2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumbernie on abc this week this morning!
trump on fox news sunday bwahahahahaha
full lineup
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory/guest-lineups-sunday-news-shows-34552502
riversedge
(70,329 posts)keeping troops in Afgan for a while?
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)so he might
riversedge
(70,329 posts)boston bean
(36,223 posts)restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)which about making $$
and lets face it....tv is about ratings and Bernie will bring in some ratings. Plus he is a top contender for the dem NOM so why not?
boston bean
(36,223 posts)give him lots of air time.
I just can't seem to square all these conspiracies with reality.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)is not necessarily an indicator of support, especially if they try to sandbag him which they often do. Fortunately, they are never successful.
boston bean
(36,223 posts)Also, they try to sand bag every politician, what makes Bernie special that he doesn't get the same treatment?
Armstead
(47,803 posts)The mainstream media (especially broadcast) is interested in shallow reality-TV drama and horse-race sport style to bring in ratings to bring in money.
That approach is bad for every candidate. They ignored Bernie until he became too big to ignore. They treat Hillary like shit, while trumpeting that she is the assumed winner. They looked to instantly anoint a "winner" in the debate, rather than actually aalys=zing what they actually said on different issues.
How about not treating all criticism about the coverage (and lack of coverage) Sanders has received as "conspiracy theories'?
boston bean
(36,223 posts)Others, not so much.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)But when Bernie supporters do it you call it conspiracy theories and see it as demands that he be treated special.
boston bean
(36,223 posts)When the fact is that the media really can't stand her and use all right wing conspiracies to bring her down.
See, the difference here is Hillary supporters think the media is biased to republicans. Bernie supporters think the media is biased for Hillary (democrats). Which the latter is kooky if I do say so myself.
Skwmom
(12,685 posts)And anyone with the ability to reason can see that. Failing to acknowledge what has become glaringly obvious is far from objective.
A corporate controlled media is every bit as bad for democracy as Citizens United.
To those of you who want to use conspiracy as a disparaging word - I'd suggest you spend a little more time reading about historical events (e.g., the Eugenics Movement).
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)but they didn't start covering him or treating his candidacy seriously until he led Hillary in some of the polls. as for sandbagging him, or sandbagging all candidates, you obviously didn't see the interview between Mitchell and Hillary. I'm surprised she didn't set out pillows for her to sit on and make coffee.