What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

TRUMP TO INFINITY AND BEYOND HQ - The Great and Positive Place (7 Viewers)

4th largest circulation in a dying industry 
And what is the circulation of The National Enquirer?  I don't think you want to make the argument that the number of papers sold or circulation is some indication of quality or credibility of any publication.

And will the endorsement of this tabloid sway one undecided voter or get a Biden voter to switch? Somehow I doubt that.

 
And what is the circulation of The National Enquirer?  I don't think you want to make the argument that the number of papers sold or circulation is some indication of quality or credibility of any publication.

And will the endorsement of this tabloid sway one undecided voter or get a Biden voter to switch? Somehow I doubt that.
What the hell does the NE have to do with the post? 

 
What the hell does the NE have to do with the post? 
I believe he was pointing out that the circulation numbers don't necessarily make a rag into a fount of true knowledge (just like he said in the post).  That's why I might discredit the 3 dozen major newspapers which endorsed Biden.  Except they're not the NY Post (one of only two to endorse Trump).

 
What the hell does the NE have to do with the post? 
The New York Post is a tabloid.

The National Enquirer is a tabloid.

And endorsement of Trump by The National Enquirer would probably carry the same weight as far as voters are concerned as this endorsement by The New York Post.

 
Please keep these extreme Left hot takes in the other threads, especially with the history of biased sources you have used. 
Stating that the NY Post and NE are tabloids and their endorsements would not be taken seriously by voters is hardly an extreme Left hot take.

 
New endorsement from the conservative paper The Union Leader.  First time in history they've endorsed a Democrat in the primary election in 100 years.  Yes, they endorsed Biden.  Must be another conspiracy.  

 
Let's not pretend that newspaper endorsement matter, regardless of how self-important they believe. Same goes for politicians - they rarely matter, and especially don't when they aren't announced until after a race has been decided.

 
The New York Post is a tabloid.

The National Enquirer is a tabloid.

And endorsement of Trump by The National Enquirer would probably carry the same weight as far as voters are concerned as this endorsement by The New York Post.
Yes and the national enquirer took down John Edward's campaign years ago with his infidelity.  Your analogy is meaningless. 

The facts are the facts no matter how it gets out

 
Yes and the national enquirer took down John Edward's campaign years ago with his infidelity.  Your analogy is meaningless. 

The facts are the facts no matter how it gets out
I wish I had a dollar in my 401k for every time The National Enquirer has gotten the facts wrong in a story. This publication is taken seriously as a legitimate source of news by almost no one.

 
President Donald Trump deserves more credit for his extensive achievements that have helped black Americans, according to CNN commentator Van Jones.

“I think it’s really unfortunate because Donald Trump, and I get beat up by liberals every time I say it but I keep saying it, he has done good stuff for the black community,” Jones said Friday during a CNN panel discussion on “The Lead with Jake Tapper.

“Opportunity Zone stuff, black college stuff, I worked with him on criminal stuff, I saw Donald Trump have African-American people, formerly incarcerated, in the White House, embraced them, treated them well. There is a side to Donald Trump that I think he does not get enough credit for.”
link

 
Ahh, you’re against science when it doesn’t fit your narrative? No one in here will be shocked. 
Not at all, I am against this vague "some scientists say" as being proof of anything. Some scientists says lots of things, like climate change is not man made or that evolution is unproven or that the earth is flat.

 
Not at all, I am against this vague "some scientists say" as being proof of anything. Some scientists says lots of things, like climate change is not man made or that evolution is unproven or that the earth is flat.
Ahh, so you only like science when it’s from the scientists that fit your agenda...glad we are getting all this on record in here. 

 
Ahh, so you only like science when it’s from the scientists that fit your agenda...glad we are getting all this on record in here. 
No. To repeat what I said before because perhaps you didn't read it:

Not at all, I am against this vague "some scientists say" as being proof of anything. Some scientists says lots of things, like climate change is not man made or that evolution is unproven or that the earth is flat.

 
No. To repeat what I said before because perhaps you didn't read it:
Please disprove it with facts, show us you aren’t willfully ignoring anything that hurts your talking points? :popcorn:

Otherwise let’s move along and thanks for the great example. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Please disprove it with facts, show us you aren’t willfully ignoring anything that hurts your talking points? :popcorn:
:mellow:

I have no idea what you are saying or what point you are trying to make, or how even to respond to it.

I am through here with this particular discussion and will not respond anything further on this digression. 

Have a good evening sir.

 
That is like refinancing your 2.75% mortgage to a 5.75% mortgage.
Price disruption in a pool of money you can't touch until retirement isn't anything remotely similar to paying 3 hundred basis points more per month to live in your home.  Jeez....

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top