I am not quite ready to consider defeat. If I’m going to have to get used to that phrase, November 9th will be quite soon enough.
Oh please. I voted for Bernie, but this is the most asinine non-story of all time. It’s the War on Christmas of the election season. The networks are all based and broadcast out of EST locations. Their politics teams will pull all-nighters for a general election, but 2:30am sunday morning called election for a bit under 10% of delegates needed to nominate got a crawl at the bottom of the screen as you would expect. The folks coming in the next morning made it the biggest story everywhere.
Hey at least I’m glad to know that I’m “generally” less racist than a Trump supporter, thats a massive weight off my back .
Also known as the “Wicked Witch of the East Coast”.
The consolation prize is that the presidential aircraft unofficial callsign will be “Broomstick One”.
There are tons of legitimate policy reasons to criticize Clinton, but no, skip all that and go straight to misogyny.
Well, if she’d stay where she belongs instead of trying to take a man’s job… /s
In this case it is misoClintony.
yet you ignore her record, her politics, her questionable ethics, and go straight for her gender?
If you insist on seeing it that way…
Yeah, steady on… The Wicked Witch of the West was a baddie because of her gender?
I think that calling her a witch is rather gendered. [quote=“Kimmo, post:30, topic:75908”]
The Wicked Witch of the West was a baddie because of her gender?
No, it’s more that witches, evil witches, are depicted as old wrinkled hags, old women, exclusively. Perhaps @shaddack isn’t aware of that relationship, but it’s there.
There are plenty of things to hone in on about Clinton that avoids gendered stereotypes that reinforces the notion that women who seek/hold political power are dangerous and inhuman. I’d love for people who oppose her nomination not play in such tropes.
I think I’m liking you more with each comment that I read.
You are not wrong!
Being seriously what?
It’s definitely not the case that all stories about the corporate media ignoring/downplaying/being biased against Sanders are false. We’re all going to have partisan goggles to some degree (to my eyes Clinton supporters seem the most deluded/dishonest after Trump supporters), but there’s more going on than just that. The changes that NYT made to an article they published about Sanders are damning:
There are other examples that are not hard to find if you care to look, like CNN & friends choosing to not air the March 15 Sanders speech, but instead broadcasting an empty podium at a Trump rally, among other examples.
Your own comparison of Trump and Sanders supporters is itself a nice example of deeply misleading spin that the corporate media has been steadily pushing:
Treating other human beings seriously - as human beings. When people say something to you, you don’t immediately dismiss it out of hand, because of their gender. Try not using stereotypes to talk about women for one. It doesn’t help, especially considering Clinton has been relying in part on a sense of feminism to rally some supporters.
I honestly think that’s not asking very much out of you.
From the article http://billmoyers.com/story/the-escalating-media-assault-on-bernie-sanders/ :
I love this.
Sure, but now that I’ve told you…
It’s not ‘too much’ to ask of anyone; most people are just too mentally lazy or emotionally complacent to afford others the same degree of regard that they would want for themselves.
I’m up in Canada, and I don’t even have basic cable, so the whole ‘mainstream/corporate media’ is lost on me, and so is the minutiae of the US election, I absorb bits and pieces that I find online (a combination of predominantly BB, Quartz, CBC, The Tyee, and random linked sites - I don’t claim they are exemplary impartial sources, just giving context), which have been predominantly 'wow Trump is kinda crazy / how much crazier can Trump be / whelp, he can be even worse" stories. There’s some bits about Clinton, and some bits about Bernie.
My comments have been really only based on what BB posts. Which has been:
- this story (Bernie getting 30-odd delegates (i vaguelly recall) doesn’t seem that newsworthy to me.),
- the Alaskan guy outraged that a superdelegate gets their own vote (I’m a millennial on the internet and I have no idea how my electoral system works),
- and one a while back about Washington Post’s 16 Bernie bashing stories in 16 hours (where there was no context at all - how many Hillary stories in the same timeframe etc.).
Based on those three stories I made my comparison to Trump & GG.I have no doubt that Bernie is getting the short end of the stick when it comes to the mainstream media, but is anyone really surprised by that? They have never given much time to the fringe candidates. Our Green Party has to fight tooth and nail to get any coverage and even be invited to debates. It’s just the way things roll. Bringing up the CNN Jesus ‘documentary’ is just click-baiting, unless the idea is that CNN purposefully scheduled the ‘documentary’ to air a few week ahead anticipating a Bernie sweep.
Has CNN interrupted programming to bring any election updates so far this cycle? Be it Bernie, Hillary, Trump, Cruz, or any other person that was stuffed into the Rep’s clown car of candidates? I have no idea, but I kinda doubt it.