- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 10, 2008 at 4:48 pm #615556
JoBParticipantbeachdrivegirl..
i just followed your link.. and i looked at the political ads the same way i looked at the story… to see what MSNBCs unacknowledged prejudice was…
i am not sure what it is that you read in that story that you wanted to share. I am sure you saw something i didn’t.
MSNBC’s cartoon covereage focused on his popularity… and not generally in a good way. He is shown standing next to an iconic president.. as a very small man who can’t even lift one of the many swords he will have to wield. he is portrayed as an adv man… with a big smile and no real message.
The good points of the article focused again on the sensation he is causing and his popularity… while going on to point out that he was not an effective senator… not diligent.. not trustworthy in compromises.. spent as little time in Washington as he could manage… was more interested in his long term political career than he was in legislating… and didn’t dream further than governor of Illinois (after he had done his time in the senate) until Ted Kennedy inspired him to use his popularity to unseat Hillary…
If you get past the hype to the content, it’s not a terribly flattering portrait of a man running for president.
If you look at this type of reporting critically, it will give you a better idea of what the campaign strategy will be this fall if he is our nominee…
BTW… in the political cartoons for Obama… the same sexist attack against Hillary is represented more than serious attacks on Obama.
If MSNBC has a political bias… it is easy to see who they think is the real threat..
March 10, 2008 at 5:01 pm #615557
JoBParticipantIn all fairness.. i followed up with a look at the MSNBC political cartoons on McCain…
imagine my doing something like that..
he is shown as the little guy fighting the system.. even when the system is the excesses of his own party. In one cartoon, he stands on a cliff while the far right hovers …about to fall into the abyss…. in the air bemoaning his candidacy… (strong image).
he is occasionally shown as a guy who will embrace anything to get elected.. but mostly he is the little guy slowly winning the grudging respect of his party.
Maybe MSNBC has a bias?
Maybe MSNBC is not a great place for democrats to go to get info on their candidates?
Maybe it’s time to stop letting the republicans tell us what to think about our own candidates?
food for thought.
i have spent enough time on MSNBC’s website for the day… maybe for the year… i need to go soak my head again and think about important things..
like the press release for our big get together next weekend:))) that just brings a smile to my face….
March 10, 2008 at 9:00 pm #615558
JoBParticipantlife is wonderful.. i turn on my tv to veg out and rest my poor head after thinking too much and find this film “Orwell rolls in his grave on LINK TV. (It is also playing this weekend…)
you can get this film on video.. i don’t know if it is available at the library…
I was pretty impressed with what i saw… and am taping it this weekend.
check it out for yourself.
it goes right to the heart of media bias.
March 11, 2008 at 1:42 am #615559
TheVelvetBulldogMemberHi House – I hope you do take the opportunity to stop by the Food Bank fundraising event on Sunday. I’ve been thinking about some of your comments, and I think that coming by would be helpful to anyone who has particular stereotypes about the folks who benefit from the Food Bank. House, I encourage you to at least visit the Food Bank’s website: westseattlefoodbank.org and look at some of the statistics regarding their clients – children, elderly and disabled people. You’ll note on the list the absence of “ne’er-do-well, beer-swillin’ welfare slackers.” I also encourage you to read some of the client stories in their archived newsletters to get a good sense of who is using the food bank and it’s related services. Above all House, I ask you divorce the notion of “Pride” from the reality of “Need.” There is NO SHAME in finding avenues to feed yourself and your family. Without proper nutrition it’s excessively difficult to be an active worker/student/member of society. People like you and me get our three squares a day and are able to contribute socially. Some folks have to decide which meal(s) to give up to make ends meet. Tell me House, which meal(s) would you give up each day? And no fair saying “dessert.”
.
Hope to see you Sunday House.
March 11, 2008 at 2:44 am #615560
JoBParticipantvelvet bulldog.. very well said…
March 11, 2008 at 2:47 am #615561
GenHillOneParticipantTVB – might be on the site, but I think some good stats about cash and what WSFB can do with it would be great to have on hand next Sunday. $25 handbags don’t sound like a ton of money but they add up and I’ve always been impressed by how food banks can stretch a dollar buying in bulk. Ten bags at $25 each ($250) could feed _________ ? I’m guessing it’s like a small village… seriously, it’s amazing the what they can accomplish. I think it would be inspiring!
March 11, 2008 at 2:48 am #615562
TheVelvetBulldogMemberGHO – Thanks to JoB’s fabulous organizing skills, there will be info there!
March 11, 2008 at 2:51 am #615563
GenHillOneParticipantOh hell, TVB, since you brought up their web page, I think I just confused you with someone else who volunteers at WSFB (Jen?). So to make up for it, I’m off to the web site myself to see if I can find the info myself – so SORRY!
March 11, 2008 at 2:52 am #615564
GenHillOneParticipantOf course there will, cross-posts flying :) I’ll still go enlighten myself.
March 11, 2008 at 3:35 am #615565
JoBParticipantthis sunday that $250..
and i would be happy with $250..
will turn into $500 with the magic of matching funds..
and i don’t know what they can do with that.. but i know what i could:)
bring your checkbooks… you just never know what you will find…
and as charlabob put it, the more beer you drink , the better they will all look:)
It’s a very good cause and especially needed right now…
March 18, 2008 at 6:09 pm #615566
JoBParticipantok.. i was looking for something else..
i picked up the Newsweek that is full of articles “examining” the Hillary campaign… from a “perspective of gender”… and buried in one of those article (i think) were stats on Hillary’s press coverage… and i wanted to find those again… but found this instead ;->
yup.. it’s biased… but this area of the website does actually use Obama’s quoted words and not just campaign rhetoric….
it’s worth following the link.. no matter which side you are on..
as for Hillary’s favorable press ratings.. (where she was actually mentioned in the press favorably) we will have to do with my memory.. which tells me that they were somewhere in the low 30s before texas and edged into the low 40s right after texas…
unfavorable mentions were in the high 60s before texas.. in the low 60s after.
I am sure someone will come along to supply the actual stats for me:) i like that about this forum:)
check out the link and then think about what the actual press reporting has been and ask yourself…
is there a breakdown between perception and reality here?
could be ;->
March 19, 2008 at 12:26 am #615567
JanSParticipanta breakdown between perception and reality…hmmm…isn’t that the norm with politics?
March 19, 2008 at 5:01 pm #615568
JoBParticipantFlag officers form the US Military explain why Hillary would be a the best choice for commander in chief…
recent videos.. on the right.. part way down the page…
And yes.. this is a web site for Hillary.. so i went to you tube and placed flag officers in the search field.
I came up with 10 videos by flag officers promoting Hillary and one for Obama.
Not a Hillary supporter? Perhaps you should watch this one…
March 20, 2008 at 6:44 pm #615569
walfredoMemberJoB- to support Hillary Clinton at this point in the campaign is the equivalent of supporting John McCain. I as a democrat, agree that if she somehow wins 62% of the remaining delegates in the remaining 10 contests (kind of like Obama did in 13 straight contests) and actually wins the election, I would support her for presidency, and I think most Obama supporters would to.
If that is what you are rooting for, then more power to you. If you are rooting for Hillary to position herself as the best choice to STEAL the election from Obama after he wins it (which any Clinton surrogate or supporter will rightfully admit is the only possible way she can win the nomination) then you are a John McCain supporter. It is that simple. If Clinton gets this nomination, but does not receive the most delegates through elections she we lose over half of the Obama supporters, including myself. I could never support someone who believes in stealing elections, and changing the rules as we go, and the end always justifies the means. That was our leader the last 7 years, and that is what McSame will be if Hillary is allowed to continue destroying the democratic party.
March 20, 2008 at 7:09 pm #615570
JoBParticipantwalfredo..
how can i be a McCain supporter when i will support any candidate my party nominates?
and notice i said any candidate my party nominates.
Yes there are primary elections.. but unless there is a clear winner with an overwhelming number of delegates.. which neither candidate is likely to get… the candidate is chosen at the convention.
Stealing the nomination would imply that Clinton could still somehow get the nomination even if Obama had the overwhelming number of delegates he needed to walk into the convention the party nominee.
If he does, it will all be over. If he doesn’t, it’s a convention.
I can’t reiterate enough.. this is a party system. As citizens, we get to advise our party… and they do have rules about how they follow that advice… which gives us input… but ultimately the party convention decides who the candidate is.
The only real election is in the fall.. and even then, the popular vote is secondary to the electoral college.
I realize that how this all really works may be new to some Obama supporters… and i suppose it can and possibly should be changed at some time in the future..
but when Obama decided to run as the party candidate… he got the party backing if he wins in exchange for the party system.
he ran as the party delegate for the Senate and in exchange he got Hillary fund raising and campaigning for him.
If he wins the nomination, he will get Hillary and her supporters fund raising and campaigning for him…
But if he doesn’t, it is his … and his supporters … responsibility to fund raise and campaign for her…
That’s how it works…
and by the way, is the agreement he entered into when he chose to seek the nomination for the democratic party candidacy.
If you want to change the system.. get involved with the party. They would love to have your input… of course, they will expect you to work for the privilege :)
Those who say they will not support the party nominee.. whoever that nominee is.. are the ones who are actually McCain supporters…
and rhetoric won’t change that.
Your anybody but Hillary option … if she gets the nomination… is McCain. It’s that simple…
it is amazing to me how many people who obviously don’t understand the way the party functions and have never been involved in party politics are now suddenly screaming for Hillary to withdraw from the race for the good of the party…
and i don’t mean that as a slam to you Walfredo.. just as a generalized comment.
It might surprise those new to politics that there is a lot more to the democratic party than Obama… and perhaps learning a bit more now would be good.
March 20, 2008 at 7:36 pm #615571
walfredoMemberJoB-
I again would challenge you to provide one plausible way- just one, where Hillary Clinton can win this election. The 62% threshhold included Florida and Michigan. If they don’t revote- SHE NEEDS TO WIN THE NEXT 10 CONTESTS IN A ROW BY OVER 68%-32% TO TIE! That means, the superdelegates could then pick evenly. If she gets less then 68% from here on out, she will not win the election. Obviously, and without question, the only possible, conceivable way for her to win is if a large majority of the superdelegates choose her over the elected candidate.
That is the truth. I hate to break it to you. http://www.obamaiswinning.com
If things play out as predicted and Obama ends with a lead of 110-135 pledged delegates, she would need over 70% of the remaining superdelegates to STEAL this election.
Please, for the love of your party you claim to embrace, explain to me how on earth that candidate, who won that way, would have any chance in a general election. Remember that this highway robbery under the best of circumstances for Clinton would happen in mid to late August! That is almost 6 more months of bitter divisive politics, capped off by your candidate STEALING THE ELECTION by lobbying the support of a ruling class!
Please, please, please explain to me how on earth this helps the democratic party. And please, please again make sure to note that I am being nieve…
March 20, 2008 at 8:52 pm #615572
JoBParticipantWalfredo..
you can spout numbers all you want to.
neither candidate is likely to walk into the convention with an overwhelming mandate.
if one does, that one will be the candidate.
if not, the process of the Democratic convention kicks in and they can choose anyone they like to be our candidate.
Maybe they will decide that this campaign has been too devisive and choose a new candidate… not likely, but entirely possible.
i am not sure who you think superdelegates are.. but they are not all the “ruling class”.. they are simply party members.
Obama chose to run as a candidate for the democratic party… to become the top dog in that “ruling class”.
as for the illusion that this is some kind of class war… the poor vote (and most powerless among us) as often for Clinton as for Obama… and more so in some demographics…
Obamas support is strongest among young middle class voters who have never participated in the elective system before.
so, to use your own rhetoric..
why would it not be hiway robbery for Obama to walk out of that convention the winner? He certainly doesn’t represent me.. or about half of those who call themselves democrats… if the comments of you and other Obama supporters are accurate in that they will vote for McCain if he isn’t the candidate.. then a good number of Obama supporters don’t support the democratic party or it’s ideals at all.
and Clinton’s early lead aside.. Obama hasn’t had the overwhelming success you mention since super tuesday.. and he wasn’t able to cinch the nomination as he had hoped even then.
to use your venacular.. “for the love of the party you claim to embrace”…
and by the way that and other phrases of yours are a clear insult to someone who has defended democratic ideals and democratic candidates for about 40 years now…and actually has committed … without knowing who the candidate will be… to work for them in the upcoming election…
any democrat who does not vote for the party’s nominee.. no matter who that nominee is… is throwing away the ideals of the candidate they claim to support.
I can’t be any more clear than that.
March 20, 2008 at 9:12 pm #615573
walfredoMemberJoB that is great question. Why would it not be highway robbery for Obama to walk off as the winner? He doesn’t represent you?
The answer- is because he would have WON. That should be much easier to comprehend, they did this election thing, and divided up delegates, and at the end of the day about 7% more of them chose Obama then did Clinton. And so, because of that he won. That would make sense??????? That would have logic??????????????? That would not be divisive??????????????
The other option is, at the end of the day and all the elections about 7% more of the delegates supported Obama, but the party elite chose Clinton by over 70%, so she is the nominee…
One is stealing an election. One is winning an election. They are two very different things…
I love the comment about- sorry but I don’t care about numbers! That is typical Hillary… It’s not if you win more states, more delegates, no the only important factor, is of course who won the states that I won! For they are the only ones who count.
March 20, 2008 at 9:14 pm #615574
beachdrivegirlParticipantMarch 20, 2008 at 9:23 pm #615575
beachdrivegirlParticipant“Obamas support is strongest among young middle class voters who have never participated in the elective system before.” So because younger individuals want to get rid of the Clinton/Bush Dynasty our votes shouldnt count. And talking about ideals of the Democratic Party are you sure that Hillary is ready to follow them? She sure hasnt shown me that. From the Democratic Party page-“and to make certain our nation’s leaders serve the people’s interests, not special interests.”–hmm seems like Obama is the peoples interest and Hillary sure hasnt been following that. “Our goal is to restore accountability, honesty and openness at all levels of government.” -Again from Demcratic Party home page. Accoutnability, honesty, and openness-she sure hasnt followed through in those categories… “The Democratic Party is committed to real ethics reform and meaningful campaign finance reform that protects our rights and ensures that elected officials act ethically — not just within the law, but within the spirit of the law.”–isnt that just the opposite of what she is doing with Michigan/Florida…
March 20, 2008 at 9:24 pm #615576
JoBParticipantWalfredo…
the selection of a nominee from a political party is not an election.. not in the terms you have described election.
You can’t win this election by simply getting 51%.
you can quote any numbers you choose to.. and dismissing them not adding up to the number that it requires to enter the convention as the party delegate.. as pure hillary not caring about numbers… is just rhetoric.
by the way.. just for the record.. i never said i don’t care about numbers. i just pointed out that the numbers you are quoting are only misdirection.
there is only one number that counts and neither candidate has achieved it.
This is a contest. There are clear rules for this contest.
Obama knew those rules when he chose to enter this contest.
I am sorry you don’t like the this game.. but this is the game Obama chose to play.
and please stop insulting me.
March 20, 2008 at 9:29 pm #615577
JoBParticipantbeachdrivegirl…
out of respect for you,, i followed your link and only got a pro-obama website.
i respect you a lot and will try to get back there tonight and slog through the website… but i am not willing to do any more right now.
Here i am back in the position of endlessly defending Hillary against things that most of the time are no more than a misunderstanding of the process… and i am a touch weary.
i would so much rather spend my time telling you why it might actually be in your best interests to support her… or at the least to stop trashing her and concentrate on supporting your candidate…
and maybe your link does that beachdrivegirl…
but failing that i really am going to go spend some time outside.
March 20, 2008 at 9:36 pm #615578
walfredoMemberWhat is she scheming? A neutral plan to have a superdelegate convention in June was endorsed by Obama today. The plan would be to have a vote after all of the states weigh in, and would provide a clear end date to the race. It would end any doomsday talk off a brokered convention, and a unwinnable fight against McSame. It would give the winning candidate an extra 2 months to rally the party prior to the convention, and the ability to use the convention to rally the party together and heal the wounds of this close primary.
In short- it would give the winning nominee a much better opportunity to win the presidency! It would be a great thing for the party, whoever the candidate…
And of course, Hillary’s campaign is against, because her only hope is to create chaos, to avoid an end date, and to continue to endorse John McCain. Hope for what? I’m not sure either… maybe a VP slot on McCain’s ticket, a 2012 run for president? I’ll give you a hint, it has nothing to do with getting a democrat elected this November…
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/03/obama-expresses.html
March 20, 2008 at 9:49 pm #615579
walfredoMemberJoB- I don’t think its insulting to ask questions. I guess you are being very honest by saying that you support the superdelegate system, and feel we should be ruled by a ruling elite, and also agreeing that is the only hope of Hillary Clinton to get to the general election.
I personally am offended by that suggestion, and believe you would be if the tables were reversed.
Your logic that Obama doesn’t have the needed delegates either is very flawed. He will need roughly 35% of the remaining superdelegates to support him to hit the magic number. To suggest that him needing to have the support of 35% of those superdelegates after winning the most pledged delegates is an any way comparable to needing over 70% of the superdelegates to support you in order to overturn the person who won the most delegates is beyond crazy reasoning. That is not a personal attack, it is pointing out an undefendable position.
Hillary supporters need to realize that after Ohio, Texas, Missippi all came to pass and she failed to net 1 delegate, that there candidate has lost. There continued support is McCain support. She needs to win 68% of the remaining delegates. She will be fortunate to win 50%, no one will even argue that…
Rush Limbaugh is supporting her candidacy for a reason.
March 20, 2008 at 10:13 pm #615580
JoBParticipantWalfredo
At which point did i day that i support the super delgate system?
i said it is the system by which obama entered the contest to become the democratic candidate. I explained why that system is in place..
i believe that is informing.. not defending.
and if and when Obama has the number of delegates he needs to actually secure the convention.. he will be the candidate.
there is no need for some june deadline for superdelegates. All he has to do is convince enough of them to actually commit to his candidacy to give him the magic number.
if they aren’t ready to commit.. it will probably be because democrats haven’t committed yet.
At what point did i say i thought we should be ruled by an elite of any kind?
Have you actually read anything i have had to say?
Apparently not. you have scanned it for rebuttal points.. but that’s about all.
and when i didn’t supply them.. you brought up your own and Rush Limbaugh… who is not really supporting Hillary’s candidacy… but making trouble as usual.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.