The conservative echo-chamber.

[Dave Gray]

I get my news from a variety of sources.

I watch a lot of editorial on CNN and MSNBC, but also keep tabs on Fox.  In additional, I read a few blogs and political sites for polling data, mostly gallup and fivethirtyeight.

While most of the country (regardless of their political affiliation) seemed to think that Obama had an easy path and Romney had almost no chance, based on the polling.  Yet Fox insisted that he had several very winnable paths.  It just didn't add up to how the polls were going.  They kept citing these outlier polls or "internal Romney polls".  They kept attacking Nate Silver as some kind of liberally biased pollster (Silver was right on, btw).  I personally know a guy who was always talking about the mainstream media covering up the real data and was extremely confident of a Romney win.  Even on this site, I kept reading "when this POS is out of office", etc. etc.

Even watching the Fox broadcast, it seemed like Karl Rove was in denial all night.  Even when FOX News called the election, he basically argued with them live on the air.

CNN's Republicans were much more in line with regular thinking.  They accepted the result and cited where things went wrong and how the GOP went too far to the right in primaries, which is why they lost in the Senate and that they have ignored important voting blocks, like Hispanics, for too long.  And they admitted that the "just say NO" strategy ultimately hurt their party and that they needed to work together to improve the country.  They weren't being liberals.  They were just sensible. 

Fox was a different story.  They polished the turd and said how this isn't a mandate and made excuses like hurricane Sandy and a bunch of other crap.

I just think that some of my conservative friends are so out of touch with reality that they only pay attention to the news that they want to hear.  If you're one of those people that was shocked at the result, perhaps you should re-examine the sources of news you take in, since they are doing you a grave disservice.

[CF DolFan]

I don't disagree with you but it isn't just conservatives and Fox. MSNBC is the exact same way and has been even labeled Fox's evil twin.  I know I keep saying this but I honestly feel it is the truth. I think most people have their minds already made up and will dismiss anything that doesn't jive with their view and at the same time will endorse something crazy just because it supports their perspective. If it wasn't for this then we as a country could hold politicians accountable. As it is we endorse people whether they deserve it or not.

[Dave Gray]

I agree that MSNBC has liberal editorial when it comes to discussing issues.  No doubt.  Maddow, Lawrence O'Donnel, Matthews etc. -- they are unquestionably liberal and have shows that lean that way.  No question.  So, if you want to compare O'Reilly to Maddow, fine -- I'm on board.

However, they still line up with CNN (a moderate network) in terms of the reality of facts when it comes to hard news. 

When Obama lost the first debate, turn to MSNBC and see Matthews flipping out at how poor a job Obama did.  They weren't in denial about it.  And when Romney lost the next 2 debates, Fox pretended it didn't happen.  They just kept assuring themselves that it was a tie, despite the rest of the country knowing otherwise.

Last night, Fox was great.  They just kept spouting about how close the race was for so long that they actually believed their own bullshit.  They attacked the messenger (Nate Silver) instead of just realizing what was actually going on.  Karl Rove was holding on to Romney winning until the last possible second, and even then, started arguing with Fox pollsters.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

in terms of the reality of facts when it comes to hard news. 

And that is the big difference between Fox and "the liberal media". 

[Spider-Dan]

I've already made this point before, but look at how easily the right dismisses evolution and climate change, and their ability to ignore the polls isn't so surprising.

The irony is that without Fox News, I think the conservative echo chamber wouldn't be able to sustain itself.  So the biggest gun in the conservative media arsenal is really just serving to prop their positions up on flimsy stilts, without doing anything to address the fundamental problem underneath.

I expect the coming days to see a repeat of 2008: some initial hand-wringing and bemoaning of the GOP's lack of appeal to minority voters, followed by a sudden return to obstruct-at-all-costs and more dog-whistle demographic identity politics.

I think the GOP needs one more presidential loss to fully grasp that they are losing the idea war.  I heard a conservative radio host today saying something along the lines of "apparently, we need to offer full amnesty to the illegals in order to get the Hispanic vote."  They have bought in to their own caricatures of what Democratic voters' values are.

[bsmooth]

I think the first thing they should do is to embrace the moderate GOPers and stop driving them from the party.

[CF DolFan]

I agree that MSNBC has liberal editorial when it comes to discussing issues.  No doubt.  Maddow, Lawrence O'Donnel, Matthews etc. -- they are unquestionably liberal and have shows that lean that way.  No question.  So, if you want to compare O'Reilly to Maddow, fine -- I'm on board.

However, they still line up with CNN (a moderate network) in terms of the reality of facts when it comes to hard news. 

When Obama lost the first debate, turn to MSNBC and see Matthews flipping out at how poor a job Obama did.  They weren't in denial about it.  And when Romney lost the next 2 debates, Fox pretended it didn't happen.  They just kept assuring themselves that it was a tie, despite the rest of the country knowing otherwise.

Last night, Fox was great.  They just kept spouting about how close the race was for so long that they actually believed their own bullshit.  They attacked the messenger (Nate Silver) instead of just realizing what was actually going on.  Karl Rove was holding on to Romney winning until the last possible second, and even then, started arguing with Fox pollsters.

Just to make sure ...  is this a general bash GOP thread or are we speaking about an incident on FOX? It seems like you and Spider are having two different conversations.

First off Karl Rove was a guest analyst and is not a reporter representing FOX. Secondly he is the only one who was arguing it or the numbers as he kept trying to show how they would change.  They never took the "Breaking News ... Obama wins re-election" off of the screen the whole time Rove was arguing this. It really wasn't that big of a deal as I saw the whole thing in real time.

Karl Rove Argues With Fox News About Whether Obama Won Ohio

Fox News had what can only be described as an insane argument with itself over whether or not President Obama had won Ohio, and the presidency.

The network seemed quite confident in its projections at first, but suddenly, pundit Karl Rove — who, as leader of a huge conservative Super PAC has something of an interest in the outcome of the race — began to pour cold water on the call.

Fox News' Chris Wallace then said that Gov. Mitt Romney's campaign is contesting the network's decision to call President Obama's re-election.

Wallace said:

"Well I have great respect for our decision desk, and I can see that they're very happy in Chicago, but I have to tell you that the Romney camp has real doubts by the call that has been made by us and by other networks. They do not believe that Ohio is in the Obama camp. I just got an email from a top Romney person. I asked, 'Do you agree with our call?' He said 'Not really. It's less than 20 percent of the vote still out in GOP areas.'"
Rove said it was "premature" and "early" to make any real decisions.

"So, maybe not so fast, folks!" Wallace said. There was a pained silence.

"Uh, thank you!" Bret Baier said. "That's awkward," Megyn Kelly added.

Baier then said that he would get someone from the network's election desk to explain why it had made the call. Kelly walked across the office, cameras trailing her, to speak with the number-crunchers.

The number-crunchers calmly repudiated Rove.

"We're actually quite comfortable with the call in Ohio," one of them said. Another said he was "99.9 percent" certain that the president had been re-elected.

"There just aren't enough Republican votes left for Mitt Romney to get there," a fellow decision desk member added.

Rove continued to contest the call. "They know the science!" Kelly responded, exasperatedly. It turned out that nobody was on Rove's side.

"They're not listening to Karl," Kelly said with some finality, as she went to a break.

The world reacted with stammering befuddlement.

Watch Rove arguing with Fox News in the clip above, and Kelly asking the decision desk to confirm its call below:

I thought this was obvious but just for the record ...

Megyn Kelly is a news anchor employed by the Fox News Channel

Karl Rove Karl Christian Rove (born December 25, 1950) is an American political consultant and policy advisor.

Sean Hannity (born December 30, 1961) is a television host, author, and conservative political commentator

Just because they are on FOX does not make them reporters.

I think this is one of those things that cause me to shake my head. Not because I'm defending FOX in this instance but the fact I probably have had this same conversation about people on MSBC. It's a vicious cycle of pick and choose, ignore, and then point and exaggerate.

[Dave Gray]

I'm not attacking conservatives.  I think that sensible conservatism is an important part of our political system to offset people like me.  But I think people like that have nowhere to go. 

I am just saying that if you're getting your news from FOX, you should re-evaluate.  You've been fed a line of BS, you bought in, and now you're shocked at the result, when the rest of the world saw this coming.  It's an echo-chamber where talking heads just babble back and forth with un-truths until everyone starts believing it.  This election is absolute proof of that.  It's fine that you watch FOX.  I'm not saying to stop.  Just offset it with "real" news, and realize that what you're seeing is an ultra-conservative circle-jerk that's out of touch with the real facts of the world.

[CF DolFan]

I'm not attacking conservatives.  I think that sensible conservatism is an important part of our political system to offset people like me.  But I think people like that have nowhere to go. 

I am just saying that if you're getting your news from FOX, you should re-evaluate.  You've been fed a line of BS, you bought in, and now you're shocked at the result, when the rest of the world saw this coming.  It's an echo-chamber where talking heads just babble back and forth with un-truths until everyone starts believing it.  This election is absolute proof of that.  It's fine that you watch FOX.  I'm not saying to stop.  Just offset it with "real" news, and realize that what you're seeing is an ultra-conservative circle-jerk that's out of touch with the real facts of the world.

I watch them all myself. Actually one of my favorite conservatives is on MSNBC. Joe Scarborough. 

What I'm saying is that I don't think most people get their news from Fox. There are people that use Sean Hannity to forward their agenda just as they use Rachel Maddow but that's just  because it fits their agenda. Not because of their groundbreaking reporting.

[Dave Gray]

^ Word.  I love Scarborough.  And David Gergen.  And Michael Smerconish.

I'm not anti-conservative at all.  I'm anti-idiot.

[Spider-Dan]

Kelly, Rove, and Hannity are all employed (regularly, and long-term) by Fox.  You are splitting hairs.

More importantly, Fox could have chosen to simply steamroll Rove and say, "Well, we know you may not want to hear this, but you're wrong."  Instead of doing that, though, they had Megyn Kelly stand up and take her well-displayed legs over to the Decision Desk to demand that they explain themselves.  They pandered to Rove instead of (deservedly) shutting him down.

And I would argue that Fox is both a-symptom-of and a-cause-of the problems with conservatism as a whole.  The talent at Fox manufactures a news story, then the news anchors at Fox turn around and report that "some people are concerned" with the "controversy over" the news story that the talent just manufactured.  And the echo chamber gets rolling.

[Spider-Dan]

Another follow-up on this:  http://www.businessinsider.com/fox-news-is-killing-the-republican-party-2012-11

Short excerpt:

There is also one other significant way in which Fox works against those it seeks to serve. In effect, it provides a false comfort zone for conservative politicians and their supporters.

As we saw with Benghazi, rather than try to penetrate mainstream media outlets, there was a clear tendency for Romney advisers to do easy "hand-offs" to Fox on issues they wanted up and running. It reminded me of when we in the Labour Party used to just drop our best material in the laps of the Mirror; they would run it big, and we’d think we were talking to the whole country. In fact, we were talking almost entirely to our own supporters.

There is another part of the article in which the "Fox GOP criticism" angle is discussed; namely, that because of the expected cheerleading nature of the echo chamber, when Fox does (rarely) criticize the GOP, the Dems immediately run with that as, "See, even Fox has called them out on this."  The upshot is that Fox criticism of Dems is considered expected behavior, but Fox criticism of the GOP is extremely damaging.