Monday, November 9, 2020

"Conservative" No More: The Devolution of Fox News


Hi all.  I'm pleased to share my latest article with you tonight, which really lets Fox News have it.  I've been a loyal reader of the Fox News website, although I rarely tune into tv of any sort, but from now on I'll be taking my "business" elsewhere.  If there's one thing we conservatives and Trumpers have learned in the last four years, it's that we need, above all, to break the stranglehold of the mainstream media and Big Tech.  This is my attempt to aid in that effort.

The Death of Fox News

On election night, I tuned into Fox News, just like million of other Americans. I was elated to see everything breaking for Trump, and — if I changed channels briefly to CNN or MSNBC — I saw quavering voices and teary eyes, both evocative of Trump's “surprise” victory in 2016. It was shaping up to be a night to remember, a night of redemption and glory for our country and of vindication for all Trump supporters.

But a funny thing happened on the way to victory... Just as President Trump and his closest advisers were preparing to throw a giant party in celebration of their triumph, Fox News — the supposed voice of American conservatism — injected a note of caution. Fox called Arizona, where hundreds of thousands of votes remained to be counted, for Biden. Given what we now know about how close the result in Arizona would be, this was grossly inappropriate and unprofessional. It was, as it turns out, though, much more than that: it was also potentially the deciding factor in Election 2020.

Why do I say that? Imagine if Fox had not made its despicable, unforgivable call. All signs on election night would have pointed to a Trump victory. Trump would have unambiguously declared victory. 330 million Americans would have gone to bed believing, despite media handwringing and equivocating, that Trump was the victor. The same momentum and sense of inevitability that now attaches itself to Vice-President Biden would have, rightly or wrongly, attached itself to President Trump.

In the ensuing days, millions of additional votes would have been counted. Trump's victory margins would have narrowed, and in the course of time Biden would have inched ahead in some of the key battlegrounds. Republicans and Trump supporters would have been shocked. They and Trump himself would have cried foul. They would have said that only fraud and malfeasance could erase such massive leads. They would have said, in other words, that Trump was the rightful winner, and only Democratic shenanigans could explain the reversal of fortune.

All this would have come to pass, and in that sense the history of the last several days would have been very similar to how things actually transpired, except for one key difference: primed to accept the fact of a Trump win, the American people, and even the media, would have taken Republican claims of fraud and malfeasance far more seriously. Instead of dismissing such allegations as the ravings of a snubbed, jaded, and frustrated one-term president, every thinking American would have had to ask the question: how can we explain an electoral system that produces such an emphatic result on election night, and then backtracks and reverses itself in the next few days? Isn't this, at the very least, suspicious, and doesn't it call for the fullest possible audit of the vote?

That's what ought to be America's attitude even now, given all the unanswered questions about the legitimacy of our electoral process. Instead, the mainstream media, including Fox News, is indulging in a rush to judgment. They are celebrating Biden's “win”, and they are castigating Trump's and Trump supporters' supposed sour grapes.

All this, in my view, is what Fox News and its so-called “decision desk” have wrought. They have made it far more difficult for President Trump to press his objections and to pursue his valid legal challenges to the election's outcome. They have made it far easier for Biden and the Democrats to slap themselves on the back and pretend that the election is over and done with.

What's worse, Fox News has compounded its sins by joining in the “post-election” plaudits for Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, and the Democrats. It has even silenced its own commentators who support President Trump's principled resistance to the precipitous enthronement of a candidate who may have benefited from widespread fraud.

Let's face it: in 2020, Fox News is stronger than ever, and its ratings are higher than ever, all thanks to the conservative and patriotic fervor unleashed by President Trump. At the hour of decision, however, Fox chose to bite the hand that feeds it: it betrayed Trump and his supporters.

Fox's steady shift to the left in recent years was apparently overlooked and forgiven by conservatives. Surely, its blatant favoritism to Joe Biden on election night, and in the days since, won't be.

Is Fox News dead? Time will tell, but one thing is for sure: it's dead to me.

Dr. Nicholas L. Waddy is an Associate Professor of History at SUNY Alfred and blogs at: He appears weekly on the Newsmaker Show on WLEA 1480/106.9.


And here it is at American Greatness


  1. Dr.Nick

    Fox News has now joined the other highly paid propaganda machines that work to promote State Socialism as represented by the so called Democrats.

    Maybe you know of some news site out there that represents all of us deplorable peasants? If so, let us know.

  2. Ray, I'm still exploring. There are plenty of alternatives, but not many with Fox's breadth of coverage. If anyone else has some recommendations, I would love to hear them!

  3. Dr. Waddy. You certainly do like alternative history. Unfortunately. what makes for good alternative history is that it is realistic. Few people would ever believe that Fox's AZ call made any difference at all. At that point of the night, Trump still had his "Blue Wall" lead, meaning AZ meant exactly nothing in terms of Trump winning. Fox viewers also knew that AZ was going to be close, in part because Mark Kelly consistently led McSally during his Senate campaign (and she not only sucked as a campaigner, but as a debater). In addition, Trump consistently beat up on an icon of AZ politics -- Senator John McCain -- which certainly did not earn him votes in AZ. (BTW, when Trump has to concede, his should look to Senator McCain's concession speech as a model, though Trump does not have that type of class).

    Finally, rather than saying Fox News (aka State TV) has "devolved," you might want to look at it this way -- even Fox News is not buying Trump's voter fraud bullshit. Neil Cavuto (no Trump foe) cut away from Propaganda Barbie's presser yesterday because of her unfounded accusations.

  4. Newsmax and OAN are pretty good at just news and facts. We have left Fox with the exception of Lou Dobbs on FOX Business and Tucker Carlson who let it rip last night about his employer/employees. Great read on Townhall about that, by the way if you are interested.

    I feel bad for you Rod who keeps believing that socialism and or communism is the way to go. I have a fellow former professor who let his anger get the best of him and called me stupid for pointing out the Constitution. You know Rod, we do have rules and laws in this country, right? Oh but your kind will try to change all sad. No, that is not an attack on your character.

    1. LINDA

      Rod teaches college. However, I do not believe he teaches History or Political Science.

      I teach college, and I teach History and Political Science.

      Of course Rod will no longer exchange comments with me because he thinks I need to kiss his butt more, and he is upset because I called him a fool.

      But you know Linda, I had to endure years of Leftist (Marxist oriented) professors to get through graduate school. But I survived.

      The bottom line is that Rod is like most educated Leftists. He is an "intellectual" snob and academic elitist who looks down on anyone who is below his level of "brain power."

      I have one thing to say about Rod and those of his ilk. Go to Hell!

    2. LINDA

      I'm against abortion, but I do believe that Left Wing intellectuals are abortions who lived. I always want to ask them if they were certified assholes when they were born or did they go to a special school to become assholes. But then I already have my answer, because almost all colleges and universities (with a few exceptions) have been producing brain washed Leftists for decades now. Rod is a perfect example of that.

      Sorry for the crude talk. If you are interested, the one hard Left History professor who poisoned and indoctrinated generations of college student was the late Howard Zinn with his textbook "A People's History of The United States". He taught untold numbers of young people then and now to hate this country. A partial cure for his toxic Marxist bullshit can be found at Regnery Publishing in "Debunking Howard Zinn....." His followers are still very much alive and continue to spread his ideological virus.

    3. LINDA

      I don't know what your religious beliefs are, but I suggest Dr. Wayne Grudem as an excellent source for the Christian cure of the many forms of Leftist thinking.

      Leftists like Rod Carveth telling you that he has never "advocated for socialism or communism" is a damn lie! I think you know that. Leftists are always attempting to tell people that they are not Leftists. In the end, they are convinced that their own brand of bullshit is truth.

    4. LINDA

      If you need a good alternative history to the Marxist version advocated by Comrade Rod Carveth, try "A Patriot's History of The United States...." by Dr. Larry Schweikart and Dr. Michael Allen. Also highly recommend "The History of The United States, A Christian Perspective" by Dr. Robert Spinney over at Patrick Henry College in Virginia.
      Maybe Rod Carveth needs to go over there and talk to Dr. Spinney about "alternative views of history".

    5. Hi Linda,

      Just so you know, when I say that I am not for socialism, I am using the dictionary definition of socialism:

      "a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole"

      I am not using the definition of socialism that some folks have been using, which is that socialism is anything that Trump does not believe in.

      I am a socially responsible capitalist. I believe in markets, but not markets that abuse workers or surrounding communities. I also believe that a socially responsible society is one that provides opportunities to the people who are the least able to participate.

    6. Hey there Rod (again)

      You sound like such a wonderful person that I am wondering when you are going to be canonized as a saint.

      Have a nice day, liar.

    7. LINDA

      Rod likes Socialism so much, that he needs to toast that ideology. I propose that Rod pee in a cup, offer the toast and than drink it. After that, he can start a Urine Therapy business, later branching out into a Bottled Fart Co-op, where he farts in bottles, they are hermetically sealed, and then people can buy and sniff them later, and get an idea of what Socialism smells like.

  5. Linda, I have never advocated for socialism or communism. But, do understand that we are not a completely capitalist country. We have programs such as Social Security, and Medicare, and the VA that are all based on socialist principles. Our corporate welfare is a form of socialism. Progressive taxation is a form of socialism.

    We have a system that is pretty much identical to the social democracies of most of the countries in Europe, with the exception of having a strong public option for health care. As a result, we pay by far the most per capita for health care in the world with results that are not as good as most industrialized nations.

    So, Linda, before talking about socialism, please know more about it.

    1. Hey There Rod

      Before talking about anything, you need to put what is left (no pun intended) of your brain in gear.

      Have a nice day, FOOL!

  6. Folks,

    Socialism/Communism is BULLSHIT! Millions have perished living under Socialist/Communist regimes, and now a Marxist dictatorship (American style) is going to be imposed on us, posing under the guise of caring about people. Socialism/Communism has NEVER cared about people. All it cares about is providing a lucrative living for thieves and liars.


    Since Rod is out in Maryland, he should read a book authored by the late Whittaker Chambers titled "Cold Friday". Chambers lived in Maryland, and was a card carrying Communist for years, until he realized what bullshit he had been sucked into, the same bullshit Rod has been sucked into.

    Rod says he has never advocated Socialism or Communism, and then proceeds to lecture LINDA on the meaning and benefits of it by using examples of Medicare and Social Security as the products of that ideology. He contradicts himself, but is so eaten up with bullshit, that he cannot even tell the difference between what he preaches to others. Get a Life Rod, or start your own blog, which I believe you already did.

  8. As a final comment on this particular article by Dr. Nick I would like to ask Comrade Rod Carveth if he would kindly consider suicide as an option to end his bullshit propaganda campaign. If he would take that ALTERNATIVE I would appreciate it, and then I could close out his file and mark it DSAF (Did Society A Favor).

  9. Dr. Waddy from Jack: You have argued well and your castigation of Fox causes me much concern. Fox and Rush have given us the broadcast voice of which we were bereft until they came along. We are probably going to lose Rush, one of the very most consequential political figures of the last thirty two years, soon. We need Fox! Perhaps they will realize their election error and take measures to preserve their well won status as the MSM defying daily voice of the real America.

  10. Gee, "Listen Linda Listen" is the meme, lol. I have stated, Ray and will continue to state I will never vote for anyone who is pro abortion (so now you know where I stand). I find it awfully funny folks who want to preach to me about socialism or communism indeed are often confused about this subject. Like I told a fellow co worker yesterday when him and another guy were telling me I couldn't define socialism/communism, "Look, so on Thursday (payday) I will fully expect my 50% cut of your pay." They both looked at me and I said, "I'm done now. Thank you. Just proved my point. Socialism is a redistribution of wealth. That is it in a nutshell. You are NOT entitled to my hard earned money, period."

    So, Rod teaches in Maryland. I see. Thank you. Indeed, Ray, he contradicted himself in his lecture. ANYWAYS, No worries. I AM NOT ATTACKING ROD, let's just have an honest talk about the word socialism and communism. Both are founded on collective cooperation. Only Communism is controlled by the state and Socialism is controlled equally allocated by a democratically controlled government. Again, I demand you give me your pay or else.

    Waving to Jack, smiles.

  11. Hi Linda. I have never contradicted myself. I did point out that our country presently has (and has for over 50 years) in place programs that are based on socialist principles. My support for those programs is not based on any support for socialism but arises out of my Catholic faith to protect the neediest in our society.

    As I have said, I advocate responsible capitalism, not socialism.

  12. Rod, I'm glad to hear you're enjoying watching Fox News now. It's all yours! Feel free to turn out the lights when you change channels. :)

    Linda, I've been keeping an eye on Newsmax and OAN lately. Thanks. I like them, but it's hard to replace Fox in its entirety. Oh well. I'd rather be on the right side of history, so to speak, and Fox just isn't anymore. They may be regretting their apostasy, however!

    Boy, Ray, stop pulling punches, huh? You speak with such subtlety -- no one can understand what you're getting at. ;)

    Linda, you can bet that anything that starts with "A People's" or "The People's" is going to a dark place. Steer clear!

    Rod, the problem with all textbook definitions of socialism, including the one in my textbook, is that they are hopelessly vague. I would point out to you, Rod, that you DO believe in an economy "regulated by the community as a whole". Lefties want to increase government regulation, no? Ergo, you're a socialist. I believe in minimal government regulation too. Ergo, I'm a socialist. Ray once mailed a letter (using the postal service). Ergo, he's a socialist. It's all a silly game, if you ask me. Bottom line: do you want a government that's bigger or smaller? We all know where you stand.

    Rod has a point that we already have elements of socialism in America -- way too many of them! Let's chop government down to size, I say. Federalism -- woo hoo!

    Ray makes a good point that socialist/communist regimes, which rule in the name of the people, have almost always treated the people like crap. America, which believes in private property and competition, has given people more prosperity and freedom than anywhere. The program of the Left is to make America less America-like. Why would we want to do that? And why wouldn't the people who DO want to do that just move to Canada and spare us their utopian blathering?

    Do you really have a blog, Rod? If so, congrats!

    Let me go on record by saying that I DO NOT support the suicide (or murder) of any of the people who post on this blog. I need all the page views I can get! In fact, if some of those dead voters in Philadelphia would start accessing the blog, I wouldn't mind a bit.

    Jack, you're right -- Fox may see the light. Editorial changes are always possible. I leave the door open for them.

    1. Let me also go on record by saying that I DO NOT support the suicide (or murder) of any of the people who post on this blog. However, in some cases a voluntary prefrontal lobotomy is recommended. Rod certainly needs to
      consider this. Ha!

  13. Dr. Waddy, having a big government or a small government is not the determining factor in judging someone as a socialist or not. You are redefining what socialism is to fit your narrative, which is a fallacious method (and unethical) of argumentation.

  14. This is the dumbest thing I've ever read. What a crock of poor argumentation and a total lack of critical thinking or introspection.

  15. This site looks like a Roger Stone fansite on Geocities circa 2003

  16. Ooo, hecklers! This means I've finally arrived at conservative stardom. What an exciting day! :)

    Rod, "socialism" is, as I said, a vague concept, and I think my metric is about as good as any other, but if you want to define yourself as a capitalist, that's great. Suffice it to say that some of us here at WaddyIsRight like our capitalism less alloyed than you do.

  17. Ray, it's funny you should mention lobotomies, because I was researching them recently. To some extent I think they've gotten a bad rep. From what I can tell their effects were highly varied, and often arguably positive or surprisingly short-lived. Having said all that, I'm not convinced that most leftists would benefit from a lobotomy. It's a toss-up. We need more data! Ha ha.

  18. Wait a second... Fox calling Arizona was "the deciding factor in the 2020 election"? Maybe I'm missing something here, but the election was already over. All of the votes had been cast. Nothing Fox could do could decide the election one way or the other. The result was already determined and was locked away in the ballot boxes waiting to be discovered by the vote counters.

  19. Welcome, Jay!

    There's a degree of truth to what you say, but you're assuming that all the ballots were indeed "locked away" by election night, which may or may not have been the case. It's at least theoretically possible that the "universe" of ballots was expanded, once the Dems knew they needed more votes.

    But my point was more about the narrative. It's important who won, by the book, and it's important who people THINK won. Right now Biden gets both prizes. Had Trump won convincingly on election night, there would have been a lot more ambiguity.

  20. Dr. Waddy, Donald Trump wasn't perceived as winning convincingly on Election Night because he wasn't winning convincingly. Only part of the vote had been counted.

    Had PA and WI allowed counting of mail-in votes to occur before Election Day, the results would have shown Biden either ahead, or the race was very tight. Blame the GOP legislatures for screwing things up.