The whole summer the media has cherrypicked polls and exaggerated emailgate all to give this picture that she's in big trouble and this is going to be another 2008; which is absurd. In 2008 she was up against another candidate roughly as good and qualified as she was so it was hard to choose.
Bernie is no President Obama, not on his best day. He's also not a Democrat so I don't like him using our party that he has razzed all these years.
"This has been a summer in which the headlines from most major news outlets have either generically claimed that Hillary Clinton was struggling in the polls, or have focused in solely on outlier polls from individual states to try to paint a picture that she’s losing to Bernie Sanders or Joe Biden or both. This has all played out even as national polls have said all along that she’s leading the primary by twenty-plus points and is in no danger. But after a week in which news outlets finally began acknlowledging that Clinton’s “email scandal” was never a scandal, now they appear also ready to admit that she’s still winning."
http://www.dailynewsbin.com/news/washington-post-finally-admits-hillary-clinton-is-winning-by-a-mile-3/22402/
When you look at the actual WP piece in question you see it was written by Eugene Robinson who is one of the very best-if only the average WP writer was at his level. Robinson violates another sacred cow by admitting the obvious: Biden doesn't sound like a man ready to run.
"The first major domino to fall yesterday was the Washington Post, which ran the headline “Hillary Clinton is still the candidate to beat.” This was no mere opinion piece, but rather a fact based argument that Clinton is still holding historically large primary leads. The Post acknowledges that not only is she winning by an average of twenty-plus points, the so-called erosion in her popularity is largely due to voter confusion over whether Vice President Joe Biden may enter the race. The article even goes on to point out the obvious, which is that based on Biden’s recent media appearances he very much sounds like someone who isn’t anywhere close to running."
And I should further add, the window in terms of time for him to run is if not slammed shot, is quickly closing. I mean this is mid September. If he announced today-which he's nowhere near doing it would be a real uphill fight.
I actually think the speech he is giving on Thursday after tonights GOP debate-Rachel Maddow made it sound like he might very well announce he's running-might finally be him pulling the plug on this fiasco.
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2015/09/killing-hillary-with-biden-i-love-vp.html
This would be a shot in Hillary''s arm as Biden speculative run is what's been eating into her poll numbers more than Bernie taking all her supporters:
"The article takes things further, pointing out that if and when Biden makes it official that he’s not running, Hillary Clinton’s primary lead should climb back from the low twenties to the high twenties, or roughly where it was back when the summer began. Finally, the article goes on to conclude what most knowledgeable observers have known from the start: the only person who can defeat Hillary in this election is Hillary herself. Read the full Washington Post article here."
However, when looking at Robinson's piece you see that as the price of his lack of Beltway orthodoxy-in actually saying something optimistic about the Hillary campaign-he still has to whack her for something.
"She keeps putting obstacles in her own path, but Hillary Clinton remains the odds-on favorite to become our next president."
"The headlines screaming “Clinton’s Support Erodes” are true, but only in a relative sense. In the contest for the Democratic nomination, according to the polls, she has slid all the way from “prohibitive favorite” to something like “strong favorite” — not bad, given the way she has hobbled herself with the e-mail scandal."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/hillary-clinton-is-still-the-candidate-to-beat/2015/09/14/b381ccc0-5b14-11e5-8e9e-dce8a2a2a679_story.html?postshare=9251442320222962
So he still has to pretned this is some Immaculate Response she should have given to the phony emails scandal. Or his Beltway buddies would not be very happy.
Part of the issue with the Clintons as Paul Waldman has said is the media resents the fact that no matter how hard they whack them it doesn't hurt them politically.
This, of course, is a clear rebuke of the media's power to decide who lives and who dies.
"And while I don’t have any direct evidence for this, I suspect that to at least some degree reporters share conservatives’ frustration that all the Clinton scandals and mini-scandals and pseudo-scandals haven’t taken them down. In a way it’s an affront to the power of the press. When we splash headline after headline about allegations of misbehavior across our papers, when we devote hour after hour on television to the fact that “questions are being raised,” well that’s supposed to make an impact. It’s supposed to drive the politician in question to the depths of ignominy. It’s not supposed to leave them in exactly the same position as they were when it started."
"Unlike the last media revolution, the current one may work in Hillary Clinton’s favor. She seems to understand that a snarky article in the New York Times is not going to hurt her, not when she’s already so well-known and there are so many other sources of information competing for voters’ attention. She can reach those voters through local news, through YouTube, through Twitter, through Facebook, and through a hundred other channels. And without a strong primary challenge, she has all the time she wants. If she doesn’t feel like taking reporters’ questions for a couple of weeks at a stretch, she doesn’t have to."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2015/05/22/the-political-media-dont-like-hillary-clinton-but-what-if-she-doesnt-need-them/
What he doesn't mention is the liberal blogosphere. Now we Hillary supporters can correct the record ourselves. Which is David Brock's point.
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2015/09/david-brock-talks-democrats-back-off.html
Here is his book
Bernie is no President Obama, not on his best day. He's also not a Democrat so I don't like him using our party that he has razzed all these years.
"This has been a summer in which the headlines from most major news outlets have either generically claimed that Hillary Clinton was struggling in the polls, or have focused in solely on outlier polls from individual states to try to paint a picture that she’s losing to Bernie Sanders or Joe Biden or both. This has all played out even as national polls have said all along that she’s leading the primary by twenty-plus points and is in no danger. But after a week in which news outlets finally began acknlowledging that Clinton’s “email scandal” was never a scandal, now they appear also ready to admit that she’s still winning."
http://www.dailynewsbin.com/news/washington-post-finally-admits-hillary-clinton-is-winning-by-a-mile-3/22402/
When you look at the actual WP piece in question you see it was written by Eugene Robinson who is one of the very best-if only the average WP writer was at his level. Robinson violates another sacred cow by admitting the obvious: Biden doesn't sound like a man ready to run.
"The first major domino to fall yesterday was the Washington Post, which ran the headline “Hillary Clinton is still the candidate to beat.” This was no mere opinion piece, but rather a fact based argument that Clinton is still holding historically large primary leads. The Post acknowledges that not only is she winning by an average of twenty-plus points, the so-called erosion in her popularity is largely due to voter confusion over whether Vice President Joe Biden may enter the race. The article even goes on to point out the obvious, which is that based on Biden’s recent media appearances he very much sounds like someone who isn’t anywhere close to running."
And I should further add, the window in terms of time for him to run is if not slammed shot, is quickly closing. I mean this is mid September. If he announced today-which he's nowhere near doing it would be a real uphill fight.
I actually think the speech he is giving on Thursday after tonights GOP debate-Rachel Maddow made it sound like he might very well announce he's running-might finally be him pulling the plug on this fiasco.
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2015/09/killing-hillary-with-biden-i-love-vp.html
This would be a shot in Hillary''s arm as Biden speculative run is what's been eating into her poll numbers more than Bernie taking all her supporters:
"The article takes things further, pointing out that if and when Biden makes it official that he’s not running, Hillary Clinton’s primary lead should climb back from the low twenties to the high twenties, or roughly where it was back when the summer began. Finally, the article goes on to conclude what most knowledgeable observers have known from the start: the only person who can defeat Hillary in this election is Hillary herself. Read the full Washington Post article here."
However, when looking at Robinson's piece you see that as the price of his lack of Beltway orthodoxy-in actually saying something optimistic about the Hillary campaign-he still has to whack her for something.
"She keeps putting obstacles in her own path, but Hillary Clinton remains the odds-on favorite to become our next president."
"The headlines screaming “Clinton’s Support Erodes” are true, but only in a relative sense. In the contest for the Democratic nomination, according to the polls, she has slid all the way from “prohibitive favorite” to something like “strong favorite” — not bad, given the way she has hobbled herself with the e-mail scandal."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/hillary-clinton-is-still-the-candidate-to-beat/2015/09/14/b381ccc0-5b14-11e5-8e9e-dce8a2a2a679_story.html?postshare=9251442320222962
So he still has to pretned this is some Immaculate Response she should have given to the phony emails scandal. Or his Beltway buddies would not be very happy.
Part of the issue with the Clintons as Paul Waldman has said is the media resents the fact that no matter how hard they whack them it doesn't hurt them politically.
This, of course, is a clear rebuke of the media's power to decide who lives and who dies.
"And while I don’t have any direct evidence for this, I suspect that to at least some degree reporters share conservatives’ frustration that all the Clinton scandals and mini-scandals and pseudo-scandals haven’t taken them down. In a way it’s an affront to the power of the press. When we splash headline after headline about allegations of misbehavior across our papers, when we devote hour after hour on television to the fact that “questions are being raised,” well that’s supposed to make an impact. It’s supposed to drive the politician in question to the depths of ignominy. It’s not supposed to leave them in exactly the same position as they were when it started."
"Unlike the last media revolution, the current one may work in Hillary Clinton’s favor. She seems to understand that a snarky article in the New York Times is not going to hurt her, not when she’s already so well-known and there are so many other sources of information competing for voters’ attention. She can reach those voters through local news, through YouTube, through Twitter, through Facebook, and through a hundred other channels. And without a strong primary challenge, she has all the time she wants. If she doesn’t feel like taking reporters’ questions for a couple of weeks at a stretch, she doesn’t have to."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2015/05/22/the-political-media-dont-like-hillary-clinton-but-what-if-she-doesnt-need-them/
What he doesn't mention is the liberal blogosphere. Now we Hillary supporters can correct the record ourselves. Which is David Brock's point.
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2015/09/david-brock-talks-democrats-back-off.html
Here is his book
http://www.amazon.com/Killing-Messenger-Right-Wing-Hillary-Government/dp/1455533769/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1441941325&sr=8-1&keywords=david+brock
It's up to us Hillary supporters to correct the record. If we don't want to see Hillary hit like her and Bill were in the 90s it's up to us to correct the record.
Hillary Supporters of the World Unite!
No comments:
Post a Comment