evaluation, but possibly a suitable proxy!