For those who thought Obama would be better because the press liked him better than Hillary...

[McCamy Taylor]

Way back in the primaries I wrote a series of journals about Edwards, Clinton and Obama and the way that the MSM had attacked each of them unfairly. We know that the press torpedoed Edwards' campaign. The damage done to Clinton's was of a different type. At first they hurt, then they actually helped her by creating the impression of a good old boy bias against her. The MSM seemed to be more or less favorably inclined towards Obama, which lead many at DU to conclude that he would be a "safer" candidate in the GE, because the press would favor him over the Republican (or at least not be biased against him), and he would not mobilize the Republican base to vote against him, because McCain would never dare to criticize a Black candidate.

I hope that the people who were guilty of this naive thinking have learned their lesson. Hell, Karl Rove attacked John McCain, a decorated former POW member of his own party in 2000. If he would do that, he would attack anyone over anything.

One thing I noticed when I wrote those journals. A lot of people read the ones about how badly the press was beating up on Hillary, I guess because it confirmed what they wanted to hear.

And very few people read or commented upon the ones about how the press was trashing Obama, especially in news aimed at conservative and independent voters, presumably, because they wanted to believe that he was going to waltz into the White House with the cheers of the press corp. They did not want to read about how people in the mainstream and at Fox had been portraying him as corrupt and inexperienced all throughout 2007.

Maybe now that we are in the general election it would be a good time to read what I compiled and see what kind of damage the Obama camp is having to undo.

"The News Media v. Obama III: John McCain Is a Two Faced Lying Dirty Trickster"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5277320

And ,just for comparison

“The Press v. Hillary Clinton Pt 3: Leaping Lesbians” here http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4977117&mesg_id=4977117

The moral is clear. The MSM does not like any Democrat.

[dkf]

1. I figured that out back in the Reverend Wright days.

[FrenchieCat]

2. The Obama campaign understands this......

clearly: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/31/opinion/31rich.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=opinion

[chascarrillo]

3. Primaries are over. Drop it.

[McCamy Taylor]

6. Those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it.

[BlooInBloo]

8. Those who do nothing but talk about history do nothing.

[chascarrillo]

9. And those who keep on dredging up the primaries here are trolls.

[pnwmom]

15. NO, in this case it's someone begging us to learn SOMETHING from history.

And not keep repeating our mistakes.

We have to fight like hell and not take anything for granted. An Obama win -- any Democratic win -- is at best a 50/50 proposition at this point. We can't trust the election system any more than last time -- all we can hope for is that we have overwhelming numbers come out to vote, and that won't be easy.

[BlooInBloo]

4. Dude - your candidate lost. Get over it.

[McCamy Taylor]

7. My candidate is Obama. He better not lose.

[progressivebydesign]

11. Oh snap! (great retort!) n/t :)

[DarthDem]

5. They Get It.

Really. They do.

[progressivebydesign]

10. Thank you for this. Several studies showed Hillary got the worst of it.

And Obama continually garnered positive coverage by a wide margin. AP was the most obvious of the organizations during the primary to give him a majority of fawning coverage. Remember when the youtube of the female journalists giggling and admiring his butt in jeans?

I tried to warn people that this was a trick that the media has done with Gore, and with Kerry, but people insisted that the media loved Obama because.. well.. they saw the light and just loved him (even though the likes of Nedra Pickler and Beth Fouhy were falling all over him.) I tried to tell everyone that the media would turn on him, on cue, when the primary was over. Suddenly Obama's favorite journalists are nowhere to be seen... Pickler, Fouhy, Babbington, Espo, Fournier, where have they gone??? Suddenly the AP stories are negative and nasty about him.

I honestly think that many of the people on these sites have not been through the 2000 or 2004 elections, or else they have short memories, because the playbook is always the same. Prop up one Democratic candidate thru the primaries, then tear him down in the GE. Like clockwork. And I also find it interesting that people here and other sites had no issue at all with the sexist name calling and hatred toward Hillary, but are now whining because people here aren't being nice to McCranky's new sidekick, Palin.

People live in their own reality...

[Egnever]

12. Where in the world did you ever get the idea people supported him because the press would treat him

better?

[sandnsea]

13. Nobody ever thought that except Hillary supporters

who insisted he was getting preferential treatment. It was never true and Obama's supporters always knew that certain portions of the media will attack any Democrat.

But it's also true that Hillary had her media stooges, and never had any problem getting on television whenever she wanted to. All 5 Sunday morning shows is quite a coup.

Now can we let the primaries be over.

[Awsi Dooger]

16. That reads like a parody

Believe anything you want, but to assert Obama wasn't getting preferential treatment is world class denial, like a race horse stuck in blinders being led to the gate. I remember a poll result that Dan Abrams highlighted, something like 86% of media coverage of Obama as favorable compared to 52% for Hillary.

[sandnsea]

18. Yeah I remember that too

It's because Hillary's campaign was being negative. Obviously there's going to be more reports about negativity when you're reporting on a negative campaign. I'm sure there will be more reports about negativity with John McCain's campaign too. He's being more negative.

[LongDistanceRunner]

14. Obama will be President despite attempts at distraction

[CreekDog]

17. I always assumed that the moment one of them was dispatched in the primaries

the press would go after the other one left standing.

no doubt in my mind on that.

your point regarding McCain and Rove is well taken.

also, my feeling was that whether they could find dirt on the candidates or not, they would just make shit up anyway.

when i was in Arizona in 1994, a good guy, populist Democrat, Eddie Basha ran for governor against a real slime, Fife Symington. Basha had opened up many full service supermarket stores on Navajo Nation lands when nobody else had. the election was close, Fife was corrupt, Eddie didn't really fight back. and then, they spread rumors that Eddie was gay.

they spread rumors that Ann Richards was gay
they spread rumors that Janet Napolitano was gay.
they spread rumors that Tom Foley was gay.

and, no, they don't say, "not that there's anything wrong with that" :eyes:

this is what we are fighting against. so my opinion was learn what you can and based on that, vote for who you think is best and not out of fear. even if they are squeaky clean, the Republicans will make up stuff anyway.