2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumfun n serious
(4,451 posts)GO Hillary!!!
Ned_Devine
(3,146 posts)brooklynite
(94,950 posts)Ned_Devine
(3,146 posts)But yeah, I wouldn't want to read a magazine that supports Hillary Clinton so I'm glad my membership ran out.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Great service to your readers, Rolling Stone
"With the narrow power base and limited political alliances that Sanders had built in his years as the democratic socialist senator from Vermont, how does he possibly have a chance of fighting such entrenched power?
I have been to the revolution before. It ain't happening."
Clinton is far more likely to win the general election than Sanders. The voters who have rallied to Sanders during the primaries are not enough to generate a Democratic majority in November. Clinton will certainly bring them along, and add them to the broad coalition that Democrats have put together in the past to take the presidency, as did Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.
On the question of experience, the ability to enact progressive change, and the issue of who can win the general election and the presidency, the clear and urgent choice is Hillary Clinton."
NanceGreggs
(27,821 posts)... to the impact of a "Killer Mike" endorsement - but I'm guessing maybe a handful of people have heard of Rolling Stone Magazine.
JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)His stories in The Rolling Stone leave little doubt of what a Clinton presidency will look like when it comes to regulation of the financial industry.
kristopher
(29,798 posts)Jann Simon Wenner (created January 7, 1946) is the cofounder and publisher of the music and politics biweekly Rolling Stone, in addition to the existing owner of Mens Journal and Us Weekly magazines. He also briefly handled the magazine Look as well as in 1993, began the magazine Family Life. In 1985, he purchased a share in Us Weekly, followed by a combined purchase of the magazine with The Walt Disney Company the next year. The magazine went weekly in 2000; after a rocky beginning, it now reaches over 11 million readers per week. In August 2006, Wenner bought out Disneys share and today owns 100% of the magazine. From 2004 to 2006, Wenner given about $63,000 to Democratic candidates and liberal organizations.
Jann Wenner Net Worth $700 Million Dollars
http://richestcelebrities.org/richest-business/jann-wenner-net-worth/
JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)My understanding is that Taibbi is very well off (his wife is a physician), but obviously he has a bit more perspective than this tycoon.
Business as usual for the powerful and moneyed elite.
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)Trump is worth double that, does that mean he is wiser?
kristopher
(29,798 posts)I can't make a connection.
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)as you bringing in the fact that Jan Wenner makes more money that Matt Taibbi. Juts because jan makes more money does not make him right, if anything, he is possibly blinded by his wealth. Jon liebowitz pointed out that many who still read RS read Taibbi, who is right regardless of wealth, and if Jan disagrees with those points, then he is wrong regardless of his wealth.
mac56
(17,575 posts)In certain circles, more money = more better.
riversedge
(70,441 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Jitter65
(3,089 posts)Skid Rogue
(711 posts)Oh, wait... Rolling Stones under the bus?
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)Response to JaneyVee (Original post)
Post removed
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)WTG Rolling Stone!
m-lekktor
(3,675 posts)JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)Crabby Abbey
(66 posts)Jann Wenner? Meh. Go Bernie!
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)I see no verification anywhere else aside from what you posted.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)Rolling Stone Endorses Hillary Clinton for President
Hillary Clinton is the clear and urgent voice that should be president, Rolling Stone says in editorial by Editor and Publisher Jann S. Wenner.
Editorial slated for Friday edition of magazine says Bernie Sanders anger over inequality is not a plan; it is not a reason to wield power; it is not a reason for hope
Its easy to blame billionaires for everything, but quite another to know what to do about it, Wenner adds
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/trackers/2016-03-23/rolling-stone-endorses-hillary-clinton-for-president
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)It didn't come up in my couple of google searches, or from a cursory glance through the RS site.
Excellent news!
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)This is a great endorsement for Hillary!
TheFarseer
(9,328 posts)So many pro-Bernie articles and then they don't endorse him? More cheering for whoever you think is sure to win I think.
Hissyspit
(45,788 posts)JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)Cal Carpenter
(4,959 posts)It's been so long since I've read it regularly, I have no idea.
But I don't remember primary endorsements in the past. (or any overt endorsements, for that matter)
ebayfool
(3,411 posts)Too bad, it used to stand for something - and it wasn't fishing in the middle.
oasis
(49,480 posts)Ouch.
JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)Performing boomer headdesk and facepalm.
Even if I didn't disagree, what a fabulous way to garner enthusiasm.
JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)There is essentially no good reason listed for Hillary in the press release, just a litany of negative remarks about progressives.
A shame really, for Rolling Stone.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)you might be right.
Not sure this is going to have the desired effect. I wonder if they'll run it next to Taibbi's next column slamming Clinton. LOL
Armstead
(47,803 posts)Jann has become too fat and happy
lunamagica
(9,967 posts)Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin
(108,430 posts)Under the bus with you
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)This boomer is appalled.
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin
(108,430 posts)I believe the baby boom ended in 1964 or 65 so the youngest would be 50. And I believe Wenner's older than that.
I'm 58 btw.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)Just know I'm one (almost 64). Only majority I've ever belonged to....! ;->
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)Rolling Stone Endorses Hillary Clinton for President
Hillary Clinton is the clear and urgent voice that should be president, Rolling Stone says in editorial by Editor and Publisher Jann S. Wenner.
Editorial slated for Friday edition of magazine says Bernie Sanders anger over inequality is not a plan; it is not a reason to wield power; it is not a reason for hope
Its easy to blame billionaires for everything, but quite another to know what to do about it, Wenner adds
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/trackers/2016-03-23/rolling-stone-endorses-hillary-clinton-for-president
TheFarseer
(9,328 posts)Rotflmao
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)ucrdem
(15,512 posts)Exactamundo. Refreshing!
ibegurpard
(16,685 posts)We need more Clinton deregulation to siphon even more to them. With some heaping side-helpings of "free-trade."
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)You need to sort through the TPP to figure out what it is, which is basically a hyper-regulatory framework for international commerce that does a lot of things aimed at helping a lot of people. Think of it as an ACA for world commerce. But "free trade" is not the point.
JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)process. That should tell us quite a bit.
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)I suppose they'll be performed offshore until the machines break or sales disappear but there are new jobs coming up HERE to replace them. That's the whole point of TPP from the Democratic perspective.
JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)ucrdem
(15,512 posts)He even asked the late Steve Jobs if it was possible to manufacture iPhones in the US. Jobs flatly said no.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)Hell she doesn't even want to do anything sbout it.
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)Here's what the last 8 years of Clintonomics accomplished:
Marr
(20,317 posts)Hillary certainly 'knows what to do about' concentrated wealth. lol.
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)Marr
(20,317 posts)Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)Gag.
ismnotwasm
(42,023 posts)This, I never saw coming.
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)I am shocked!
longship
(40,416 posts)angrychair
(8,753 posts)Sounds like an endorsement from Wenner than the magazine itself but , meh, who cares.
the clip says "6 million millennial readers" seems unlikely as the vast majority of its readers are over 35 and a verified subscription of just over 1.4 million people.
In general though I see a endorsement like this being a serious negative to those younger, liberal readers. Otherwise, could give two-shits.
http://www.srds.com/mediakits/rollingstone/circulation.html
And
https://www.quantcast.com/rollingstone.com#demographicsCard
Vattel
(9,289 posts)basselope
(2,565 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Karmadillo
(9,253 posts)JohnnyRingo
(18,689 posts)I love RS as much for it's hard hitting current events coverage as I do for keeping this 62 year old up on what's happening culturally and on the music scene. I'll continue to rely on the publication for keeping me abreast of a rapidly changing world.
I agree with Wenner that the attempt to pull the country to the left with McGovern backfired on us Boomers and resulted in a Nixon landslide. It's one of the reasons I too support the more measured experience of Hillary Clinton over the fringe policy dreams of Bernie Sanders.
Those who think change that wrests power from long entrenched brokers can happen overnight should witness the futility of Occupy Wall Street. The majority of Americans scoffed at those protesters much as they would a Bernie Sanders White House.
America has changed since 1972, but not to the left. When I worked the polls last week 4 out of the six voters under the age of 21 asked for a Republican ballot. Some revolution.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)and without some of the Danish issues, mainly lack of diversity.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)Why do you think we are all talking about the 1% and the 99% now?
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)Tarc
(10,478 posts)Perhaps they can ask John Lewis, Liz Warren, Lena Dunham, etc...to nudge aside a little. It's gettin awful crowded down there.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)Tarc
(10,478 posts)SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)mac56
(17,575 posts)workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)Good one!
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)This is amazing.
Snarkoleptic
(6,002 posts)I've a feeling Dr. Hunter S. Thompson would not be pleased.
Logical
(22,457 posts)Response to JaneyVee (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Amimnoch
(4,558 posts)Bernie Sanders is a real life wizard of Oz... Big talking head, makes grand promises knowing he can't keep them, who's really just a charlatan behind the curtain in the corner.
Wake up scarecrow, that's a piece of paper, not a brain.
postatomic
(1,771 posts)DesertRat
(27,995 posts)Beacool
(30,254 posts)I would have thought that they would have endorsed Sanders.
snowy owl
(2,145 posts)Justin Trudeau - Canada Why are they so much more risk-tolerant and caring of people than Americans? More war. More inequaity. More special interests Thank you, Rolling Stone. Go back to rock and roll. You're better at covering musicians than politicians.
I, too, appreciate Matt Taibbi. But Wenner is a corporatist now.
Cha
(298,018 posts)hellofromreddit
(1,182 posts)The author's pitch for Clinton reads more like a pitch for fear.
"Never try, never fail."
It's not very inspirational.
bigtree
(86,016 posts)mac56
(17,575 posts)as someone eloquently put it elsewhere -
"eavesdropping on a sorority house."