The Dream Ticket vs. The Media: Republicans be Very Very Afraid

mculator

(658 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Mar-06-08 01:15 PM
Original message

The Dream Ticket vs. The Media: Republicans be Very Very Afraid

Edited on Thu Mar-06-08 02:09 PM by mculator

So after Super Tuesday, the media was constantly pecking at Hillary about how Barack won more states, his winning streak, etc. He was winning consistently. After the writers' strike, however, comedians begin making fun of the media's negative coverage of the Hillary camp. The media starts pecking at Obama. Only 2 or 3 days of this happen, but is it coincidence that Hillary then wins? I know all things equal, Democrats are split about half and half right now, and that seems to be the norm in politics this century: close races everywhere. Given this, don't you think the media should show some class and cover some real issues, like the ongoing Pakistani turmoil, the energy crisis, etc? Every time I turn on the news it is a pundit whom I already know have some bias when covering one candidate or another. Today "Rolling Stone" endorses Obama, and for some reason that is supposed to constitute a consensus of important political minds whose courageous vote should somehow be newsworthy. I agree that it is certainly a monumental decision, since they have never done such a thing in a primary, but obviously they must be doing so to somehow influence myself and other readers of their now-biased publication.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-Oprah Winfrey. I know she's probably as good of a political endorsement as any superdelegate, right? Maybe she can't vote, but are votes what count? The same goes for Jack Nicholson and Clinton. Why should I care what his opinion is? The real question is, why is this newsworthy and Pakistan isn't? I'm inclined to believe it's advertising dollars, and so I'm also inclined to believe that the coverage be negative toward Obama soon if he (as he seems to be) remains the front runner. I predict that directly before Mississippi they will say it does not matter, and will give him negative press right before Pennsylvania and the like in an attempt to keep the race as close and interesting as possible. Polls that give even info will be displayed, polls that are leaning will be made to disappear.

I think that we should find a way to convince our candidates to run together. I propose that our votes continue on as planned in these primaries with more positive campaigning based around the issues, not based around defeating the other candidate. I think whoever wins the most votes, since everyone agrees that that will not be enough to "clinch" the nomination, should be the Presidential candidate and second place should be the VP candidate. We should do this with the idea of keeping the White House until 2024. When either candidate repairs the 7 years of republican damage, there will be a great argument for continuing the Democratic leadership.

We will continue our process, but it won't break up the party at ALL. It will IMPROVE our chances. There will be a practically GUARANTEED Democratic White House.

Most importantly, we will have taken the power away from the Main Stream Media by coming to a peaceful agreement.

Edit for typo.