Our PRIMARIES, The CORPORATE MEDIA and MY PREDICTION for the next 4.5 weeks

[FrenchieCat]

The media has been on the case of who will be the Democratic nominee for quite some time, but we have now arrived at "CrunchTime" and they are now going to go into overdrive. Based on the primary schedule, they have little time to waste, as they need to influence our vote, and most of us know that the last 2 weeks prior to an election is the time that voters are really, really paying attention.

The media has already set it all up, and it is now ready to go.

Hillary was talked about above and beyond anyone else throughout primary season and before. In fact, she was promoted positively 24/7 for the last 2+ years. The constant talk of inevitability and Hillary as "the frontrunner" has irritated the Dem Base to no end (as it was designed to do) and Currently she is being deconstructed and nothing she nor Bill will do and/or say during the next 2 weeks will gain them any positive media attention. In fact, Bill's campaigning for Hillary is about to be turned into a negative....but the media has to be careful, cause the whole point is to keep the base disgusted with Hillary being heralded as the winner over and over again without any votes cast.

Hillary has gotten about as much mileage as she was going to get from positive reporting, and from two weeks ago on, the attention will become deeply negative. Her failure to capture anything but first place in Iowa (unless she can come in first in New Hampshire) will be written as a dismal failure for her campaign, and it will only go downhill from there (or that is what the media is counting on).

The media hates the Clintons, and in order for the media to feel vindicated over their rabid and irrational herd actions during the 90s, they are engineering Hillary's lose during these primaries. It is total payback for both Bill and Hil (and to a lesser degree, the entire Democratic party legacy that they left). This plan was set up long ago to work; and so it will.

Obama has been promoted for the most part very positively for the last year or so. In fact, it is highly due to the media's encouragement that Obama determined that he would run for President. Please know that Obama, as far as the media is concerned, has reached his high note penacle with the Oprah endorsement, and just as we see it here, Oprah is going to go down for the count along with her chosen candidate (the media gets a twofer....cause they are tired that oprah is so loved nationally anyways). The media is not ready for a Black President who's track record is not clear enough of them to truly know how it would all end, and it appears that the Democratic party isn't truly ready either. The Democratic party is too afraid of losing, and we all know that Democrats, at the end of the day, tend to be scared of a whole lot of things.

The media will be deconstructing Obama for the last couple of weeks prior to Iowa. They have already started; see the Oprah fanfare get played down as "barely a gain" to a "might be a lose" a la Dean endorsement by Gore in '03. The media has positioned Obama in a "high expectation" slot in Iowa, and Obama will be seen as more of a loser than a winner if he places anything but 1st place.

Both of the above candidates have enough money to last them a while, BUT it is the free publicity from the early states that count for the rest of the primary season, because it is priceless.

Edwards has been pretty much ignored and left to his own devices throughout the primary season till now. He was always always mentioned as part of the top tier, and never totally forgotten by the media; but he was simply never highlighted for the attributes he brings to the table.....but that is all about to end. It has always been glaringly obvious that a media story featuring Edwards as the great White Hope in the sense that he fits neatly the historical legacy of what constitutes a winner in Presidential politics; the good looking White guy from the South.....was not being suggested nor promoted by the media. This was purposefully done so that he would not peak too soon....because whatever "flaws" he has will not be discovered until "later". The Dem base have grown to love him, partially because the media ignored him and his attributes, and because Edwards has had nothing to lose in his campaign rethorics of promises......and has had everything to gain; including a solid base at the progressive end of the democratic spectrum...and these folks vote!

The well publicized media storyline of "Obama vs. Hil" rumbles have cleared the way for an Edwards rise just in the nick of time (funny how synchronized it all is). Now, please know that Edwards will not be rising because of anything special that he has recently said or done, but rather because he is now the underdog waiting to come on the scene who can provide Iowans another choice other than the over-reported candidates; Obama and Hillary. Going forward on, for the next two weeks, Edwards is about to garnet much more press, most of it positive (as he did in 2003-04 in the last two weeks prior to Iowa). Edwards' been weakened significantly by his acceptance of matching funds, which makes him a more acceptable candidate for the Corporate Media......as it could lead to an exciting and "against the current CW" GOP victory in the general election (which the Corporate media prefers at the end anyways....cause they are...corporate, after all). But till then, Edwards is now ready for his close up in the primary story line.


Current Prediction:

I will call Iowa for Edwards....and I am not sure, but I believe that Iowa will propel Edwards to, at the very least, a 2nd place finish in New Hampshire.

Still in Iowa, Obama will take a respectful 2nd place finish, and Hillary third. Biden will come in fourth, and Richardson will take fifth. If Biden and Hillary's placing are reversed, it won't help Biden win any additional states beyond allowing him to live another day, but it will be the beginning of higher than before doubts by the Hillary campaign. Dodd will drop out after Iowa and endorse Hillary.

I predict that Obama will win New Hampshire, with Hillary close behind. With Edwards' close 3rd place finish, that will clear the way for (out of favor) Michigan...where Hillary will win (as her name is the only one on the ballot). A Michigan win won't mean much, but it will make Hillary appear a bit stronger and erase her embarassing primary debuts.

Then it is off to Nevada, which will give Hillary her first bonafide win, with Edwards placing 2nd. Richardson will take a respectable 3rd, and Obama will take a (not good enough at all) 4th. Biden will drop out at this point or will become a non entity candidate.

In South Carolina, one week later...OBama will take first, Edwards 2nd, and Hillary 3rd. Please note that it is very possible that Edwards could come in first (if Hillary and OBama split enough of the 50% Black vote) with Obama in 2nd instead.


I do not predict what will happen further than this.....and I cannot predict who the nominee will be at this time. I believe that the end result will depend on how the Corporate media chooses to appproach each and every known results after its occurrence.

[yourout]

1. Certainly would make for interesting political theatre.

[FrenchieCat]

8. Well the Media wants "theater" for as long as possible, as long as they still

have control over the ultimate outcome.

Plus, the media loves as large and as many "advertising" election media buys possible for sho'! :evilgrin:

[musiclawyer]

2. applause for your thinking this through

Clearly not a post on a whim, but i don't think the corporate media is a monolithic thinking entity. There are editorial and production decsions made with some instuctions coming from the top. But I don't think it's all in lockstep. What they all want, however, is a horserace, and that concept does fit with your overarching theory that Edwards will get some face time soon. And I can't agree more--just in the nick of time. Absent a Gore miracle, Edwards is the safest bet if we want the POTUS. In fact the world neerds a democratic POTUS. (This is not the time to take risks). HRC and Obama are no sure thing even against the winner amongst a field of GOP lightweights.

[FrenchieCat]

4. Thank you for your compliment on my time thinking about what I wrote in my thread......

and I add that I followed the Media's influence beginning with the impeachment of Bill Clinton, to the 2000 election on forward........and although I conceed that they, the corporate media, do not "control" all, they control a great deal; an awesome amount, in fact.

I do believe that the 5 Corporate owners of most of our media do plan ahead, and do march in negotiated lockstep, i.e., look at their past identical moves in not just politics. Certainly it is not a well oiled machine, and things can somethimes go awry....but I do believe that they are in direct colusion, e.g., the Iraq war promotion, the missing blondes, etc.....

As for John Edwards, he is not my favorite by a long shot, and I am not as hopeful as you are that he could actually win the GE.....but on that point, we can certainly agree to disagree.

[KoKo]

3. K&R....I've been watching and seeing what you have...so I give a recommend!

[FrenchieCat]

5. Kewl!

Yep....if one really watches, and not even that closely, what is going on and what may happen shouldn't be a surprise.

:hi:

[BeyondGeography]

6. Edwards is a boutique candidate compared with HRC and Obama

for the simple reason that those two soak up between 80% and 90% of the black vote. This will doom him not only in SC, but in many of the Super Tuesday states. Where the minority vote does not play a significant role on Feb. 5, Edwards will be fatally compromised by a miniscule organizational presence compared with his rivals.

Absent a self-induced implosion or scandal this will end up a two-person race. Advantage to the establishment, but it sure is fun to watch them sweat.

Recommended.

[FrenchieCat]

7. Well, you may be right......

but my understanding is that in SC, the Black vote is about 50% of the overall. Now, if there are more voters than normal (which could happen for the sake of Obama), it may work out in Obama's favor. However, if Obama and Hillary split 50% of the SC vote, than the other bloc (the Dem White SC) may overwhelmingly go to Edwards...who did win that primary last time round, and so he does have that history working in his favor.

But you are correct that Edwards' organization or lackthereof is going to be a weakness to him...which is why I can't predict a nominee at this time. :shrug:

[sandnsea]

9. No, all of the media does not hate the Clintons

The Clintons still have influence with the New York Times, Washington Post, and some in the networks as well. Fineman, Crawford, some at Newsweek and Time, they have plenty of media control. You will begin to see that in full swing once this Oprah magic wears off.

The only thing that can possibly happen is for the people to ignore the media and to simply reject conventional wisdom and vote for Obama or Edwards. If Hillary keeps it up with these stupid attacks, that's what will happen. If she stops and goes back to straight campaigning, then she'll win it all.

[FrenchieCat]

10. The beauty of it all is that

we shall see all what develops very soon! :)

[Major Hogwash]

11. Very well-thought out analysis. Job well done! You, FrenchieCat, are a real American!

Man, this is really good stuff. I can't use a nut pick to crack anything off of the gist of the article in order to argue against anything you have said here.

You are one hell of an American, taking the time to decipher through the bullshit and to come up with this analysis.

Damn, somebody should hire you to help them out with their campaign!

[FrenchieCat]

12. Awwww......

how nice of you! :pals:

[CyberPieHole]

13. Great post, FrenchieCat...

your prediction may very well be proven true. I particularly agree with your analysis of the primary season as it began. Thanks for posting.

:kick: and recommend

[PATRICK]

14. I only question the aim and goals

but i think you perceive the bald-faced media spin correctly. that is the easy part and it comes not from the judgment of the conniving pundits but the talking points driven from on High. Sometimes they just don't even know where THEY are going with this except to have fun raising up and taking down the rivals until the winner is a mess.

WHo do they want that winner to be? Now that is the rub. they fear Hillary being swept in by the party- in strength. it galls. It is tricky to expect her to be brought in as weak president ready to hoodwink and destroy with shrinking House and Senate coattails. The GOP party especially could live with the latter. It is salvation. Bill Clinton practically changes George It's adult diapers. That could signal the acceptance of the King, or simply doing it to Bill all over again- because they can.

I think they have options and can't bank on the last American democratic process to be perfectly tweaked. So overall, they need to trash the winner and divide the party. I don't think they want Edwards, but Edwards will be given no free ride. They would trash JFK's sordid personal life mercilessly and berate his war record. They would shoot Bobby because he was simply too clever and high class a risk once their hand was shown. Most our party leadership still looks blind at that hand which has been slapping them around for decades. Yet there is no messiah candidate or public favorite to get an overwhelming win. None, no matter who you might name. Reagan was pumped up as one but only incumbency sealed his deal, as with Bill. Eisenhower simply had the keys to the nation after WWII. Few, thank god, ever have that invincible prestige and running with a party that owned the rules on the slander machine.

I don't think they know. The Bushies might, they don't like risks, only simple sure things. They consider this whole show a Punch and Judy court entertainment and don't care much about the GOP party legitimacy since they are in the processes of destroying democracy wholesale anyway. In fact the weak GOP field looks submissive to NOT being rivals OR heirs to the Bush dynasty.

You can't deliver the nation from thralldom to this pervasive evil influence easily. As you tell, the primaries, election alone cannot change things. it can only start too, and THAT is what is being inhibited, short-circuited and played for suckers all along.

Don't listen to Luntz. He's a crook and liar. Don't bow to fear of them much less respect for their apparent sympathy and assistance. Shut them out, tune them out and get our process where it belongs and where we need it.

Without their kind spin I think Edwards is still the best. I have no illusions it will be easy and why the supporters of other candidates HAVE to harbor those illusions may be because of the fear and triviality that the media poisons out process with- to a purpose. Whoever wins means we only get a chance to fight and rebuild. It will just be the beginning, though sunrise after this long night will be most welcome and justice unchained our surest hope.

[Stop Cornyn]

15. I think you are right about Iowa, and (probably) right about New Hampshire, but if Richardson or

Biden sneaks past Hillary in Iowa, I could see her slipping to third in New Hampshire.

I think it is too unknowable to forecast beyond New Hampshire except that I think Michigan will play out badly for Hillary:

But now, in a new voter guide unveiled this week, state party leaders are urging voters who support any of the four Democrats who've dropped out of the Michigan primary to cast their ballots for "Uncommitted," effectively ceding their voices to an unknown slate of delegates to be named later in party caucuses across the state.

Also, if Hillary is coming off momentum-killing losses in Iowa and New Hampshire, she might very well lose to "uncommitted" -- imagine THOSE headlines -- or possibly a swollen protest vote for Dodd or Kucinich.

Michigan is a lose-lose for Hillary. If she wins, the headline is "Hillary beats Dodd and Kucinich while all the real contenders played by the party rules and skipped this sooner state." If she loses, the headline is "KUCINICH UPSETS HILLARY!!!" or "UNCOMMITTED BEATS FORMER FRONT-RUNNER!"

[Franc_Lee]

16. end result will depend on the Corporate media...