Is the Political Atmosphere Dangerous?

[Clyde]

With cable networks carving out a niche for themselves (Fox - to the right. MSNBC to the left) and ratings ever so important, are these networks and hosts contributing to a charged atmosphere? With the lefties and their anti-Bush stuff from recent past and now the surge in right-wing screaming about losing gun rights and socialism and every other -ism out there, are they contributing to any violent outbursts? Have they contributed to violent outbursts in the last 8 years?

 

Is it possible they are a problem?

[cammando]

Really haven't heard much screaming yet, but you will be hearing a lot if government continues on the path Obama is trying to pave. Pretty soon his socialistic policies and painting the scene in other countries that America is the bad guy will begin to rile the silent, moral majority of this country who usually just work hard and raise their families, pay their taxes and fight for their country and don't complain.. Get these people riled up and their voices will be heard loud and clear.....

[Habib]

They may fan the flames a bit, but their existence is wholly a result of demand. People largely like to listen to what they agree with. What is more dangerous in my opinion is that there are enough people who are unwilling to have their beliefs challenged to create this demand.

[Clyde]

They may fan the flames a bit, but their existence is wholly a result of demand. People largely like to listen to what they agree with. What is more dangerous in my opinion is that there are enough people who are unwilling to have their beliefs challenged to create this demand.

 

I'll challenge the above slightly. Yes, they are a product of demand. However, they also skew stories and , unfortunately, are many times incorrect or only half right. The average Joe Public doesn't do any research. If Hannity/KO/Beck said it then by God it must be true. The govt is coming for my guns/turning into apologists/are war mongerers/etc in their mind because their guy said so.

[Clyde]

BTW the worst of all offenders one either side is Glenn Beck. He's flat out scary in his rhetoric and made-up conspiracies.

[HHSDad]

President Obama's job approval is the most polarized for any new President in forty years.

 

Obama's current approval ratings:

Democrats: 88%

Republicans: 27%

[Clyde]

President Obama's job approval is the most polarized for any new President in forty years.

 

Obama's current approval ratings:

Democrats: 88%

Republicans: 27%

 

That poll was one of the reasons I started this thread.

[Clyde]

President Obama's job approval is the most polarized for any new President in forty years.

 

Obama's current approval ratings:

Democrats: 88%

Republicans: 27%

 

I just came across this from the guy who did the poll.

 

Pew associate director Dimock, however, says this is a misreading of the poll. Dimock says the divide is driven by long term trends and by the uncommonly enthusiastic reaction to Obama by members of his own party — by what he calls “the way Democrats are reacting to Obama.”

 

Interestingly, Dimock also said this phenomenon is partly caused by the recent tendency of Republicans to be less charitable towards new Presidents than Dems have been.

 

 

http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/president-obama/pew-official-disputes-right-wing-claim-that-pew-poll-shows-obama-is-polarizing/

[Habib]

Another bit on the poll:

 

Nonetheless, measurements of the partisan split in support for the President, as Pew Research has done here (they found a record partisan split in Obama's approval ratings, with 88 percent of Democrats but just 27 percent of Republicans approving of Obama's performance) are not quite as straightforward as they might seem. This is because partisan identification is at least somewhat fluid. The Republicans, in particular, have lost quite a bit of support over the past several years; those persons who continue to identify as Republicans are a hardened -- and very conservative -- lot. Just 24 percent of voters identified as Republican when Pew conducted this survey in March, which is roughly as low as that total has ever gotten.

 

We see some evidence of these effects in the comparison of Obama's numbers to those of George W. Bush's at a comparable point in his presidency. Obama and Bush had roughly the same level of support among members of their own party (88 percent for Obama, 87 percent for Bush) and roughly the same level of support among unaffiliated voters (57 percent for Obama, 56 for Bush). Bush, however, had more support from the opposition party (36 percent of Democrats versus 27 percent of Republicans). And yet Obama, not Bush, had the higher overall approval rating, because Democrats are a significantly larger constituency than Republicans.

 

Link

[Clyde]

I read an article yesterday where an FBI profiler/psychologist said that many of these people who go off the deep end do it out of irrational fear. The guy in Pittsburgh was convinced from listening to talking heads that the govt was going to abolish the right to bear arms.

 

You then hear the Senator (or Congresswoman?) from Minnesota saying that the President is going to require all kids to go to a "re-education camp" to be taught the current govt philosphy. She then adds that these kids will also have mandatory service commitments to the govt.

 

Weak-minded people not intelligent enough to think for themselves and who are struggling hear this crap and they (sometimes) go off.

[PepRock01]

Weak-minded people not intelligent enough to think for themselves and who are struggling hear this crap and they (sometimes) go off.

 

Sadly, I honestly feel that this represents a majority of the population. I have seen little in my time, short though it may be to this point, to tell me that the majority of Americans are anything more than lemmings.

[Clyde]

Sadly, I honestly feel that this represents a majority of the population. I have seen little in my time, short though it may be to this point, to tell me that the majority of Americans are anything more than lemmings.

 

Sadly, I agree with you.

 

Part of it is people trusting some talking heads thinking "why would they lie." I'm already on record as saying Glenn Beck is either stupid or he's a con man trying to scare people. He's bad for America because of what you describe above and what the FBI profiler alluded to. People want to lash out when they are struggling and all they need is a reason - as crazy as it may be.

[Habib]

Sadly, I honestly feel that this represents a majority of the population. I have seen little in my time, short though it may be to this point, to tell me that the majority of Americans are anything more than lemmings.

 

:thumb: I think this is the unfortunate truth.

 

At the same time, I don't see any reason to support censorship.

[swamprat]

Sadly, I agree with you.

 

Part of it is people trusting some talking heads thinking "why would they lie." I'm already on record as saying Glenn Beck is either stupid or he's a con man trying to scare people. He's bad for America because of what you describe above and what the FBI profiler alluded to. People want to lash out when they are struggling and all they need is a reason - as crazy as it may be.

I feel that the main stream media's anointment of this President, now and before his election, propagated the lemming reaction for him that you so fiercely accuse the listeners of Rush, Hanity, and Beck of. For those that can't think for themselves, the above pundits simply offset the barrage of Obama worship that plasters the major networks and news channels.

 

Are you proposing Beck be banned from the airways?

[FC]

The hard part is cutting through all of the rhetoric, fanaticism, and left-wing/right-wing influenced information to find the truth. How are we as Americans supposed to know the truth when one side says it’s good for the country and the other says it’s bad? All politicians stretch the truth to fit their agenda and the media does the same thing even though they are supposed to be the “honest brokers”.