TV Ratings: Fox News Debate Rises Without Donald Trump, Hits 12.5 Million Viewers

The Hollywood Reporter ^ | January 29, 2016 | Marisa Guthrie

[House Atreides]

Donald Trump may have been conspicuously absent, but Thursday night's Republican debate on Fox News Channel nevertheless scored a 8.4 rating and 12.5 million viewers, according to early numbers from Nielsen. That's higher than the returns for the last Republican debate, Jan. 14 on sister net Fox Business Network, and marks the No. 2 telecast in FNC history.

Meanwhile, all the other cable news networks were covering Trump's competing event in Iowa, during which Trump boasted he raised $5 million for veteran's charities. Those other cable news networks, neither of which blanketed the time period with the event, averaged a respective 1.76 million viewers (CNN) and 1.02 million viewers (MSNBC) between 9 and 11 p.m. ET.

[Vision Thing]

Dude, your fox news network is a no-spin zone, so don’t be spinnin’.

[NKP_Vet]

The debate was the second lowest ratings in all the GOP debates. Only the Fox Business Channel debate was lower, and that’s because not as many people have Fox Business as they have Fox News. The Trump event was not carried in it’s in it’s entirity by any network other than C-Span and C-Span does not counting number of viewers.

Fox Network can spin it all they want, but the debate was absolutely did not attract as many views as the rest of their debates, with the exception of the last Business debate.

Mess with Trump again and get more of the same low ratings, probably lower.

[GeaugaRepublican]

Do you doubt that Trump will ask for the money? Am I dreaming here? He’s going to get it from someone..I’m thinking. He will at least shame them since he gave $1,000,000. Could be wrong...

[Starstruck]

In fact the very first question was about Trump...Yuk yuk.

So how would you know that?

[Democratic-Republican]

Donald Trump may have been conspicuously absent, but Thursday night's Republican debate on Fox News Channel nevertheless scored a 8.4 rating and 12.5 million viewers, according to early numbers from Nielsen. That's higher than the returns for the last Republican debate, Jan. 14 on sister net Fox Business Network, and marks the No. 2 telecast in FNC history.

Wow, last night's debate was the 2nd highest telecast in Fox News Channel's history. It had 12.5 million viewers.

ROTFLMFAO! You didn't just say that! That is CLINTON level of spin. Only Alan Colmes or Paul Begala could hold a candle to you.

FOX Business does NOT have the same penetration that FNC has. FNC is on most basic cable whereas FBC is sparse.

It would be impossible for FNC to not surpass FBC in any scenario. In fact, it looks like FNC *lost* at least 10 million viewers over the last FNC debate.

What level of TDS does a person require to cause such a massive logical disconnect! Fess up, are you Alan Colmes?

[House Atreides]

Wow, last night’s debate was the 2nd highest telecast in Fox News Channel’s history. It had 12.5 million viewers.
..............................................................................................................................
ROTFLMFAO! You didn’t just say that! That is CLINTON level of spin. Only Alan Colmes or Paul Begala could hold a candle to you.
*********************************************************************************
Jeez....the article DID say that last night’s debate was the 2nd highest telecast in Fox News Channel’s history and that it had 12.5 million viewers.

Are those two items FACTS? If the article lied, you should go to the article’s source and show them that they were LYING. If, however, those two items were FACTUAL...then, perhaps, you need to accept reality and not allow yourself to be thrown into a TIZZY by a factual article.

[Democratic-Republican]

Jeez....the article DID say that last night's debate was the 2nd highest telecast in Fox News Channel's history and that it had 12.5 million viewers.

Are those two items FACTS? If the article lied, you should go to the article's source and show them that they were LYING. If, however, those two items were FACTUAL...then, perhaps, you need to accept reality and not allow yourself to be thrown into a TIZZY by a factual article.

Now you're dissembling.

If you really want to post facts as you say, then please fill in the blanks here ...

• # of Viewers for 1st FNC debate ... ?? million

• # of Viewers for 2nd FNC debate ... ?? million

Take your time, wait for the final Nielson numbers. But we'll all be waiting breathlessly.

[VerySadAmerican]

How does 12.5 million viewers equal more than 24 million viewers. I posted last night that Fox can report whatever rating they want to report. Looks to me like they’re fudging numbers.

[House Atreides]

Look, I posted a link to an article. I suspect that the brain cells of a number of FReepers are dying from the ECSTACY they feel for the candidates, but if you don’t like the fact presented in that article and dream that they had posted a different set of facts...go to them.

Feel free to continue to wait “breathlessly” — perhaps even more brain cells will die. It’s AMAZING to me how this article has gotten so many TRUMP (LET US ALL PRAISE HIM & LIFT UP HIS CAMPAIGN) completely discombobulated.

[House Atreides]

How does 12.5 million viewers equal more than 24 million viewers.
***************************************************************
I doesn’t. Who said it did, out of curiousity.

[WENDLE]

I want to simply recommend that you fasten your seat belt. I am changing over to Rubio for VP.

[Democratic-Republican]

Look, I posted a link to an article. I suspect that the brain cells of a number of FReepers are dying from the ECSTACY they feel for the candidates, but if you don't like the fact presented in that article and dream that they had posted a different set of facts...go to them.

Feel free to continue to wait "breathlessly" - perhaps even more brain cells will die. It's AMAZING to me how this article has gotten so many TRUMP (LET US ALL PRAISE HIM & LIFT UP HIS CAMPAIGN) completely discombobulated.

So I guess that's a "no"?

You're gonna resist considering a perfectly logical counter-argument by simply avoiding supplying the viewer totals for the two FNC debates?

Anybody can do what you did by supplying apples and oranges propaganda. There is always a website demonstrating that up is really down or 1 is really 0. Alan Colmes has made a career of doing that. Him and his fellow travelers kept the degenerate rapist in office and out of prison by doing just that.

Only you can convince yourself whether there are objective truths. Put down the Nietzsche and open your mind.

The only real question is I have now is whether: (1) you honestly believed that original propaganda and now that you have the relevant facts are too stubborn or embarrassed to admit a mistake, or (2) whether you were intentionally and dishonestly propagandizing in the first place. Which is it? (1) or (2)?

Some candidates' supporters are their candidates' own worst enemy.

[Democratic-Republican]

Without Donald Trump Fox Loses Half The Debate Audience

Of course that doesn't stop the professional GOPe apologists and propagandists from the pontificating cocktail class from trying to spin the results.

Quickly to the typeset, clickety-click, Bill Kristol and the crew at the Weekly Standard do their earnest impression of Baghdad Bob by comparing the Fox News debate to the previous Fox Business debate.

A comparison of apples to pancakes.

It looks to me like they lost 12 million viewers since the first debate, and it would have been even worse if some people didn't just tune in to watch the train wreck in progress.

Some drop-off was expected because all the debates have experienced it, but the math shows that the drop-off here was significant, double the rate of the other networks ...

So, will our FRiend House Atreides simply man-up and admit an error, or was it really an intentional display of propaganda all along? The ball is in your court.

[Democratic-Republican]

I forgot to post the photo of the author of the above-mentioned propaganda piece in the first place.

... Lying Putz Bill Kristol ...

[Democratic-Republican]

Here's what this braindead putz Tweeted last night ...

Bottom line: Trump was loser by skipping debate & putting on lame event instead.
Prediction: Trump/Cruz/Rubio will be a close finish Monday.

- Bill Kristol (@BillKristol) January 29, 2016

Trump had a veterans fundraiser!

Bill Kristol, braindead putz, is catching hell for that crack.

[House Atreides]

Look, I’ll do a very quick assessment of YOUR numbers in Post 93 above without trying to go verify their accuracy.

And I’ll use this calculator:

http://www.timeanddate.com/date/durationresult.html?m1=08&d1=06&y1=2015&m2=1&d2=28&y2=2016

to determine elapsed days between debates on the same network.

1. FBN — For the 65 days between debates, viewers dropped 21.43% or .3296% PER DAY.

2. CNN — For the 90 days between debates, viewers dropped 21.74% or .2415% PER DAY.

3. FOX — For the 175 days between debates, viewers dropped 48.00% or .2742% PER DAY.

When adjusted for the number of ELAPSED DAYS between debates, the audience drop percentage PER ELAPSED DAY falls between the PER ELAPSED DAY percentage drop of Fox Business Channel and the drop of CNN.

Quite frankly, other than folks such as us who kinda OBSESS over this stuff, for the broader American populations, these debates become “same-old, same-old” and their interest in watching them drops off with time —as the above assessment shows when factoring in the variable of TIME.

[altura]

People lose interest in debates but that was an excellent showing and The Donald Show barely drew.

[altura]

They got Trump out of the way so as to get him out of the way. He was hardly mentioned the rest of the night and was a much better debate without his surly presence.

[altura]

That thought did prevail. It was a better debate without Trump there.

Several commentators on Fox mentioned it and the debate thread participants noticed it also.

[altura]

A whole bunch of books will be written about this Trump phenomena.

Because it’s kinda amazing. He is a consummate self-promoter, a bigger than life billionaire who flaunts his wealth and his importance. He has a soap opera personal life and gets his jollies yakking up chick talk with Howard Stern. He had a successful reality show. He’s a small-minded narcissist who nurses grievances ....

and, he’s managed to form and lead a cult of admirers who not only excuse his glaring faults but celebrate them.

He’s changed things here on this site. People don’t play as nice with each other. People have forgotten our common goals and interests to either worship the Trump or try to get people to see he’s not worthy of worship.

Strange things are happening.