Media shortchange Edwards

[Nutmegger]

What about John Edwards? The big media portray the Democratic race as a death-match between the Clinton machine and the Obama phenom. Edwards comes off as a plodder in the shadow of two glamour pusses.

Back in the world of plain people, the story looks somewhat different. A new Des Moines Register poll shows 28 percent of likely Iowa Democratic caucus-goers preferring Barack Obama, 25 percent for Hillary Clinton and 23 percent for Edwards. That sounds like a three-way race to me.

Also consider the caucus rules. Within a caucus site, people whose candidate gets less than 15 percent of the total can throw their support to another contender. Edwards now leads the Democratic pack as the likely participants' second choice, according to a recent Rasmussen poll.

The former senator from North Carolina seems definitely in the game. So why is the race commonly seen as a two-titan contest? The easy explanation, that much of the media are lazy, would not be far off. But something else is going on.

Full article: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2004051041_harrop041.html

[bluethruandthru]

1. Just imagine if John Edwards got just half the press

that Clinton and Obama get! If someone only listened to the nightly news shows on the big 3 networks...they would think there were only 2 Democratic candidates. Almost never a mention of Edwards...let alone the others! It's really wrong.

[Armstead]

2. Definetly true -- It applies to all of the "other" candidates too

[MethuenProgressive]

3. Yesterday, RWer Isabel Ball had the byline to this piece. Today it's "Froma Harrop"?

DU is a funny place.

[1932]

4. My local news routinely shows a live clip of Clinton and Obama and do not show one of Edwards.

Last night it was a story about Iraq as an issue in the campaign. "All the democratic candidates want to bring the troops home...clip of Clinton...clip of Obama...However, Bush argues that the war is working...clip of Bush."

[OHdem10]

5. When did we ever choose our presidents.???

They usually do a better job of convincing us someone is our
choice.

This time it has been a little harder. The story line is
Rudy V HRC. They had to keep HRC in the lead.

When you hear a TV anchor yelling Obams is surging, and
you look at the numbers---Still within Margin of Error.


The only thing that has not gone their way. They thought
they would have knocked Edwards out by now. They did
not. So they ignore and pretend he is not there.

Folks, Pure and Simple.

In order for Rudy to win, they need our candidate to have personal
baggage. (This is not fair) but Bill"s baggage is HRC's baggage
to the TV Media.) Personal stuff on both sides makes a wash.
Whew---gets Rudy to WH.

Is this fair--no. Life is not fair.

[Evergreen Emerald]

6. I was thinking of that this morning when Edwards was on Morning Joe

All they talked about was Clinton and a bit about Obama...never a mention of Dodd (except when Dodd had earlier in the campaign called him angry for his attacks), never a mention of Biden...it is as if there are only three running.

[glowing]

7. The media shortchanges everyone that they have been told to

short change.. they've been told who to prop up.

[waiting for hope]

8. Sheesh -

"But something else is going on." - No freaking shit! They will mention all four top tier repukes - Rudy, Mittens, McCain, and Thompson - but heaven forbid they step outside the lines and mention any other Dems but Clinton and Obama. The media thinks we are shallow, (after seeing the success of American Idol and Dancing with The Stars - I might have to agree) and only want to be entertained by a woman and African American running for office...no mention that the entire group of Democratic candidates is exceptional this cycle. I'm glad to see that more and more are realizing this --

Thanks Nutmegger! :bounce: and :kick:, :thumbsup: and more of these: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :hi: