The media is the problem not Clinton or Obama or Edwards or Richardson or Kucinich or etc

[dsc]

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Political Tracking/Favorables/RepublicanPresidentialCandidates.htm

This is Rasmussen's favorability/unfavorability ratings of Republican candidates.

Note that the better known a Republican candidate is the better he is percieved.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Political Tracking/Presidential Match-Ups/2008DemocraticPresidentialMatchups.htm

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/PoliticalTracking/Presidential Match-Ups/2008DemocraticPresidentialMatchups.htm

This is Rasmussen's fav/unfav for Democrats.

Here the opposite is true.

This is no accident. The press has targetted our candidates. It doesn't get simpler than that.

The overriding press nariative of Guilani is "America's Mayor", that of McCain is "Straight Talk Express". For Democrats we hear quite different nariatives. John Edwards is "feminine" "faggot" sleezy trial lawyer", Hillary is "castrating" "shrill" "phony" "fake", and Obama is "Muslim" "Hussein" "Madrassa".

Is it any wonder that as our candidates get better known they become less popular while as theirs getter better known the get more popular? Look at what it took for Bush to finally have more people think of him unfavorably than favorably. It took repeated lies, a disastrous war, bankrupting the nation, the disastrous response to Katrina, two dollar and a half gas, and several arrests of close associates and government employees. In contrast it took Gore to be right about every major issue of the day while Bush has ruined the nation. Gore's numbers 50 to 47. The Gorical is one measley point better Hillary. Gore who was right on Iraq, right on Social Security, right about Osama, right about the enviroment, just plain right. And only now is he a measley 3 points to the good.

We need to stop enabling this behavior. We need to stop repeating right wing talking points about Democrats simply because it temporarily helps our chosen candidate. The press hates our party. They will lie and lie and lie and lie some more to pimp their favored candidates and trash ours. There isn't some magic Democrat who will change that.

On edit: There is no way to fix the link so it will work correctly. You will have to cut and paste.

[postulater]

1. Link doesn't work right

I had to cut and paste.

Thanks for the post.

[Evergreen Emerald]

2. Thank you for the insightful information

It is true. I think the dems did a disservice to themselves when they capitulated to the media pushing them into campaigning early. They fell into the trap. The "liberal" media has a year to dissect and destroy the candidates one by one.

And, I am appalled that DU posters fall for the negative and false labeling of the candidates. If one more DUer says Ms. Clinton is "polarizing," I think I will scream. That is false and a right-wing-talking point. She was vilified in the media for a decade--and the American public fell for the labels--even "progressives" regurgitate those negative, lying talking points.

I heard the republican candidate speaking about his opponents: there is no infighting. They speak respectfully of each other while we eat our own.

[pretzel4gore]

3. the pigmedia is the problem...

the people aren't hogs, and this aint a barnyard, yet that is what the pigmedia have been assuming-we-all-know for 30 years-what made reagan the 'great communicator' when he only won 37 percent of vote in 1980 election? the media lied then and they've lied ever since - they are pigs, because being well off isn't enough for them, they want more, more, more

[jobycom]

4. Exactly. All the arguments that one or another of our candidates has less or more baggage

are naive, because they assume that the attacks on our candidates have anything to do with them. Just as Gore was smeared into a serial liar and exagerator, any of our candidates will be smeared into exactly the opposite of what they are.

The saddest part, to me, is how many Dems buy the lies against our own candidates. Hillary is the biggest example right now because the media and the Repubs (same thing, really) see her as the biggest threat. Read her actual words, look at her actual record, and you get a very different idea of her than you do by listening to all the bashers. Many of the common perceptions of her are easily traced back to Drudge stories or Newsmax stories that in themselves are clearly misrepresentations of her words or positions. Yet even liberals believe them. Some think we should abandon Hillary because of these myths, yet as soon as we do, our next front-runner will face the same type of attacks. It doesn't matter how clean you think your favorite candidate is, he or she will be smeared and will gain the same negative image as Clinton. Same as Gore did. Same as Kerry did.

It's not the candidates, it's the media.

And no, I'm not saying "vote for Hillary." There are legitimate objections to her, and there are great redeeming qualities in the other candidates (I haven't decided on a candidate yet). What I'm saying is what my sig line says--support your candidate without tearing down the other candidates, because if you get your way and your candidate becomes the frontrunner, he or she will face the same crap that Clinton faces now.

Or don't, and let's continue whining about Republican presidents until 2012.

[Double T]

5. Anyone that ever believed the corporate owned and operated........

msm was suddenly going to find favor with the Democrats, is only deluding themselves. Starting these political presidential campaigns so early was definitely a mistake; people will eventually burnout on the political droning long before it is time for the actual elections.

[skipos]

6. We have to elect a Dem with the media we have, not the media we want

I am 99% sure that neither Obama nor Edwards will have the negatives that Hillary has. Any of our Dems are going to get mud on 'em, but Hillary will get the most.

If you want to see a Republican with high name recognition and low fav/unfav ratings, look at Newt. He is even worse than Hillary in that regard. That is why I hope he is their nominee.

[dsc]

10. with all due respect that is total crap

Kerry was our supposedly unassailable candidate last time, and look what happened to him. Look at Gore for that matter. One of the most honest people in public life and after the press was done he was thought of as a total liar.

[skipos]

11. Your post has nothing to do with what I said.

Care to clarify?

[dsc]

12. Your post stated that Obama and Edwards are somehow less vulnerable to the media

than Hillary. That is total crap. The media will destroy any candidate we put up. Hillary is not somehow unique in this.

[skipos]

14. Great facts you got there. I never said that they were less vulnerable to the media

I said she will have worse favorable/unfavorables than the other candidates, even as the other candidates become more known.

Please note that I am not claiming everyone else will have great fav/unfavs. Baring some huge blunder from the other candidates, she will just have the worst. If you think that the media is going to tarnish every Dem equally, you should look at polls about Bill Clinton.

Bump this post a year from now and lets see.

[dsc]

15. I don't know what worst means in your universe

but in mine it means that anyone other than Hillary would be less bad off. If worse means something else then please let me know.

[skipos]

16. Lets start over.

You wrote:
"Your post stated that Obama and Edwards are somehow less vulnerable to the media than Hillary. That is total crap."

I never said that. Clear?

[dsc]

17. Yes you did

Unless worst doesn't mean what it has customarily mean for ages Hillary would have to be worse off than them which makes them better off. That is what worst means.

[MLFerrell]

7. A prescient observation...

K&R.

[ananda]

8. media is definitely a problem..

.. but not the only problem.

[EVDebs]

9. Operation Mockingbird, emanates from the GHWB building

ironically named for a supposed intelligence operation our government uses. I think it's called the Central Intelligence Agency but it's gone schizo lately with stovepiped b.s., WHIG and OSP groups trumping the legit intell.

No wonder they call Air America Air America. Blowback is a bitch.

[Cha]

13. The corporatemediawhores

have been the problem for at least 20 years.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x494473