Look What’s Happening to The NFL After 3 Weeks of Anthem Protests


It looks like the free market has spoken, and it isn’t good news for the NFL.

After allowing San Francisco 49ers backup quarterback Colin Kaepernick, and numerous other players who followed his lead, to engage in disrespectful and farcical protest of the national anthem, the NFL’s ratings have taken a hit.

We’re heading into week four of play in the NFL and the ratings through the first three weeks have been markedly poor.

Although it’s not proven, of course, that the protests are the reason for the failing ratings, it’s highly likely that they are. There has been a notable movement on social media, with tags such as #NFLBoycott, to boycott the NFL in response to the disrespectful, dishonest protests.

There are plenty of people who watch the NFL because they want to escape everyday life, and the protest movement injects a divisive, destructive and false agenda into an arena where many people simply don’t want it.

CBS News Detroit reported the comments of James Olson of Birmingham, Michigan, who voiced his frustration: “I want to say to these guys ‘If you weren’t playing in the NFL, you would be working at McDonalds. I think people have had it.”

“Sports used to not be a stage for this, and now it is, so I’m turning it off,” Olson said. “I refused to watch the Chicago-Philadelphia game because they were going to protest… You start to figure out you can get along without football, there are other things out there I can do.”

Forbes Magazine reported the lagging NFL ratings: “Week 2 of the NFL season is picking up right where Week 1 ended in terms of TV ratings. This weekend’s Sunday Night Football failed to reverse the downward trend and the same holds true for last night’s Monday Night Football on ESPN.”

RELATED: Police Refusing To Cover HS Football Game After Students Protest National Anthem

The trend of falling ratings in the NFL was chronicled by Sports Business Daily:

“The NFL’s three primetime packages are each seeing double-digit percentage declines to date. NBC continues to lead with an average of 23.0 million viewers, but that figure is down 10% from “SNF” last year, when the net was on a record pace to start the season.

ESPN’s “MNF” is averaging 10.84 million viewers to date, down 19% from the first four games last season and marking the slowest start for “MNF” since ESPN was averaging 10.52 million viewers to start the ’07 season.

CBS and NFL Net are combining to average 16.37 million viewers, down 15% from ’15…”

There are certainly other potential factors, such as Sunday and Thursday Night Football spreading viewership thin (meh, doubt it) and declining broadcast viewership by millennials, that could be affecting ratings. In addition, apparently Monday Night Football has been declining in viewership for the past four years.

DEAR RIOTERS: Black Mom & Lover KILLED Her 6yr. Son – What Time Is Your ‘PROTEST?’


Paging ‘Black Lives Matter’… Should New York prep for a ‘protest’, or does that only happen when there is a Police Officer involved?

This is really shocking:

Zymere Perkins was rushed to hospital on Monday after reportedly being found unconscious at his home in Harlem, New York with bruises to his body – but was pronounced dead shortly after arrival.

Mother, Geraldine Perkins, and her boyfriend, Rysheim Smith, were arrested last night on charges of acting in a manner injurious to a child.

Their arraignments were pending but murder charges are expected to be filed against one of them after the city’s medical examiner’s office determines how the child died, police sources said.

The young mom has been the subject of five child abuse investigations but was cleared of wrongdoing, according to ABC 7.

However sources close to the case said Geraldine told police that Smith, 42, was the one who dealt the deadly blows to Zymere.

Police said they received an alarming call from the boy’s apartment at 2.20pm on Monday with the caller telling the operator that the boy was unconscious.

Before waiting for the ambulance the mother, carrying the boy, hailed a cab and went to a hospital.

Neighbors told ABC 7 that they had not seen Perkins for days before Monday and said there were no tell-tale signs the boy was suffering from domestic abuse.

‘She walked out with the child in her arms,’ neighbor Chauncey Brown said. ‘And the child, the body was lifeless. So I don’t know whether he was alive and she was trying to get him some help. I don’t know.’

That poor child. His life was cut short and there will be temporary outrage, but nothing compared to what happened in Ferguson, Baltimore, Milwaukee or Charlotte.

Will Black Lives Matter be there to constantly remind everyone about Zymere Perkins?

Probably not.


George Soros network pushed “Islamophobia” propaganda after San Bernardino jihad massacre


“ReThink Media, funded in part through NSHR grantee the Security and Rights Collaborative, distributed a set of talking points to organizations working to combat Islamophobia and arranging a series of conference calls to discuss messaging and crisis communications tactics.”

For years I have wondered why every single mainstream media reporter I have ever encountered was completely in the tank for the “Islamophobia” myth, and wholly unconcerned about jihad terrorism. Now we know why: they were bought and paid for. These revelations should bring the whole elite media superstructure tumbling down. It won’t, but every new push brings it closer to collapse.

“Hacked Memos: George Soros Network Hyped ‘Islamophobia’ After Muslim Terror Attacks,” by Aaron Klein, Breitbart, September 28, 2016:

NEW YORK – In the wake of Islamic terrorist attacks in the U.S. and abroad, grantees of George Soros’s Open Society Foundations mobilized to counter anti-refugee and anti-Muslim immigration sentiment while using the attacks to push gun control and advocate against the surveillance of Muslims in major U.S. cities such as New York.

Hacked Foundations memos reviewed by Breitbart Jerusalem betray the symbiotic relationship between Soros’ grantees and prominent politicians, including Attorney General Loretta Lynch, in working to push these agendas.

One December 3, 2015 document, titled “Aftermath of ISIS attacks,” outlined a network of grantees that immediately sprung to action pushing specific policy agendas immediately after the December 2, 2015 terrorist attack in San Bernardino, California.

“Anticipating a backlash against Muslims, advocates swung into high gear,” the memo relates.

The grantee actions included attacks on those who spoke against immigration from Islamic countries, a push for gun control, and a speech by Attorney General Lynch at the annual dinner of a grantee, Muslim Advocates.

Here are some actions, as cited in the document:

*ReThink Media, funded in part through NSHR grantee the Security and Rights Collaborative, distributed a set of talking points to organizations working to combat Islamophobia and arranging a series of conference calls to discuss messaging and crisis communications tactics.

*Muslim Advocates was set to host a conversation with Attorney General Loretta Lynch on efforts to battle hate speech and anti-Muslim discrimination at its annual dinner in Washington DC.

* Advocates of greater gun control took to Twitter, chiding the parade of politicians who sent “thoughts and prayers” without taking concrete steps to improve public safety. The Center for American Progress convened calls on mass gun violence—one of a number of efforts to follow through on President Obama’s exhortation to revive efforts to enact new controls, such as universal background checks or a ban on assault rifles.

* The National Security Network released a new policy report entitled Mainstreaming Hate: The Far-Right Fringe Origins of Islamophobic and Anti-Refugee Politics in their handling of the Syrian refugee resettlement.

* The Refugee Council USA and some of its members issued calls to action to safeguard the Syrian refugee resettlement program.

After the Lynch event, a second Foundations’ memo boasted, “Appearing at the annual dinner hosted by grantee Muslim Advocates, Attorney General Loretta Lynch vowed that her department would vigorously investigate claims of hate speech that could lead to anti-Muslim violence.”

The first document relates a specific rapid response deployment of Foundations grantees to combat calls for restrictions on the visa waiver program after it was made public that Tashfeen Malik, one of the San Bernardino attackers, passed three background checks by U.S. immigration officials and was granted a K-1 visa to immigrate from Pakistan as the fiance of attacker Syed Rizwan Farook.

The document reveals:

Following the San Bernardino shootings in December by a U.S. citizen and his Pakistani spouse, there were additional proposals to limit the immigration of foreign nationals from specific Muslim countries, including restrictions on the visa waiver program.

US Programs’ Reserve Fund request, already in pipeline since the Syrian refugee crisis erupted last summer, received tentative approval. This request, which includes both c3 and c4 components, will provide communications capacity and advocacy support to refugee groups. It will also bolster immigrant rights groups’ ability to respond to anti-Muslim and anti-refugee rhetoric, which has been prominent in the race for the Republican 2016 presidential nomination.

The issue of refugee resettlement is central to the Open Society Foundations’ domestic aims. As recently reported by Breitbart News, hacked Soros documents state that the billionaire and his foundation helped to successfully press the Obama administration into increasing to 100,000 the total number of refugees taken in by the U.S. annually. The documents reveal that the billionaire personally sent President Obama a letter on the issue of accepting refugees.

Meanwhile, another document, titled, “ISIS Attacks Aftermath” and dated November 17, 2015, lamented that “Tuesday brought a more concerted effort to push back against efforts, fueled by key leaders in Congress and governors in over half the states, to bar Syrian refugees from resettlement in whole swaths of the U.S.”

According to that memo, among the prescriptions from grantees was:

Cities United for Immigration Action, a coalition of nearly 100 mayors, municipalities and counties organized by New York City’s Bill de Blasio, sought to counter the wave of governors opposed to allowing in Syrian refugees with a message of welcome and inclusion. “We should not close our borders to any group of people fleeing the atrocities and horrors of terrorism,” said Mayor de Blasio.

Yet another document listing grantee response to Islamic State attacks, dated January 7, 2016, addressed grantee opposition activism to the domestic surveillance of Muslims. The actions, the document states, included a lawsuit “contesting the NYPD’s surveillance of Muslims in New Jersey, brought by grantees Muslim Advocates and the Center for Constitutional Rights.”



The USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times “Daybreak” poll tracks about 3,000 eligible voters until election day, asking on a regular basis about their support for Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump or other candidates as well as their likelihood of actually casting a ballot.

We update the data each day based on the weighted average of poll responses over the previous week. That means results have less volatility than some other polls, but also means the poll lags somewhat in responding to major events in the campaign. More about the poll and why it differs from others.

Who would you vote for?

We ask voters what the chance is that they will vote for Trump, Clinton or someone else, using a 0-100 scale. The overall level of support for each candidate reflects the weighted average of those responses.


By age

Voters 35-64 have so far shown the least volatility, splitting about evenly between Clinton and Trump. Trump holds the advantage among those 65 or older. The two candidates have exchanged leads among younger voters.


By education

Trump holds an advantage among voters without a college degree. White voters who have not graduated from college are a core source of support for Trump. By contrast, Clinton has done better among voters with college degrees than previous Democrats.


By income

Clinton holds a distinct edge among lower-income voters, reflecting her strong support among blacks and Latinos. Trump has a lead among middle-income voters.


By race/ethnicity

Disaffected white middle-class voters have been the backbone of Donald Trump’s presidential run, as the poll shows. Black and Latino voters lean heavily toward Clinton. Trump’s statements critical of Mexicans in the U.S. illegaly have harmed him politically among Latinos.


By gender

Trump saw a significant bounce in his support from women after the Republican convention, but Clinton rebounded quickly after her convention. Trump’s support among men has remained fairly steady.


Who do you think will win?

We ask voters who they expect to see win, regardless of which candidate they support. Over the years, asking voters their expectation about which candidate will win often has proved to predict elections more reliably than asking how they plan to vote. That’s particularly true when the election is still many weeks away.

Do you intend to vote?

Turnout is a key factor in any election, but may be particularly central in this one. If one candidate’s supporters are less committed to turning out than the other’s, that could point to an important weakness.