• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

VP Candidate Paul Ryan Coverage

If "cable" waits until the Olympics end (Sunday evening) they are already late by two news cycles. The Internet is already loaded with all manner of comments and articles about the VP candidate.
 
landtuna said:
If "cable" waits until the Olympics end (Sunday evening) they are already late by two news cycles. The Internet is already loaded with all manner of comments and articles about the VP candidate.

True I do remember in 2008 the Biden VP and Palin VP candidates were named 2 Days before the China Olympics were about to close and the Knee-jerking from Cable and political blogs did go in full gear on that day.
 
WHOAAAAA! The Republican candidate has named a Vice-Presidential candidate!!!

Never ceases to amaze me how much of a long, drawn out drama federal elections are in the United States. In 2008, here in Canada we had a federal election campaign at the same time as the U.S. campaign, and even here it felt like there was only one election, south of the border. We had an election call, there was a half-hearted election campaign that was heavily overshadowed by Sarah Palin, and once our election was over we sat around wishing we could be part of the mega-election rock concert.
 
M.J. said:
Never ceases to amaze me how much of a long, drawn out drama federal elections are in the United States. In 2008, here in Canada we had a federal election campaign at the same time as the U.S. campaign, and even here it felt like there was only one election, south of the border. We had an election call, there was a half-hearted election campaign that was heavily overshadowed by Sarah Palin, and once our election was over we sat around wishing we could be part of the mega-election rock concert.

I mostly agree with your sentiment. I very closely followed the most recent general election in the UK, and made these observations on why the parliamentary system has shorter election cycles:

(1) The parliamentary system lacks a primary process
(2) A general election can be called at any time with 4-8 weeks notice
(3) A parliamentary election is cheaper with no nationwide office, so the parties don't need the time to raise a billion dollars or so.
 
M.J. said:
WHOAAAAA! The Republican candidate has named a Vice-Presidential candidate!!!

Never ceases to amaze me how much of a long, drawn out drama federal elections are in the United States. In 2008, here in Canada we had a federal election campaign at the same time as the U.S. campaign, and even here it felt like there was only one election, south of the border. We had an election call, there was a half-hearted election campaign that was heavily overshadowed by Sarah Palin, and once our election was over we sat around wishing we could be part of the mega-election rock concert.

I think most Americans would say our federal election process is way too long and much too expensive. Bear in mind though that the presidential candidates are only advertising heavily in so-called "swing" states (those that are so far equally mixed between the two and could go either way and have a large number of electoral votes). Here in Arizona we have been having non-stop TV advertising for the past six weeks for preliminary elections which typically have many more candidates. It gets very old. :mad:
 
Well I saw the speech that Ryan made today after he was introduced by Romney. I almost dozed off because his vision and that so-called budget plan is all talk and no action if it gets that far. I don't see him being ready for the White House (even if he is 42 and served seven terms in Congress) plus if anything this will end up being another McCain/Palin trainwreck since Wisconsin voters is more in line with Democrats despite that recall for Governor Walker, so if this coverage and the spin he'll be getting from the news networks and the TV outlets in Wisconsin is a indication of whats to come then Mr. Ryan better be in for a wake up call.
 
landtuna said:
M.J. said:
WHOAAAAA! The Republican candidate has named a Vice-Presidential candidate!!!

Never ceases to amaze me how much of a long, drawn out drama federal elections are in the United States. In 2008, here in Canada we had a federal election campaign at the same time as the U.S. campaign, and even here it felt like there was only one election, south of the border. We had an election call, there was a half-hearted election campaign that was heavily overshadowed by Sarah Palin, and once our election was over we sat around wishing we could be part of the mega-election rock concert.

I think most Americans would say our federal election process is way too long and much too expensive. Bear in mind though that the presidential candidates are only advertising heavily in so-called "swing" states (those that are so far equally mixed between the two and could go either way and have a large number of electoral votes). Here in Arizona we have been having non-stop TV advertising for the past six weeks for preliminary elections which typically have many more candidates. It gets very old. :mad:

Ive long thought the parliamentary system was a better one. One advantage of living in California during national elections - neither party spends much money on TV because it's a foregone conclusion that it will for go for the Democrat, and the electoral votes are winner-take-all. But all the ads for local and statewide candidates and ballot propositions also gets old fast.
 
Also Wait for the National Media trying to see a link over budgets between Scott Walker and Paul Ryan in the coming days.
 
Here in Wisconsin I'm pretty much prepared that I'll be using the mute button and commercial skip alot this fall ::). We have candidates who are pretty much fighting to be second to Tommy Thompson in the primary on Tuesday still spending like it's November 6th, and we've only had about three one-month breaks in any political ad activity since 2010 because of the union disputes and recalls. With Ryan as the VP candidates, the dead calm after the August primary that usually occurs with the ad cycles will not occur this year in our state.
 
landtuna said:
I think most Americans would say our federal election process is way too long and much too expensive. .......It gets very old. :mad:

Our politicians can fix this anytime they want to. Problem is, they don't want to. Neither party.

Dump the Citizens United ruling and implement public financing of campaigns. Get all the big money interests and lobbyists out of the picture. Result would be more transparency, better candidates, less negative attack advertising, more focus on the real issues, and a level playing field for the candidates.

The reason the politicians don't want to do this is obvious....they're addicted, if not totally beholden, to the PACs and their "big money sugar daddies". IMHO, it's a serious problem that the most successful countries with parlimentary systems don't share.
 
I am facing some appointments and a filing deadline, so I have not followed the media as closely as I normally do. Only played back ONE DVR of the Sunday Morning interview/debate fests. But so far I am finding the tenor the reporting pretty good. I don't expect backlash from the Republican side over the selection. This is not a "Sarah Palin Style choice". On the Democratic side there seems to be happiness and excitement both from movers-and-shakers in the party as well as from the Liberal Talking Heads. They like the idea that Ryan is the "poster child" for all the things they disagree with about Republicans.

The race is on. It is going to be loud and furious. And when it is over we will ALL be glad to see the event over with. Some of us will be happy with the results. Some of us will be shedding tears over the results. I don't think this is going to be an election where the media needs to twist arms and stir the pot to get fodder to fill their broadcast time. The candidates and the parties will be self-activating.... no training wheels from the media needed.
 
landtuna said:
I think most Americans would say our federal election process is way too long and much too expensive. Bear in mind though that the presidential candidates are only advertising heavily in so-called "swing" states (those that are so far equally mixed between the two and could go either way and have a large number of electoral votes). Here in Arizona we have been having non-stop TV advertising for the past six weeks for preliminary elections which typically have many more candidates. It gets very old. :mad:

As a fellow Arizonan, I second these comments. It does get old...but they will help television make money for the remainder of the year.
 
I find some of it quite amusing: I am one of the 55+ crowd, and I think the little old lady in the wheelchair being sent over the cliff by one implied to be Paul Ryan, has to be one of the funniest ever. Then the President giving a speech commercial follows that his plan will also make it so that the kids can't secret me away in some government run nursing home, which will be inconvenient for them. Another more recent ad also rather amusing, as the commercial complains that the middle class has to pay $2 thousand dollars in taxes while Mitt Romney only pays $2.8 million a year in taxes.

The way the advertising goes, I get dumped off a cliff, and then I'm in a pickle because there won't be a concrete block walled government nursing facility to dump me in, all because of some guy who wants everyone else to make enough money to only have to pay $2,800,000.00 a year in taxes.

It's a beautiful thing.
 
I heard the speech live on NPR with a soft female voice explaining occasionally. I actually had the radio on for "Car Talk", which did air in its entirety afterward.
 
Silkie said:
Another more recent ad also rather amusing, as the commercial complains that the middle class has to pay $2 thousand dollars in taxes while Mitt Romney only pays $2.8 million a year in taxes.

I see that the reporting and the candidate rhetoric (from both sides) continues to beat the drum for the "middle class". It is a beautiful term that apparently seems warm and fuzzy to the potential voters. I get the idea a lot of people never stop to ask: "WHO is middle class?"

When I was growing up, (in the country, in the rural southwest) I always got this picture that the middle class were somewhere between the "working and laboring class" and the very rich. Successful doctors and lawyers were middle class. People who owned properous businesses were middle class. The middle class lived in movies and we read about them in the newspaper now and then. Many of us grew up not sure that we knew anyone who was middle class. I'm not sure the guy who owned and operated the local pharmacy was middle class. Over in the next town was a pharmacist who was the third generation to own the drug store. Now he had apparently finally achieved middle class.

I am teasing a little with all this, but back in the 40s and the 50s, being middle class was something pretty special.

Then I listen to today's political commercials and the news/talk shows. It seems that EVERY politician today has the best interest of The Middle Class at the center of his focus, and that anyone who is not below the poverty level and has any kind of job at all is THE NEW MIDDLE CLASS.

Can someone explain to me what we call the people today who drive Audis and Jaguars and and Lexus 460s because they do not fit today's definition of The Middle Class, and they are not part of the One Percent either. What do we call the Entry Level Wealthy today.... and what are the politicians offering this class of people in order to get their vote?
 
Governor Romney should have waited until after the Olympics to make the VP pick public.

Or was he planning to do that, only that someone had leaked the news late Friday (August 11th), forcing him to move up the announcement to ASAP (the next morning)??
 
formeraa said:
It does get old...but they will help television make money for the remainder of the year.

Yet it always leads to network programming giving way locally to "Make Good Theater" a few weeks after the election.
 
"Can someone explain to me what we call the people today who drive Audis and Jaguars and and Lexus 460s."

Hopefully, my new best friends. Sharing is caring!
 
Greg Goodfellow said:
"Can someone explain to me what we call the people today who drive Audis and Jaguars and and Lexus 460s."

I know what I call BMW drivers in Snottsdale. :mad:
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom