Would Bush be in the White House if we had the blogosphere in 2000?

[Ignacio Upton]

This is the only negative thread in a sea of positive ones, but I've been meaning to post it for these past couple of days

Bush has only gotten as far as he's had because of an unchecked media. I think that this was particularly true from 1999-2001, before during and after his campaign (although not as bad as post-9/11, this period was almost as disgusting to say the least). From the moment he announced the corporate syncophants pumped him up and helped trash anyone who didn't roll over and concede (despite McCain getting good press after te New Hampshire Primary, the media said almost nothing of Bush's dirty tactic's, and months later they accused Gore of being too negative on Bush during his campaign, conveniently ignoring Bush's horrible attacks on McCain.) The only time in 2000 that they grilled him at all was when his DUI arrest was released, but other than that they carried his water. They made the public think that he "won" the debates against Gore, even though polls showed that people thought Gore won. My question is, what if DU and Kos had been around in this election? Would the Liberal Blogosphere been able to stop Bush and stop the M$M from aiding him? In 2004 the Blogosphere was able to prevent the media from spinning the debates in Bush's favor through a massive emailing and polling blitz and we managed to raise large sums of money.

[seeker4ever]

1. Yes... they cheat and cheat BIG!

[Wapsie B]

2. That's a good point.

He wouldn't have had the cakewalk he did have that's for sure. There would've been someone scrutinizing his actions since the corporate media refused to do it.

Welcome to DU!

[Ignacio Upton]

3. Thanks

:)

On the other hand I think the blogosphere would have been divided between Gore and Nader. Still, I bet that we could have sunk Bush regardless.

[jdlh8894]

4. Cakewalk?

The * was appointed ( given GRACE ) by the SCOTUS!

[Wapsie B]

5. My point was that the media didn't do it's job

and scrutinize *'s life. It's as if nothing existed before Poppy got him the guv's job in Austin.

[sandnsea]

6. The internet was pro-Nader

That was the contribution in 2000, Gore is just like Bush and vote swapping. There wasn't any calling out of the media and its favoritism to Bush, the lefties on the internet fueled it in fact. That's what I remember.

[WildEyedLiberal]

7. Yes, because Nader turnout would've been higher

The "left-wing blogosphere" is not now and never was friendly to Democrats. Many pretend to love Al Gore now, but let's not forget what a villain he was among lefties in 2000. The "liberal blogosphere" would've been screaming the whole time about how there's not a dime's worth of difference between Gore and Bush, and as they say, the rest is history.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[WildEyedLiberal]

9. I really don't think DU is any more influential than FR

The vast majority of the population considers both sites to be fringe extremists. And honestly, given the amount of Nader/ANSWER/Dem-bashing apologetics I see here, they're probably right.