What the Press Owes Bernie Sanders (don't shoot the messenger)

[antigop]

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-05-27/what-the-press-owes-bernie-sanders

Nope. No self-described socialist has come anywhere close to a Democratic nomination. Nor has the Democratic Party chosen anyone who doesn't consider himself a member of the Democratic Party in the first place.

We don’t have to wait until the primaries and caucuses to know Sanders has no realistic path to the nomination. It isn’t up for grabs the way it is on the Republican side. No candidate has ever put together as impressive a lineup of endorsements from party leaders this early as Hillary Clinton has this year, and such endorsements (unlike early polling results) are excellent predictors of nomination results.

This doesn't mean reporters will present a full picture of the nomination contest if they ignore Sanders and other long shots. As a protest candidate, Sanders has solid credentials for being taken seriously. He's a sitting U.S. senator. He's articulating his differences with his party (and the Republicans) on many domestic and international issues. And he's doing enough of what real candidates do (as opposed to, say, former Virginia Senator Jim Webb, who hasn't done much campaigning at all after announcing his Democratic candidacy some time ago).

Sanders is part of the story of the campaign, in the same way Ron Paul was a serious part of the 2012 and 2008 fights for the Republican nomination despite having no realistic chance of winning. Protest candidates who have real constituencies are part of how parties define themselves during nomination contests.

It's wrong to say the press should cover every candidate equally. It has constraints, both in resources (covering candidates is expensive!) and reader interest. Horse-race coverage, after all, is driven in large part by readers who want to know which candidate is going to win or at least who has a good shot at winning. Given how many candidates have a realistic chance on the Republican side and the presence of a few protest candidates in that race as well (Rick Santorum, a bit of both, is declaring his bid today), journalists have complex calculations to make.

Wow. So much wrong with this...where to begin?

[HassleCat]

1. "Hope I don't break my arm...

...while patting myself on the back." The mainstream media is going to tell itself it's doing exactly what it should be doing, telling the people what they need to know, applying the filter of conventional wisdom.

[cascadiance]

2. Bloomberg also heavily tried to pump money in to Oregon's "Top 2 primary" measure in 2014

That lost worst than any of the measures did, including that which was going to give undocumented people driver's licenses, despite a more right wing Oregonian newspaper endorsement of yes on this measure before the election. So I take articles from his web site with a grain of salt.

Top 2 primary was about in effect moving the big decisions of winnowing out other voices in more of a general election type of primary season with lower numbers of voters that are more white and wealthy then too, and having the general election be more of an afterthought two way vote (and in some cases no election at all if in some elections someone gets over 50% of votes in the lesser number of votes cast during primary season). And in effect taking away for political parties to have their own primaries then to decide who should represent them, rather than having a free for all decided by corporate media article "endorsements" of candidates that the media people (and their corporate owners) want to win early on.

That sentiment seems to be reflected here, as if to say that Hillary is characterized as having it locked up now before the primary with all of these "endorsements" that you can bet are being paid for to happen now by the 1% so that he can achieve his influence the way he would have liked to have happen in top two primaries around the country.

We will have a real battle in the coming months combating these messages coming from corporate controlled media trying to say the same thing so that they can control who gets heard and who people think will win.

They want a president that has been "marketed", not one that who has been *voted on* after primaries that involve candidates speaking with voters.

[TBF]

3. Bernie is a threat to the status quo -

and I think we as supporters will have to have very thick skin. This type of nonsense will come from every direction if he starts doing well in primary contests. Hillary is safe - the establishment likes her. Bernie talks about income inequality - that makes people in high places nervous.