Talarico or Crockett?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ideally, I prefer Crockett. However, she has a great position right now in the House and uses her platform well. I’d love for her to continue and grow in that roll.

Based on a few things, Talarico may be the better candidate for Texas and I think voters who want a fresh face and more youth in the Senate will like that too.

This way, we get both.

Can Crockett keep her House seat if she loses the Senate primary? I’m not sure.

I prefer Talarico in this race because Crockett hasn’t really presented a good reason for her running other than “Trump hates me” and she’s polling worse than he is against all of the possible opponents.

No. She gave it up.

Correct. As I understand it she was asked to run for the Senate, but then she has polled so badly the Democratic powers that be threw their support behind Talarico--including the whole Colbert/Talarico set up that got him launched. No one said anything about it from the government. It was CBS legal that brought it up. And Colbert didn't want to give Crockett equal time.

As politics goes, all the puppet masters behind the scenes doing their thing.

I think you understand most to all of this incorrectly.

Then explain why this is incorrect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ideally, I prefer Crockett. However, she has a great position right now in the House and uses her platform well. I’d love for her to continue and grow in that roll.

Based on a few things, Talarico may be the better candidate for Texas and I think voters who want a fresh face and more youth in the Senate will like that too.

This way, we get both.

Can Crockett keep her House seat if she loses the Senate primary? I’m not sure.

I prefer Talarico in this race because Crockett hasn’t really presented a good reason for her running other than “Trump hates me” and she’s polling worse than he is against all of the possible opponents.

No. She gave it up.

Correct. As I understand it she was asked to run for the Senate, but then she has polled so badly the Democratic powers that be threw their support behind Talarico--including the whole Colbert/Talarico set up that got him launched. No one said anything about it from the government. It was CBS legal that brought it up. And Colbert didn't want to give Crockett equal time.

As politics goes, all the puppet masters behind the scenes doing their thing.

I think you understand most to all of this incorrectly.

Then explain why this is incorrect.

Who do you think asked her to run for the Senate? Talarico and Colin Allred were already running and she’s been a star in the House. So tired of good House members throwing that away for long shots at Senate seats (looking at you, Allred/Beto/Tim Ryan/Val Demings etc.) Colbert didn’t launch Talarico and it would be really stupid to schedule a “launch” less than a week before the start of early voting. Talarico was “launched” months and months ago when he appeared on Joe Rogan’s podcast. And FCC Chair Brendan Carr absolutely has said he’s reconsidering the exception to the equal time rule that talk shows have had since the 1960s, which is what CBS legal told Colbert, who has had Crockett on his show twice. Not sure if anything you said is correct.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ideally, I prefer Crockett. However, she has a great position right now in the House and uses her platform well. I’d love for her to continue and grow in that roll.

Based on a few things, Talarico may be the better candidate for Texas and I think voters who want a fresh face and more youth in the Senate will like that too.

This way, we get both.

Can Crockett keep her House seat if she loses the Senate primary? I’m not sure.

I prefer Talarico in this race because Crockett hasn’t really presented a good reason for her running other than “Trump hates me” and she’s polling worse than he is against all of the possible opponents.

No. She gave it up.

Correct. As I understand it she was asked to run for the Senate, but then she has polled so badly the Democratic powers that be threw their support behind Talarico--including the whole Colbert/Talarico set up that got him launched. No one said anything about it from the government. It was CBS legal that brought it up. And Colbert didn't want to give Crockett equal time.

As politics goes, all the puppet masters behind the scenes doing their thing.

I think you understand most to all of this incorrectly.

Then explain why this is incorrect.

You are wrong on just about every point!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ideally, I prefer Crockett. However, she has a great position right now in the House and uses her platform well. I’d love for her to continue and grow in that roll.

Based on a few things, Talarico may be the better candidate for Texas and I think voters who want a fresh face and more youth in the Senate will like that too.

This way, we get both.

Can Crockett keep her House seat if she loses the Senate primary? I’m not sure.

I prefer Talarico in this race because Crockett hasn’t really presented a good reason for her running other than “Trump hates me” and she’s polling worse than he is against all of the possible opponents.

No. She gave it up.

Correct. As I understand it she was asked to run for the Senate, but then she has polled so badly the Democratic powers that be threw their support behind Talarico--including the whole Colbert/Talarico set up that got him launched. No one said anything about it from the government. It was CBS legal that brought it up. And Colbert didn't want to give Crockett equal time.

As politics goes, all the puppet masters behind the scenes doing their thing.

I think you understand most to all of this incorrectly.

Then explain why this is incorrect.

You are wrong on just about every point!

And yet, you still can't say why I'm wrong. That is because I'm not. When redistricting occurred, Crockett's seat was diluted, making it less of a sure thing that she would win reelection. Dems asked her to run for Senate. But since then, Dems have thrown their weight behind Talarico as being more likely to win against the GOP, especially with Paxton gaining momentum.

Again, if you have facts to discuss, then state them. Very difficult to debate when all you can provide is that I'm wrong, and then add an exclamation point, as if that makes it more valid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ideally, I prefer Crockett. However, she has a great position right now in the House and uses her platform well. I’d love for her to continue and grow in that roll.

Based on a few things, Talarico may be the better candidate for Texas and I think voters who want a fresh face and more youth in the Senate will like that too.

This way, we get both.

Can Crockett keep her House seat if she loses the Senate primary? I’m not sure.

I prefer Talarico in this race because Crockett hasn’t really presented a good reason for her running other than “Trump hates me” and she’s polling worse than he is against all of the possible opponents.

No. She gave it up.

Correct. As I understand it she was asked to run for the Senate, but then she has polled so badly the Democratic powers that be threw their support behind Talarico--including the whole Colbert/Talarico set up that got him launched. No one said anything about it from the government. It was CBS legal that brought it up. And Colbert didn't want to give Crockett equal time.

As politics goes, all the puppet masters behind the scenes doing their thing.

I think you understand most to all of this incorrectly.

Then explain why this is incorrect.

You are wrong on just about every point!

And yet, you still can't say why I'm wrong. That is because I'm not. When redistricting occurred, Crockett's seat was diluted, making it less of a sure thing that she would win reelection. Dems asked her to run for Senate. But since then, Dems have thrown their weight behind Talarico as being more likely to win against the GOP, especially with Paxton gaining momentum.

Again, if you have facts to discuss, then state them. Very difficult to debate when all you can provide is that I'm wrong, and then add an exclamation point, as if that makes it more valid.

There’s a post above yours with facts and you’re here with more fantasy. The Cook PVI rating for Crockett’s current seat under the new lines is D+30. There’s no way she wasn’t running away with it. Which Dems do you think asked her to run for Senate?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ideally, I prefer Crockett. However, she has a great position right now in the House and uses her platform well. I’d love for her to continue and grow in that roll.

Based on a few things, Talarico may be the better candidate for Texas and I think voters who want a fresh face and more youth in the Senate will like that too.

This way, we get both.

Can Crockett keep her House seat if she loses the Senate primary? I’m not sure.

I prefer Talarico in this race because Crockett hasn’t really presented a good reason for her running other than “Trump hates me” and she’s polling worse than he is against all of the possible opponents.

No. She gave it up.

Correct. As I understand it she was asked to run for the Senate, but then she has polled so badly the Democratic powers that be threw their support behind Talarico--including the whole Colbert/Talarico set up that got him launched. No one said anything about it from the government. It was CBS legal that brought it up. And Colbert didn't want to give Crockett equal time.

As politics goes, all the puppet masters behind the scenes doing their thing.

I think you understand most to all of this incorrectly.

Then explain why this is incorrect.

Who do you think asked her to run for the Senate? Talarico and Colin Allred were already running and she’s been a star in the House. So tired of good House members throwing that away for long shots at Senate seats (looking at you, Allred/Beto/Tim Ryan/Val Demings etc.) Colbert didn’t launch Talarico and it would be really stupid to schedule a “launch” less than a week before the start of early voting. Talarico was “launched” months and months ago when he appeared on Joe Rogan’s podcast. And FCC Chair Brendan Carr absolutely has said he’s reconsidering the exception to the equal time rule that talk shows have had since the 1960s, which is what CBS legal told Colbert, who has had Crockett on his show twice. Not sure if anything you said is correct.

Crockett's base was diluted by the redistricting, and, as you implied, she was getting a lot of attention, though I disagree that she was a star. So why not run for the Senate? But it all fell apart for her because you can only act so crazy and stay viable in a Senate race. Allred dropped out. And sure, Talarico was technically launched, but most people who aren't following politics had never heard of him. So, what better way to truly launch him than a stunt with Colbert right before early election started to get people talking about him in a way that no one was talking about him before. All Colbert had to do was ask Crockett on the show given that Talarico's appearance was so close to early elections. And again, it was never the FCC who said anything about it. It was CBS legal. Instead, Colbert pulled it, blamed the FCC, and had record views on YouTube.

Frankly, I think it's inspired since Talarico now has a real change to win against the GOP candidate in a way he no chance before all this. And Crockett, for all you clearly are a supporter of hers, was never going to win a Senate seat, then or now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ideally, I prefer Crockett. However, she has a great position right now in the House and uses her platform well. I’d love for her to continue and grow in that roll.

Based on a few things, Talarico may be the better candidate for Texas and I think voters who want a fresh face and more youth in the Senate will like that too.

This way, we get both.

Can Crockett keep her House seat if she loses the Senate primary? I’m not sure.

I prefer Talarico in this race because Crockett hasn’t really presented a good reason for her running other than “Trump hates me” and she’s polling worse than he is against all of the possible opponents.

No. She gave it up.

Correct. As I understand it she was asked to run for the Senate, but then she has polled so badly the Democratic powers that be threw their support behind Talarico--including the whole Colbert/Talarico set up that got him launched. No one said anything about it from the government. It was CBS legal that brought it up. And Colbert didn't want to give Crockett equal time.

As politics goes, all the puppet masters behind the scenes doing their thing.

I think you understand most to all of this incorrectly.

Then explain why this is incorrect.

Who do you think asked her to run for the Senate? Talarico and Colin Allred were already running and she’s been a star in the House. So tired of good House members throwing that away for long shots at Senate seats (looking at you, Allred/Beto/Tim Ryan/Val Demings etc.) Colbert didn’t launch Talarico and it would be really stupid to schedule a “launch” less than a week before the start of early voting. Talarico was “launched” months and months ago when he appeared on Joe Rogan’s podcast. And FCC Chair Brendan Carr absolutely has said he’s reconsidering the exception to the equal time rule that talk shows have had since the 1960s, which is what CBS legal told Colbert, who has had Crockett on his show twice. Not sure if anything you said is correct.

Crockett's base was diluted by the redistricting, and, as you implied, she was getting a lot of attention, though I disagree that she was a star. So why not run for the Senate? But it all fell apart for her because you can only act so crazy and stay viable in a Senate race. Allred dropped out. And sure, Talarico was technically launched, but most people who aren't following politics had never heard of him. So, what better way to truly launch him than a stunt with Colbert right before early election started to get people talking about him in a way that no one was talking about him before. All Colbert had to do was ask Crockett on the show given that Talarico's appearance was so close to early elections. And again, it was never the FCC who said anything about it. It was CBS legal. Instead, Colbert pulled it, blamed the FCC, and had record views on YouTube.

Frankly, I think it's inspired since Talarico now has a real change to win against the GOP candidate in a way he no chance before all this. And Crockett, for all you clearly are a supporter of hers, was never going to win a Senate seat, then or now.

You continue to be incorrect. I like her in the House but I’m not a supporter of hers for the Senate and I think her running is really dumb (I said as much above) and she hasn’t done a good job explaining why she’d be a good Senator or what her positions are. Her launch video was literally me me me. Allred didn’t drop out until she ran. Colbert has already asked Crockett to be on the show twice, and he doesn’t need the FCC implying or CBS interpreting the FCC and telling him who should be on his show and when.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ideally, I prefer Crockett. However, she has a great position right now in the House and uses her platform well. I’d love for her to continue and grow in that roll.

Based on a few things, Talarico may be the better candidate for Texas and I think voters who want a fresh face and more youth in the Senate will like that too.

This way, we get both.

Can Crockett keep her House seat if she loses the Senate primary? I’m not sure.

I prefer Talarico in this race because Crockett hasn’t really presented a good reason for her running other than “Trump hates me” and she’s polling worse than he is against all of the possible opponents.

No. She gave it up.

Correct. As I understand it she was asked to run for the Senate, but then she has polled so badly the Democratic powers that be threw their support behind Talarico--including the whole Colbert/Talarico set up that got him launched. No one said anything about it from the government. It was CBS legal that brought it up. And Colbert didn't want to give Crockett equal time.

As politics goes, all the puppet masters behind the scenes doing their thing.

I think you understand most to all of this incorrectly.

Then explain why this is incorrect.

You are wrong on just about every point!

And yet, you still can't say why I'm wrong. That is because I'm not. When redistricting occurred, Crockett's seat was diluted, making it less of a sure thing that she would win reelection. Dems asked her to run for Senate. But since then, Dems have thrown their weight behind Talarico as being more likely to win against the GOP, especially with Paxton gaining momentum.

Again, if you have facts to discuss, then state them. Very difficult to debate when all you can provide is that I'm wrong, and then add an exclamation point, as if that makes it more valid.

There’s a post above yours with facts and you’re here with more fantasy. The Cook PVI rating for Crockett’s current seat under the new lines is D+30. There’s no way she wasn’t running away with it. Which Dems do you think asked her to run for Senate?

Yes, I saw that after I responded. Which I have also responded to. Given how politics work, there are always the vying groups of backers in both parties who want to get their way. I don't disagree that she would have been better off running for reelection rather than for the senate seat. But (this is my conjecture) given the (as the other poster mentioned) star quality some people believed she had, it seemed like a good idea to try to take the senate seat. And from what I've seen and been told, she would want to do that. With that, you get her out there campaigning and can really see she wasn't going to be viable at that level, and allegiances switch. Allred drops out in December to run for reelection for his house seat. Talarico gets the support. Colbert introduces him in a big way so that suddenly he is on the radar literally right before early voting began.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ideally, I prefer Crockett. However, she has a great position right now in the House and uses her platform well. I’d love for her to continue and grow in that roll.

Based on a few things, Talarico may be the better candidate for Texas and I think voters who want a fresh face and more youth in the Senate will like that too.

This way, we get both.

Can Crockett keep her House seat if she loses the Senate primary? I’m not sure.

I prefer Talarico in this race because Crockett hasn’t really presented a good reason for her running other than “Trump hates me” and she’s polling worse than he is against all of the possible opponents.

No. She gave it up.

Correct. As I understand it she was asked to run for the Senate, but then she has polled so badly the Democratic powers that be threw their support behind Talarico--including the whole Colbert/Talarico set up that got him launched. No one said anything about it from the government. It was CBS legal that brought it up. And Colbert didn't want to give Crockett equal time.

As politics goes, all the puppet masters behind the scenes doing their thing.

I think you understand most to all of this incorrectly.

Then explain why this is incorrect.

Who do you think asked her to run for the Senate? Talarico and Colin Allred were already running and she’s been a star in the House. So tired of good House members throwing that away for long shots at Senate seats (looking at you, Allred/Beto/Tim Ryan/Val Demings etc.) Colbert didn’t launch Talarico and it would be really stupid to schedule a “launch” less than a week before the start of early voting. Talarico was “launched” months and months ago when he appeared on Joe Rogan’s podcast. And FCC Chair Brendan Carr absolutely has said he’s reconsidering the exception to the equal time rule that talk shows have had since the 1960s, which is what CBS legal told Colbert, who has had Crockett on his show twice. Not sure if anything you said is correct.

Crockett's base was diluted by the redistricting, and, as you implied, she was getting a lot of attention, though I disagree that she was a star. So why not run for the Senate? But it all fell apart for her because you can only act so crazy and stay viable in a Senate race. Allred dropped out. And sure, Talarico was technically launched, but most people who aren't following politics had never heard of him. So, what better way to truly launch him than a stunt with Colbert right before early election started to get people talking about him in a way that no one was talking about him before. All Colbert had to do was ask Crockett on the show given that Talarico's appearance was so close to early elections. And again, it was never the FCC who said anything about it. It was CBS legal. Instead, Colbert pulled it, blamed the FCC, and had record views on YouTube.

Frankly, I think it's inspired since Talarico now has a real change to win against the GOP candidate in a way he no chance before all this. And Crockett, for all you clearly are a supporter of hers, was never going to win a Senate seat, then or now.

You continue to be incorrect. I like her in the House but I’m not a supporter of hers for the Senate and I think her running is really dumb (I said as much above) and she hasn’t done a good job explaining why she’d be a good Senator or what her positions are. Her launch video was literally me me me. Allred didn’t drop out until she ran. Colbert has already asked Crockett to be on the show twice, and he doesn’t need the FCC implying or CBS interpreting the FCC and telling him who should be on his show and when.

Oddly, from reading this, I don't think we actually disagree. There seems to be a nuance of meaning that only starts coming through with "discussion" instead of just saying, You're wrong.

And as I've said, FCC never said anything about it. It was all CBS legal, but Colbert and Talarico made a big deal out of it, getting a lot of attention that they never would have gotten had they simply aired the interview on CBS. They did not have to air it on YouTube. But they did, and lied to get a lot of outrage going, and thus, getting Talarico out in front of millions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ideally, I prefer Crockett. However, she has a great position right now in the House and uses her platform well. I’d love for her to continue and grow in that roll.

Based on a few things, Talarico may be the better candidate for Texas and I think voters who want a fresh face and more youth in the Senate will like that too.

This way, we get both.

Can Crockett keep her House seat if she loses the Senate primary? I’m not sure.

I prefer Talarico in this race because Crockett hasn’t really presented a good reason for her running other than “Trump hates me” and she’s polling worse than he is against all of the possible opponents.

No. She gave it up.

Correct. As I understand it she was asked to run for the Senate, but then she has polled so badly the Democratic powers that be threw their support behind Talarico--including the whole Colbert/Talarico set up that got him launched. No one said anything about it from the government. It was CBS legal that brought it up. And Colbert didn't want to give Crockett equal time.

As politics goes, all the puppet masters behind the scenes doing their thing.

I think you understand most to all of this incorrectly.

Then explain why this is incorrect.

Who do you think asked her to run for the Senate? Talarico and Colin Allred were already running and she’s been a star in the House. So tired of good House members throwing that away for long shots at Senate seats (looking at you, Allred/Beto/Tim Ryan/Val Demings etc.) Colbert didn’t launch Talarico and it would be really stupid to schedule a “launch” less than a week before the start of early voting. Talarico was “launched” months and months ago when he appeared on Joe Rogan’s podcast. And FCC Chair Brendan Carr absolutely has said he’s reconsidering the exception to the equal time rule that talk shows have had since the 1960s, which is what CBS legal told Colbert, who has had Crockett on his show twice. Not sure if anything you said is correct.

Crockett's base was diluted by the redistricting, and, as you implied, she was getting a lot of attention, though I disagree that she was a star. So why not run for the Senate? But it all fell apart for her because you can only act so crazy and stay viable in a Senate race. Allred dropped out. And sure, Talarico was technically launched, but most people who aren't following politics had never heard of him. So, what better way to truly launch him than a stunt with Colbert right before early election started to get people talking about him in a way that no one was talking about him before. All Colbert had to do was ask Crockett on the show given that Talarico's appearance was so close to early elections. And again, it was never the FCC who said anything about it. It was CBS legal. Instead, Colbert pulled it, blamed the FCC, and had record views on YouTube.

Frankly, I think it's inspired since Talarico now has a real change to win against the GOP candidate in a way he no chance before all this. And Crockett, for all you clearly are a supporter of hers, was never going to win a Senate seat, then or now.

You continue to be incorrect. I like her in the House but I’m not a supporter of hers for the Senate and I think her running is really dumb (I said as much above) and she hasn’t done a good job explaining why she’d be a good Senator or what her positions are. Her launch video was literally me me me. Allred didn’t drop out until she ran. Colbert has already asked Crockett to be on the show twice, and he doesn’t need the FCC implying or CBS interpreting the FCC and telling him who should be on his show and when.

Oddly, from reading this, I don't think we actually disagree. There seems to be a nuance of meaning that only starts coming through with "discussion" instead of just saying, You're wrong.

And as I've said, FCC never said anything about it. It was all CBS legal, but Colbert and Talarico made a big deal out of it, getting a lot of attention that they never would have gotten had they simply aired the interview on CBS. They did not have to air it on YouTube. But they did, and lied to get a lot of outrage going, and thus, getting Talarico out in front of millions.

What in the “lie”? FCC pressured CBS who folded like a cheap suit.

Your assertion that Colbert is somehow “launching” Talarico is just objectively wrong. Colbert has invited Crockett on previously (when she was running for senate). And would you really “launch” a candidate as early voting starts? The Dems did that with Kamala and see how that worked out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ideally, I prefer Crockett. However, she has a great position right now in the House and uses her platform well. I’d love for her to continue and grow in that roll.

Based on a few things, Talarico may be the better candidate for Texas and I think voters who want a fresh face and more youth in the Senate will like that too.

This way, we get both.

Can Crockett keep her House seat if she loses the Senate primary? I’m not sure.

I prefer Talarico in this race because Crockett hasn’t really presented a good reason for her running other than “Trump hates me” and she’s polling worse than he is against all of the possible opponents.

No. She gave it up.

Correct. As I understand it she was asked to run for the Senate, but then she has polled so badly the Democratic powers that be threw their support behind Talarico--including the whole Colbert/Talarico set up that got him launched. No one said anything about it from the government. It was CBS legal that brought it up. And Colbert didn't want to give Crockett equal time.

As politics goes, all the puppet masters behind the scenes doing their thing.

I think you understand most to all of this incorrectly.

Then explain why this is incorrect.

Who do you think asked her to run for the Senate? Talarico and Colin Allred were already running and she’s been a star in the House. So tired of good House members throwing that away for long shots at Senate seats (looking at you, Allred/Beto/Tim Ryan/Val Demings etc.) Colbert didn’t launch Talarico and it would be really stupid to schedule a “launch” less than a week before the start of early voting. Talarico was “launched” months and months ago when he appeared on Joe Rogan’s podcast. And FCC Chair Brendan Carr absolutely has said he’s reconsidering the exception to the equal time rule that talk shows have had since the 1960s, which is what CBS legal told Colbert, who has had Crockett on his show twice. Not sure if anything you said is correct.

Crockett's base was diluted by the redistricting, and, as you implied, she was getting a lot of attention, though I disagree that she was a star. So why not run for the Senate? But it all fell apart for her because you can only act so crazy and stay viable in a Senate race. Allred dropped out. And sure, Talarico was technically launched, but most people who aren't following politics had never heard of him. So, what better way to truly launch him than a stunt with Colbert right before early election started to get people talking about him in a way that no one was talking about him before. All Colbert had to do was ask Crockett on the show given that Talarico's appearance was so close to early elections. And again, it was never the FCC who said anything about it. It was CBS legal. Instead, Colbert pulled it, blamed the FCC, and had record views on YouTube.

Frankly, I think it's inspired since Talarico now has a real change to win against the GOP candidate in a way he no chance before all this. And Crockett, for all you clearly are a supporter of hers, was never going to win a Senate seat, then or now.

You continue to be incorrect. I like her in the House but I’m not a supporter of hers for the Senate and I think her running is really dumb (I said as much above) and she hasn’t done a good job explaining why she’d be a good Senator or what her positions are. Her launch video was literally me me me. Allred didn’t drop out until she ran. Colbert has already asked Crockett to be on the show twice, and he doesn’t need the FCC implying or CBS interpreting the FCC and telling him who should be on his show and when.

Oddly, from reading this, I don't think we actually disagree. There seems to be a nuance of meaning that only starts coming through with "discussion" instead of just saying, You're wrong.

And as I've said, FCC never said anything about it. It was all CBS legal, but Colbert and Talarico made a big deal out of it, getting a lot of attention that they never would have gotten had they simply aired the interview on CBS. They did not have to air it on YouTube. But they did, and lied to get a lot of outrage going, and thus, getting Talarico out in front of millions.

What in the “lie”? FCC pressured CBS who folded like a cheap suit.

Your assertion that Colbert is somehow “launching” Talarico is just objectively wrong. Colbert has invited Crockett on previously (when she was running for senate). And would you really “launch” a candidate as early voting starts? The Dems did that with Kamala and see how that worked out.

The FCC never said anything. AGAIN, it was CBS legal that said something. So the "lie" is that the FCC said they had to give equal time to Crockett when in reality it was just CBS legal who said it could be a problem. As you said, Crockett had been on the show 2x. (She did ask to be on the same week as Talarico, and instead the moved the interview to YouTube.) So there never should have been any concern about being compliant.

And we just have to agree to disagree re: launching Talarico. Early voting is important in Texas. And comparing it to Kamala is not an apples to apples comparison because she could have won had she not been so terrible on the campaign trail. Will Talarico do the same and fall apart? We shall see. But for now, Talarico will come out of early voting in the lead, where had the Colbert thing not happened, Crockett had a great deal more name recognition and probably would have come out of early voting in the lead--and potentially would have won the nomination had something not happened to get Talarico's name out there. And, as I've said, Crockett has no chance of winning against Cronyn or Paxton. Talarico stands a chance.

[Anonymous]

Carr both denies that he was trying to enforce the equal time rule — which again has never been enforced for talk shows — at the same time as he said he was considering enforcing it on The View, which is a talk show. Stop running cover for Carr. CBS’s lawyers may have interpreted his comments very conservatively, but he definitely said he was considering it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Carr both denies that he was trying to enforce the equal time rule — which again has never been enforced for talk shows — at the same time as he said he was considering enforcing it on The View, which is a talk show. Stop running cover for Carr. CBS’s lawyers may have interpreted his comments very conservatively, but he definitely said he was considering it.

PS The View doesn’t have an equal time issue either because Crockett and Talarico have both appeared on the show since they declared as Senate candidates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Carr both denies that he was trying to enforce the equal time rule — which again has never been enforced for talk shows — at the same time as he said he was considering enforcing it on The View, which is a talk show. Stop running cover for Carr. CBS’s lawyers may have interpreted his comments very conservatively, but he definitely said he was considering it.

PS The View doesn’t have an equal time issue either because Crockett and Talarico have both appeared on the show since they declared as Senate candidates.

CBS said it could be a problem. Colbert had 2 choices: Defend their stance of already having had Crockett on twice. Or, put Crockett on again to cover themselves, just in case. INSTEAD, they lied and said the FCC shut it down, then moved the interview to YouTube. This is fabricated drama.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Carr both denies that he was trying to enforce the equal time rule — which again has never been enforced for talk shows — at the same time as he said he was considering enforcing it on The View, which is a talk show. Stop running cover for Carr. CBS’s lawyers may have interpreted his comments very conservatively, but he definitely said he was considering it.

PS The View doesn’t have an equal time issue either because Crockett and Talarico have both appeared on the show since they declared as Senate candidates.

CBS said it could be a problem. Colbert had 2 choices: Defend their stance of already having had Crockett on twice. Or, put Crockett on again to cover themselves, just in case. INSTEAD, they lied and said the FCC shut it down, then moved the interview to YouTube. This is fabricated drama.

Colbert never said the FCC shut it down, he was very clear on the night of the interview and the next day that it was CBS’s lawyers who had opinions about it. Have you actually watched what he said?