Cable News Ratings for Wednesday, November 7, 2012

Categories: '

(274) Comments - Add Yours!

1. Bobbyv

   Posted November 8, 2012 at 7:14 PM

   Mark,

   I agree about KR, to me most of the time he seems to at least try to give a non-biased analysis but when the heat is on his true colors came out.

2. Jeff

   Posted November 8, 2012 at 7:15 PM

   @SP, very happy Chris Matthews apologized for his stupid statement about the hurricane. His apology if you missed it, is worth trying to google. I’m still mad he said it in the first place, it was dumb and irresponsible. But, i accept his explanation and apology. Ya know its like 99.9% of what Hannity says on his program dumb and irresponsible.

3. Sicilian Papa

   Posted November 8, 2012 at 7:18 PM

   @

   Mark

   Karl didn’t want to lose. I didn’t either, I had one eye closed and I perked up to listen to him.

   It is a couple of days later and I am cool. Time to move on.

   My goal now is to see the Propaganda wing of the progressive movement brought to it’s knees. I have a good friend of a friend who is in the know about a forth broadcast network. It will give us on the right something to do if it happens.

   And I will shut up!!!!!!!!!!!

4. Sicilian Papa

   Posted November 8, 2012 at 7:20 PM

   An honest moment, you can’t unring the bell! Tingles, he’s the man.

5. Jeff

   Posted November 8, 2012 at 7:24 PM

   Sorry not the first time Rove made a dumb choice and miscalculation. 2000 spent campaign money and sending Bush to California,trying to get Gore to spend time and money in California too, huge mistake. Gore didn’t take the bait, Gore beat Bush in California by almost 20 points. Seems Rove is only good at slinging filth and attacking military heroes like John McCain & John Kerry who served.

   Roves boys:
   Bush AWOL and shady military record
   Cheney 5 deferments
   Romney dodged the draft while campaigning for the Vietnam War
   Ryan never served in the armed forces

   Rove is a pig!

6. Jeff

   Posted November 8, 2012 at 7:27 PM

   @SP btw the polls didn’t change in favor of Obama during or after the storm. Not sure what a news anchor has to do with the situation.

7. Jeff

   Posted November 8, 2012 at 7:30 PM

   Lawrence O Donnell just did the funniest little Briton Dick Morris!!!!!

   Who saw it? ROTFLMFAO!!

8. PaulG

   Posted November 8, 2012 at 7:44 PM

   @Jeff

   I believe the stocks are taking this tumble because they have doubts, and NO confidence in the leadership of John Boehner being able to have any control of his party and his radical teaparty loons.
   __________________________________________________________

   I had to scramble Wed pre-market to unload all my Romney stocks that ran-up for the past few weeks,,coal stocks,,energy stocks,,financials etc…Sell off has little to do with congress and in the long run Pres Obama should be good for stocks as the easy money policies under Chairman Bernanke will continue..Weaker Dollar equals higher stock prices,,until the $h!t hits the fan..Don’t really think it helped any financial stocks with Elizabeth Warren being elected to the Senate as she will probably be browbeating them from the Finance Committee…

9. PaulG

   Posted November 8, 2012 at 8:08 PM

   Interesting article

   First, Barack Obama’s re-election showing was actually pretty unimpressive for a guy whose philosophies voters have supposedly adopted. As of this writing on Wednesday, Obama’s vote total stood at an unimpressive 60,119,958. That’s about what John Kerry got in 2004 (59,028,444). President George W. Bush actually did far better than Obama in his 2004 reelection quest, posting a vote total that was about 2 million higher (62,040,610) than what Obama got on Tuesday. That’s hardly a remarkable finish in a country with a population that has increased. In fact, it’s a decline of 9 million votes from Obama’s 2008 total.

   Had Romney (57,425,441) done as well as McCain did in 2008 (59,934,814), he and Obama would have run neck and neck, virtually matching each other’s vote totals. That’s hardly the stuff of demographic ruin.

   The question Republicans and conservatives need to ask is not why voters showed up for Obama, whose turnout wasn’t exactly extraordinary, but why millions of their own voters, people who had pulled the lever for Bush and McCain, didn’t do the same for Romney or simply stayed home.

   Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/11/what_major_demographic_shift.html#ixzz2Bh9DD1x6

10. AppleStinx

    Posted November 8, 2012 at 8:23 PM

    TheBoss1 wrote: “…go to the first page and watch from the 12:52 mark until the end…”

    I watched it. Is her laudry list supposed to be what a conservative believes in, including conspiracies et al? She would be good at writing those chain emails where reality and prank are mixed together so that a casual listener thinks they are all for real. And she goes from eloquently stating that ours is a 2-party system where both sides are supposed to come up with ideas and choose the best to basically saying that her side owns those good ideas (while the other is in a bubble).

11. Mark

    Posted November 8, 2012 at 8:38 PM

    @Paul G

    I love the right’s talking points about the votes Obama and Romney got compared to other people, and how that somehow solidifies the right’s position. Simple fact is we still have many states that haven’t counted all the votes(such as California which is stuck at 70% or roughly 3.5-4M votes). We basically have 7-10 million more votes to be counted(many in heavily democrat areas)

    When all is said and done Obama will probably increase his vote total 4-7M and Romney has a chance to get more votes then George Bush in 2004(due to increasing population) so trying to analyze numbers till they are all in is idiotic, but hey saying Obama got wayyyyy less votes then last time tells us how Obama values don’t resonate with people, while Romney couldn’t even beat McCain says we need a more conservative person, sounds good to the audience those kind of articles they are pandering to

12. 1966

    Posted November 8, 2012 at 8:44 PM

    ellen douglas dead at 91 rip
    goodnite everybody.

13. PaulG

    Posted November 8, 2012 at 8:59 PM

    @Mark

    Politico has California at 100% Obama 5.6 mil,,Romney 3.6 mil..

    http://www.politico.com/2012-election/map/#/President/2012/

14. Mark

    Posted November 8, 2012 at 9:02 PM

    By the way here is the voting results

    http://tinyurl.com/a39rnt8

    If you scroll down you can see the percentage of people counted. Some notables that stand out

    California – 70% (or 3.8-3M more votes)
    Washington – 55% (or 1.5-1.8M more votes)
    New York – 86% (or 900k more votes)
    Arizona – 71% (or 650k more votes)
    Oregon – 75% (or 500k more votes)
    Michigan – 91% (or 400k more votes)
    Ohio – 90% (or 500k more votes)
    Texas – 96% (or 300k more votes)
    Florida – 97% (or 250k more votes)
    Colorado – 90% (or 250k more votes)

    So before anybody reads an article trying to interpret the numbers of voters, wait till they are all counted

15. Mark

    Posted November 8, 2012 at 9:04 PM

    PaulG
    ———————
    http://www.politico.com/2012-election/map/#/President/2012/
    ———————
    Politico is wrong, in 2008 California had more then 13M voters, now maybe we can expect a drop but 4M?

    Look at Florida on politco, they have it at 100%, I know for a fact we are stuck at 97%

16. PaulG

    Posted November 8, 2012 at 9:29 PM

    @Mark

    Ok,,your numbers debunk the article’s premise,,Obama should get 67 mil and Romney 63 mil with 100% reporting..

17. Sia

    Posted November 8, 2012 at 9:30 PM

    Don’t worry MSNBC will go back to being the losers they are ! LIBERALS KEEP CELEBRATING AND THEN WHEN OBAMACARE HITS US AND WE CONTINUE TO LOSE JOBS well be the ones laughing at your stupidity and what you’ve done !

18. Mark

    Posted November 8, 2012 at 9:36 PM

    @Paul G

    It’s hard to guess how the votes will be split since I don’t know which counties have to put the totals in but both guys stand to gain some votes since every state is not at 100%

    Good chance Romney beats Bush’s totals though from 2004(mainly due to increase in population more then anything) or at worst comes relatively close

19. Mark

    Posted November 8, 2012 at 9:38 PM

    All that being said I don’t see Obama getting close to 69.5M, as you said probably 67M at best

20. PaulG

    Posted November 8, 2012 at 10:00 PM

    @Mark

    Should be a 3% margin of victory,,quite a bit less than the 7% margin in 2008…