The Associated Pimps are SO anti-Dean that it's not even funny.

[stickdog]

Check out the language in this hack job:

http://www.boston.com/dailynews/047/region/Dean_pushes_ahead_on_president:.shtml

Howard Dean on Monday pushed his beleaguered Democratic presidential bid across Wisconsin amid the departure of his national chairman, a fresh sign of internal upheaval on the eve of a critical primary with 72 national convention delegates at stake.

Dean said little substantively about the circumstances surrounding Steve Grossman's exit. But the former Vermont governor's national campaign manager, Roy Neel, said he thought Grossman would soon join the campaign of front-runner John Kerry. ''He's made clear his on-the-record comments to the press he has another agenda at work now,'' Neel said.

For whatever the reason, the shake up obscured Dean's message on the eve of the primary in a state with a tradition of supporting liberals, mavericks and Washington outsiders a state he said he badly needed to bounce back from a long string of losses.

And the signs on the campaign trail huddled meetings involving aides, the absence of a formal schedule beyond Tuesday and dozens of empty chairs at events such as one in Racine, Wis., on Saturday indicate the end is near for a candidacy that just six weeks ago was first in polls, fund raising and momentum. Still, he had a packed rally at the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse on Monday and he planned rallies later in the day in Wausau and Madison.

[Dookus]

1. wow

it's not like Dean's campaign is beleaguered, or that firing the Chairman is any sign of internal upheaval or that there really WERE any empty chairs in Racine.

Dean's the frontrunner, leading handily and anything that intimates otherwise is an outrageous lie!

It's hard to write about a collapsing campaign using only glowing terms.

[stickdog]

13. Dean is now polling SECOND in Wisconsin. Why not wait for the results

before writing his obit, unless you are trying to affect them -- like Grossman obviously was?

[AP]

16. Two months ago he was in first:

The poll of 402 likely Democratic primary voters broke down this way: Dean, 33 percent; Joseph Lieberman, 12 percent; Wesley Clark 11 percent; Dick Gephardt, 9 percent; John Kerry, 6 percent; John Edwards, 2 percent; Dennis Kucinich, 3 percent; Carol Moseley Braun, 1 percent; Al Sharpton, 0 percent. Twenty-two percent were undecided.

http://www.wispolitics.com/index.iml?Article=6682

[AP]

18. Last Thursday, he was in second:

Badger Poll published Thursday in The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and The Capital Times in Madison, Wis., shows what an uphill battle Dean faces in the state. Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry led Dean, 45%-12%. Former Army general Wesley Clark had 11%. Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina had 6%. The survey of 175 likely Democratic voters had a margin of error of +/-4 percentage points.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-02-05-dean-wisconsin_x.htm

[stickdog]

23. You know as well as I do that you can't compare these polls.

If I WERE to, I'd note that Dean and Edwards are closing fast on Kerry.

[AP]

42. When you say "he's now second" there's an implicit comparison.

"Now" implies relativity.

What's your comparison? One poll had him with 11 and Edwards with 16 (with a MOE of 4). Every other poll had Dean in second of first. I

[Nicholas_J]

84. The only poll in which Dean places second is Zogby

And a distant second at that. One day to go, the polls have all been strikingly accurate in their results. Tomorrow Kerry wins his fifteenth win. At that point the lock on the nominations is almost assured.

And thats with dean spending every day of the last month in Wiscinsin. A pathetic showing for that amount of effort.

[stickdog]

22. Two months and a harshly negative press, a kamikaze Gephardt and a

kamikaze Lieberman ago.

[AP]

111. Where's the evidence of harsh negativity prior to 11pm on Jan 19?

That's the part that doesn't make sense.

Even on that night, NPR wouldn't cut from Harkin warming up the audience for Dean to hear Edwards's speach.

They were still focusing totally on Dean. It wasn't even until he said YEARGH that they went negative.

[stickdog]

115. On page 11. (nt)

[AP]

120. Wrong. p11: Dean's coverage still more pos than neg prior to Jan 19.

And the third GREEN (more pos) band straddles the 19th, so it might have been even higher than the second if the cut off were the 19th, since the 20th and 21st were huge negative press days for Dean (BECAUSE HE LOST AND ACTED CRAZY).

[Dookus]

24. OK..

he's second in Wisconsin. So what? The guy in the lead has just racked up 14 wins out of 16 contests. Dean has zero. Will a distant second place in Wisconsin change that dynamic? I don't see how.

The former frontrunner who spent 40 million dollars hasn't won a primary, and it looks like he may not win any. His second and third place finishes are largely FAR behind the winner. His campaign has collapsed, and now it's all over but the shouting.

[stickdog]

32. Once again, why are you and the AP so eager to write his obituary in

advance?

Why can't the voters of America have their chance to decide on this?

Dean is in second place in the delegate count, he's polling well in Wisconsin, and there are still 35 states to go -- including all the biggest states except Michigan.

[Dookus]

34. If you expect

a reporter to cover a flagging campaign, yet not ever give any hint that it is indeed a flagging campaign, I think your expectations are unreasonable.

Nothing in that story is untrue. The reporter is reporting exactly what he or she sees.

Would you impose some sort of requirement on the media that they can't say anything less than positive about any candidate until the last primary is over?

[stickdog]

38. If one can't see the bias literally DRIPPING from the article, it's simply

because one shares it.

[Dookus]

43. and I can just as easily say

that if one doesn't see the truth literally DRIPPING from the article, it's simply because one is blind.

Neither your response nor mine is terribly helpful. You call it bias, I call it honesty. I have no reason to believe that the Dean campaign is doing better than that reporter implies.

[stickdog]

52. The problem is the reporter isn't IMPLYING anything. He's clearly

editorializing against Dean and painting the bleakest picture of hopelessness imaginable.

The language is over-the-top from the first sentence to the last.

[Dookus]

55. and I think

that it is your bias that causes you to believe that. Nothing you highlighted struck me as particularly unusual. The reporter is covering what he or she sees. I don't see editorializing.

You seem to expect a glowing, rosy report about an imploding campaign, but that's not going to happen no matter WHO they're writing about.

[stickdog]

65. Where's the "Edwards can't win" article? Where's the Kucinich &

Sharpton should quit articles?

And I'm sure that Dean said that "he badly needed to bounce back from a long string of losses" as suggested by the writer, right?

There are 35 states to go and Dean's currently in second place. Dean has far more contributing supporters than Edwards, and with a strong showing in Wisconsin, they will be reengerized.

So where are the "Edwards is running out of money" articles? In fact, where is a single remotely positive article about Dean or comparatively negative article about Edwards?

[The Magistrate]

66. None Of These Figures, Mr. Dog

Were ever widely considered to have much chance of victory, therefore that they have no chance now is hardly news....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[stickdog]

71. How long will the "Dean has no chance" meme pass for cutting edge,

highly newsworthy reporting? We are going on a month now ...

And where is a single remotely positive article about Dean or comparatively negative article about Edwards?

[janx]

95. Tabloid journalism is cheap. A lot of it (judging from your example)

is only a matter of some easy verbs and adjectives. People can crank this stuff out in very little time.

[Zinnola]

89. As a Dean supporter

it is comments like yours that do not lend me to want to vote for Kerry. Thank goodness, there are other Kerry supporters on this board who are gracious and want Dean supporters. Your arrogance is appalling.

[lancdem]

2. Looks pretty accurate to me

Denial ain't just a river in Egypt. :(

[stickdog]

15. And Kerry was dead in the water in early January. (nt)

[AP]

3. It's hard to blow sunshine up asses with Dean campaign.

Kerry and Dean are the only two who have had to dump campaign managers, and Kerry's coverage at the time was way worse.

[lancdem]

4. I forgot about that

But, yeah, when Kerry shook up his staff it was seen as a sign of a flagging campaign - which, of course, it was at that point.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

5. I Remember That, They Were Saying It Was the Final Nail in Kerry's Coffin

Man. What an incredible closer Kerry is.

DTH

[stickdog]

17. Dean didn't "dump" or "oust" his campaign manager. He tried to

relieve him of some of the duties he was obviously failing at.

[AP]

19. He dumped Grossman.

And whatever he did to Trippi made Trippi cry.

[stickdog]

25. Grossman started working for Kerry two days ago.

That much is patently obvious!

[AP]

31. And it seems that you expect the media to cover this as good news

for Dean? Or do you expect them to cover it not at all?

[stickdog]

36. I expect them to cover it IN CONTEXT like they cover EVERY OTHER

CANDIDATE.

The guy stabbed Dean in the back to ingratiate himself with Kerry. The articel should MAKE IT PERFECTLY CLEAR that HE WAS NOT SPEAKING FOR DEAN OR HIS CAMPAIGN!

[AP]

40. Do you remember how negative the coverage was of Kerry's

campaign when his team was cycled?

Why do you expect Dean to get better coverage now? Because he did for a year prior to YEARGH? Sorry, the media doesn't want ANY Democrat to win in November. They're not dumping on him now because he can beat Bush. They're dumping on him now because he can't win the primaries.

[stickdog]

48. But I thought they always dumped on the front-runner.

Funny how the explanation changes every week but the dumping on Dean part always remains constant, isn't it?

[AP]

50. Define 'they'? Media or other candidates? Media always tries to get Repubs

elected. The leader gets attacked by other candidates (except for Edwards).

[stickdog]

54. You are avoiding the point. You used to say, "the media always dumps

on the front-runner." Now you say, "the media's dumping on him because he's losing."

Which is it?

[AP]

96. When did I say "the media always dumps on frontrunner"? I've always said

the media wants the republicans to win, and they do what needs to be done to achieve that.

[The Magistrate]

6. An Accurate Report, Mr. Dog, Nothing More And Nothing Less

Gov. Dean is a spent force. Tomorrow will be a rout, and he is not likely to last the week after it....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[stickdog]

26. He won't last the week?

Is he coming down with anthrax or will his plane crash?

[The Magistrate]

33. What An Imagination You Have, Sir!

He will very likely fold his candidacy within a week of the trouncing he will receive tomorrow in Wisconsin. It will be impossible to retain or recruit competent professional staff, or to raise sufficient monies to continue.

"Can;t nobody here play this game?"

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[madfloridian]

44. You are most likely right, Sir.

I believe most of us have the message now. The party has spoken, the media have spoken, and 25% of the Democratic voters in the primaries have spoken.

There is just a little problem, sir. People tend to get a wee bit testy when their votes are not allowed to happen.

So, Kerry will get the nomination. Dean, being the good guy he is, will endorse him, and the rest of us will do what our consciences tell us. NOT what the party tells us. What we think is right.

And America will go along in the same way to the same ends unfortunately. And there will be no change. And the people do not get to decide. Oh, sorry, 25% of the Democratics who wanted to vote, who were excited for the first time in years....got to vote when it counted.

Proceed.

Sir!

[Dookus]

47. well

if he really wants, he can stay for all the primaries. But he still won't win one.

Do you really believe that Kerry's support is just a statistical fluke in the states that have already held primaries, and that Dean has some hidden majority support in those states that haven't?

Is there any polling showing Dean doing appreciably better in states that haven't yet had their primaries than he's done to date?

[madfloridian]

51. No, I believe Kerry is the nominee.

I will not go into what else I believe, as it does not matter. Does it? Kerry is the nominee. For sure.

[The Magistrate]

60. The Only Real Question Is This, Ma'am

In November, will you vote to evict the criminals of the '00 Coup from office? That can be done only by voting for the nominee of the Democratic Party; nothing else will serve to do it. Persons who will not do this, for whatever reason, will be giving material assistance to the worst elements of reaction in our polity, and must know they are doing so.

Gov. Dean has recently campaigned by trotting out lines of attack that are little more than trial balloons for Republican attacks in the fall: one of them, a distorted smear concerning "special interest money", which has no real basis in fact, has already featured in a Republican advertising campaign. This sort of thing can only harm the prospects for defeating the enemy in the fall, and if this is the way Gov. Dean now sees fit to press his personal advantage, then the sooner he is out of the race the better it will be for all, both the Party, and the people of our country.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[madfloridian]

70. Sir, I believe that you gave it a name.

You called it treason in another post. I do not share that opinion.

I call what he is saying, speaking the truth. That is what our country is about, the freedom to speak out.

Now, are you pronouncing it time for all the rest to leave the race as well?

Sir!

[The Magistrate]

73. And Stand By It, Ma'am

Gov. Dean is not speaking truth in his recent attack lines; rather, he is lying like a newspaper.

No other candidate in the contest, certainly not Sen. Edwards or Rep. Kucinich, has behaved in the manner Gov. Dean has displayed.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[madfloridian]

86. That is your right to believe as you wish. Sir.

I think you have a right to believe as you do. I think it is rather sad that you feel only Kerry has a right to be in the race now.

I also would take offense if I were a Kucinich or Edwards supporter, in that you dismiss them so readily as not a challenge at all.
In that way you complimented Dean a little, since you do consider him a threat.

I think your words are empty ones, lacking depth and sincerity. Mind you, that is not an attack on you, just on your words. I prefer simple words, clear ones, in a manner that is down to earth.

I won't intrude on your words again, except perhaps to read or ponder....and then move on to some more pleasant.

Sir!

[The Magistrate]

100. Recent Statements By Gov. Dean, Ma'am

May have some detrimental effect on the Party's efforts in the general election to defeat the criminals of the '00 Coup. That is all that interests me in this question; the personalities are otherwise interchangeable. Any candidate who acts in a way that seems likely to harm the Party's chances for victory ought to be condemned; any candidate who acts in a way that does not seem likely to harm the Party's chances for victory ought to be commended. If Gov. Dean sought to extend his life as a candidate by attacking the enemy, and not fellow Democrats, his candidacy would not seem objectionable to me in the slightest.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[stickdog]

63. If Dean is going to receive a trouncing tomorrow, why don't you and the AP

just let the Wisconsin voters do the talking for you?

I'll tell you what I think. I think Dean was making real headway in Wisconsin. And that's why his traitorous campaign manager decided the time was right to stab him in the back. And that's why every news media outlet is so busily writing Dean's obituary BEFORE THE FACT. The idea that these ubiquitous highly negative "Dean's toast" stories are not AFFECTING tomorrow's outcome is ludicrous!

What's your explanation for Grossman's actions? Specifically, why did he call the NY Times behind Dean's back to tell them Dean was going to quit and support Kerry two days BEFORE the Wisconsin primary?

[The Magistrate]

64. Rats Leave Sinking Ships, Sir

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[stickdog]

67. True, but even rats don't poke giant holes in the ships they abandon.

The man could have left the campaign quietly.

Or he could have left the campaign AFTER the Wisconsin vote.

Grossman didn't merely jump off a sinking ship. He actively worked to do his damnedest to sink the Dean's ship -- with the full and eager cooperation of the media!

[DoveTurnedHawk]

68. Grossman Is a Disloyal Shit

I haven't seen many people here disagree with that sentiment.

DTH

[The Magistrate]

69. Rats Will Gnaw Through Steel To Daylight As The Water Closes In, Sir

The man works in this trade, and wants to continue doing so.

It seems like he will....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[stickdog]

74. Come on. He's obviously been drawing two salaries for

some time now!

[damnraddem]

7. I'm afraid it doesn't much matter now.

It worked.

[AP]

9. I have yet to see evidence that the media took Dean down.

Even that study everyone is showing doesn't say that pre jan 18 Dean's coverage was predominantly negative. In fact, it was predominantly positive. After he lost Iowa, the press rallied around Kerry and turned its back on its old favorite.

The media didn't take Dean down.

It's way more accurate to say that it tried its damndest to get him elected. However, they only promoted him because he was a flawed candidate. When they saw that all their hard work failed, they moved on to plan B to help Bush win in November.

[stickdog]

20. What do you mean EVEN THAT STUDY?

The study was perfectly clear. Dean got the worst media coverage BY FAR in January while Kerry and Edwards got the best media coverage BY FAR.

Do you dispute the study for some reason?

While you are at it, why don't you collect all the positive Dean stories the Associated Press has written since Gore endorsed Dean for me.

Have fun looking, because apart from the AP's neutral mention of the Harkin & Moseley-Braun endorsements, you won't find a single positive article.

[AP]

28. That study shows he was getting pos cov'g prior to caucus,

and harsh coverage afterwards.

Isn't the argument that the media CAUSED his downfall?

Also, it says that Kerry didn't get pos cov'g until after the caucus.

Isn't the argument that the pos coverage of Kerry caused him to win?

The study supports neither of those conclusions.

As with the article you cited, the media coverage has REFLECTED the tanking of Dean's candidacy.

You know my theory: they carried him this far, when they saw he couldn't win, they dumped him. They only promoted him because he was flawed and couldn't have beaten Bush. So when the media stopped promoting him, all the flaws became too obvious.

[The Magistrate]

35. That Is Unkind, My Friend

You are confusing the matter with facts at variance with ideological desire....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[stickdog]

45. Bullshit

http://www.mediatenor.com/US-Election_040209_monthly.pdf

Look at page 11.

At his HIGHEST level in January (the first week), Dean was getting just 13% more positive than negative coverage. The second week -- before Iowa -- it dropped to just 6% more positive than negative. The next week it was just 3% more positive than negative, and since then it's been sharply negative.

Now look at page 8 and compare this to Kerry whose positive coverage outweighed his negative coverage by over 25% and Edwards whose positive coverage outweighed his negative coverage by over 35%!

[Dookus]

49. hrmm...

So Dean was getting positive coverage, on the whole, leading up to the caucus. It just wasn't positive ENOUGH to suit you.

Interesting.

[stickdog]

77. Pure sophistry. Dean was getting hammered with negative coverage

BEFORE Iowa, while Kerry was being cheered for his "you saved my life in Nam" campaign stunt and Edwards was getting glowing praise as the "new fresh face."

And now that Kerry is the front-runner, the anti-Dean/pro-Kerry/Edwards media bias has unrelentingly continued, despite widespread assurances that the media's constant tearing down of Dean was simply some function of him being the front-runner.

[AP]

107. You have any proof?

[stickdog]

116. Yes. Every study shows the same thing.

But seriously, find me a single positive major media (press service, WP, NY Times) article about Dean from 2004.

I haven't encountered one. It's like trying to find a gumdrop in a shitstack.

[AP]

53. It was still postive. You're complaining that he wasn't getting enough

positive coverage.

That same study says the media ignored Kerry and Edwards until after Iowa.

Page 8 covers the entire month of January. Of course they got good press AFTER they did well in IA.

What do you want? Dean got great coverage for months without winnning anything.

[stickdog]

80. Just look at the report at tell me which candidates even ARGUABLY

got better media coverage in January than Kerry & Edwards and which candidate EVEN arguably got worse media coverage than Dean and Kucinich.

Then just look at pages 9, 10 & 11. Could the media's power to affect public opinion simply by the mix of positive and negative stories they choose be more clear?

[Dookus]

85. You're operating on the assumption

that the media somehow "owe" the same type of coverage to all candidates. That is nonsense.

If Dean had won Iowa and New Hampshire, he would've gotten a lot of positive coverage. He did not.

Dean's campaign collapsed. It was the biggest political story of the winter, and the media would've been remiss in NOT reporting it.

No, the media are not obliged to give the same percentage of positive coverage to each candidate. Their job is to report what's going on, and they have done so.

When a campaign collapses as spectacularly as Dean's, only an unreasonable person would expect the news to cover it positively. And when a campaign succeeds as well as Kerry's, it's not reasonable to expect the press to cover it negatively.

[stickdog]

91. Wrong. I'm presenting indisputable facts from which I'm drawing

modest and inescapable conclusions. I highly recommend it.

[Dookus]

94. You have not done any such thing

Imploding campaigns get bad coverage. Soaring campaigns get good coverage. It doesn't require a media conspiracy for that to be so.

[AP]

97. The report itself says that numbers for the 4 week period were ....

... dramatically altered by changes at the end of the month. In fact, isn't one of the pages titled "Kerry and Dean swap places as media favorite in January"?

You're entire argument is that this happened before the 18th. The Report doesn't say when it happened precisely, but it seems to be the conclusion of the report that it happened AFTER Jan 19th. And there's nothing in the report saying it happened before the 18th.

[w4rma]

109. Calling for the break up of media oligopolies will turn the oligopolies

against you.

[AP]

112. They never thought he was going to win. That's why they were promoting him

Whatever he said about them, it wasn't going to change the fact that they were going to make him the center of attention, and claim everything revolved around him until it was clear that there was no chance he'd get the nomination.

And where's the evidence of negativity prior to Jan 19th?

[jansu]

61. The Center for Public Intergrity

reported that Dean received only 49% favorable reporting throughout 2003 and all other Democratic Candidates received favorable reporting of 78% during the same time frame. Where do you get the facts that the media carried him this far? After he stated to Chris Matthews that he would change the media ownership, he was totally tanked by the media.
http://makethemaccountable.com/podvin/media/040201_TheScream.htm

[AP]

108. The coverage he got propelled him to the top of the field and made him 40m

in donations.

And the article you cited says nothing about the Center for Public Integrity.

[stickdog]

21. What do you mean "EVEN THAT STUDY"?

Here is THAT study:

http://www.mediatenor.com/US-Election_040209_monthly.pdf

The study is perfectly clear. Dean got the worst media coverage BY FAR in January while Kerry and Edwards got the best media coverage BY FAR.

Do you dispute the study for some reason?

While you are at it, why don't you collect all the positive Dean stories the Associated Press has written since Gore endorsed Dean for me?

Have fun looking, because apart from the AP's backhanded mention of the Harkin & Moseley-Braun endorsements, you won't find a single positive article.

[BruinAlum]

8. It's accurate

All the words you have in bold are apporopriate and accurately reported objective assessments of reality.

You expectations are unrealistic if you were expecting a sugar-coated version of the facts.

[stickdog]

27. My EXPECTATIONS are that the media should let the fucking voters of

Wisconsin decide Dean's fate instead of desperately trying to decide it for them in advance!

[AP]

29. If they had, Dean never would have been in the lead.

It was the media coverage that got him to be the odds on favorite prior to IA.

[The Magistrate]

41. A Good Point, Sir

Gov. Dean was in the lead right up until rank and file members of the Democratic Party actually cast votes. It would seem to me the voters have decided his fate, and that rather handily....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[stickdog]

82. Dean was never in the lead vs. the DLC.

His campaign's biggest mistake was getting conned by the media on that point.

[AP]

98. I didn't know they were polling Dean vs DLC. Dean was ahead in every other

poll though. Thanks to the media coverage.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

10. I just read that his WI campaign manager is 24 Years old.

WTF?

[Justitia]

11. I'm backing you up on this one.

Uh, I thought the AP was supposed to be an independent, neutral, wire svc.

I'm no media novice, and their editorializing this past year has been egregious. I've called their nat'l desk to complain of it (not just Dean stories either), although they seemed relatively unconcerned. I don't remember it being this way a yr ago.

[revcarol]

12. Some of it might be objective, like the empty chairs,

but most of it was just CODE WORDS for "He's a loser."

However much I am used to this as a tactic, being a supporter of Dennis, this is just disgusting. SOOOOO slanted.

[eileen_d]

14. I agree that this is a hack job

Yes, Dean's status in the race is not what it used to be, but the tone in this piece is over the top. And Grossman is a jerk.

[mzmolly]

30. As Dean said, news has become entertainment. It's ALL tabloid these days.

:puke:

[Dookus]

37. what makes the story quoted

"tabloid"?

Is it untrue? Is it salacious? Does it rely on innuendo and rumor?

Why isn't it possible that the article accurately reflects what the reporter is seeing?

Do YOU believe Dean's campaign is going well?

[mzmolly]

56. Salacious...yes.

Regarding his campaign *going well* it's going better than Edwards.

[Dookus]

58. not really

Edwards has more 1st and second place finishes than Dean. Edwards has WON more delegates than Dean. Edwards has not fallen from frontrunner status.

In those senses, Dean's campaign is not going as well as Edwards'.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

59. It's Also a Story ARC That Is Important

Dean went from first to also-ran status. That looks like a plummet, an implosion.

Edwards came in second in Iowa from out of nowhere, and has since that time done reasonably well. While that may not be a "meteoric" rise, it certainly is at least an improvement followed by a plateau, without yet being a fall.

DTH

[mzmolly]

72. Again, you cant choose which part of our Democracy you like best.

Edwards also benefits from very positive news coverage.

[Dookus]

81. I'm not sure what you mean...

but I agree that ANY candidate benefits from positive press coverage.

The question is whether all candidates DESERVE positive press coverage? Is there some inherent fairness doctrine that says all candidates must receive equal amounts of positive and negative coverage, regardless of the facts of their campaigns?

Dean went from clear front-runner to 2nd runner-up in a matter of weeks, after spending 2 years and 40 million dollars campaigning. That is newsworthy, and I wouldn't expect most of the news generated by that fact to be terribly positive.

Why shouldn't the media report when a campaign is in trouble? Personally, I prefer the truth to a polite fiction when it comes to news coverage.

[stickdog]

87. No. But the relationship is complex and fraught with positive feedback.

To deny that is to deny the reality of the frighteningly unchecked power of US corporate media.

Consider the media's role in selling the US public the bullshit war on Iraq as another illustrative example.

[AP]

39. But it's a playing field they're all playing on.

The outrageously extensive Dean coverage for a year prior to the first primary might have prevented every candidate other than the rich, 4 term senator whom everyon already knew from getting enough coverage to establish their own identities.

It's cuts both ways.

Dean isn't in a unique position.

The media doesn't want just Dean not to win. The media wants only Bush to win.

[mzmolly]

57. The media is making a Bush win more likely...

That's part of the plan.

[Dookus]

62. a new poll

shows Kerry beating Bush handily, and Bush beating Dean even more handily.

How is nominating the guy most likely to beat Bush a sign that the media are trying to make a Bush win more likely?

personally, if I were a nefarious media baron who wanted to ensure Bush's victory, AND I had the power to do something about it, Sharpton would've done a helluva lot better. Dean would've, too.

[mzmolly]

75. A *new* poll after the media take down...

Dean has been damaged, that's a given. Kerry has been annointed, that's a fact.

After all *Kerry looks so Presidential* ~ Joe Scarborough

[Dookus]

83. the "media takedown"

may well be the media simply reporting that after 2 years and 40 million dollars, voters are rejecting Dean in favor of Kerry.

That is newsworthy, and it doesn't require a belief in a media conspiracy to understand why they covered it. It was the biggest political story of the winter.

Further, I believe the primary and caucus voters of Iowa and New Hampshire to be rather intelligent, dedicated and knowledgeable. Blaming the media for them deciding to support someone other than your guy is facile and insulting. Few voters in the country pay as much attention to the race as the Iowa and New Hampshire primary voters. They are not sheep.

[AP]

99. Which is why they propped up Dean until he proved that with

a lot of propping up, he still couldn't win IA.

[BuelahWitch]

119. What station were you watching?

Too bad my cable company didn't carry it :eyes:

[AP]

121. NPR loved Dean up to an including the Iowa caucuses.

And don't get confused. If, before Jan 19th, a station called Dean anti war, or talked about the other candidates attacking him, that was GOOD coverage for Dean, not bad coverage.

Treating him like the anti-Bush, and making him the center of attention was helpful to him.

[lyonn]

113. the media and the DLC has spoken

Now, who will win the GE? The media (Bush) or the DLC. Remember 2002 when the pink tutu crowd didn't do anything to impove our position in Congress and we lost seats. Then Dean speaks out clearly and says what most Dems are thinking and gets the ball rolling, then the DLC crowd takes it from there. It's as if they think they are the only ones clever enough to capture the White House from Bush. I only hope they are right. The media will hammer Kerry at a steady pace as soon as he is the nominee.

[AP]

122. Yeah. DLC'er Al Gore endorsed Dean. DLC'er Bradley endorsed Dean.

The DLC spoke. And then CBC spoke. And the unions spoke. And then Iowa voters spoke. And then Dean shouted...

[jansu]

46. Why are they so anti Dean?

I started this in another thread, but this is a great article that helps to answer the question you asked. Here's just the beginning of it with the link to read the rest.

"On December 1, 2003, Howard Dean was ahead by twenty points in the polls when he appeared on Hardball with Chris Matthews and said, “We're going to break up the giant media enterprises.” This pronouncement went far beyond the governor’s previous public musingsabout possibly re-regulating the communications industry, and amounted to a declaration of war on the corporations that administer the flow of information in the United States.

It was an extraordinarily noble and dangerous thing to do: when he advocated a truly free press, Dr. Dean was provoking the corrupt media conglomerates that control what most Americans see and hear and read, and thereby control what most Americans think.

The media giants quickly responded by crushing his high-flying campaign with the greatest of ease. This time, they didn’t even have to invent a scandal in order to achieve the desired result; merely by chanting the word “unelectable” at maximum volume, the mainstream media maneuvered Democratic voters into switching their support to someone who poses no threat to the status quo.

http://makethemaccountable.com/podvin/media/040201_TheScream.htm

[NV1962]

76. Welcome to the club of non-frontrunner pariahs...

AP is a dreadful case - and especially troubling, considering its "authority" (should be pronounced as market share) and resulting effect on editorial policy.

Stickdog, here's the heartfelt sympathies of a Clarkista who gnashed many a molar and muttered plenty of unsavory epithets over the same thing.

[bowens43]

78. I don't see anything anti-Dean in this article.

It looks accurate. His campaign is beleaguered, there is fresh internal upheaval, Dean did say very little about Grossman's exit, the attention was drawn away from his message, he does need a win in Wisconsin to remain viable. The writing i n the wall.

[arwalden]

79. What Would YOU Have Written Instead? Let's See Your Version...

please. Just so that I can have something to compare it to.

Thanks,
Allen

[DoveTurnedHawk]

88. Ooh Ooh! Let Me Try!

Howard Dean on Monday pushed his voter-challenged Democratic presidential bid across Wisconsin amid the news that his national chairman was taking a much-needed vacation in Boston, Massachusetts after putting in so much hard work on Dean's groundbreaking, revolutionary campaign. "Steve Grossman is my friend, and applaud him for making the effort to give himself a little healthy 'me time.'"

Bizarrely, Grossman's vacation appeared to attract an unseemly amount of attention from a press corps apparently desperate to waylay the second-place, but surging, Dean campaign. Indeed, Dean recently held a rally that attracted dozens of supporters and well-wishers. Dean is looking to chalk up the first of his victories in Wisconsin tomorrow, in what would undoubtedly spark a nigh-unstoppable trend.

Still, Dean is taking his own words to heart, as his lack of formal schedule after tomorrow's primary appears to indicate some healthy 'me time' for Dean, as well.

DTH

[arwalden]

92. It's Better If You Imagine Any Female Character From "Clueless" Reading It

I chose "Cher" played by Alicia Silverstone.

Oh you know that style of question-mark-talk? Where the tone of the last word of every sentence? Is raised as though you're asking a question? But it's really a sentence?

-- Allen

[DoveTurnedHawk]

93. And That One Time? At Band Camp?

:D

DTH

[Dookus]

90. Heheh...

"Howard Dean, fresh off a string of near-second place victories in the Democratic Primaries, today announced his campaign is going so well he no longer requires the services of his national Chairman.

Speaking to throngs of supporters who literally half-filled High School Auditorium, Dean stated that his campaign is on track to win the nomination, provided he gets 12 percent of the Wisconsin vote, and that he needs only to secure 78% of the vote in the remaining primary states to secure the nomination."

[John_H]

101. Here's how that fucking article should have read if AP were fair!!!

LA CROSSE, Wis. (AP) The amazing Howard Dean on Monday heroically pushed his perfect storm across Wisconsin amid the jettison of his DLC mole national chairman, a fresh sign of his electability on the eve of a critical primary with 72 national convention delegates at stake.

Dean spoke eloquently about the circumstances surrounding Steve Grossman's exit. But the former Vermont governor's national campaign manager, Roy Neel, said he thought Grossman would soon join the failing campaign of Republican John Kerry.

''He's made clear in his on-the-record comments to the press he has another agenda at work now,'' Neel said.

For whatever the reason, the shake up highlighted Dean's message on the eve of the primary in a state with a tradition of supporting liberals, mavericks and Washington outsiders a state he said would continue a long string of magnificent finishes.

It was the second brilliant strategic change in the Dean high-command in little more than two weeks. Joe Trippi, his campaign manager previously, was ousted after Dean finished well ahead of both Rev. Al Sharpton and Rep. Dennis Kucinich in the Iowa caucuses and came in a glorious second to intern-screwing Kerry in New Hampshire.

At the time, Dean said that he offered Trippi Louisiana and the Northern part of Mississippi should he become President as payment for ad buys. When he decided to bring in Neel for the top day-to-day job, Trippi demanded all of Mississippi and half of Alabama, and was then exiled.

Grossman said he had begged pathetically to stay on the Dean Machine and understood why Dean considers him a rat bastard."

[The Magistrate]

102. That Sounds About Right, Sir

Honest and un-biased reporting is a joy to read....


"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[eileen_d]

103. OMG

I am crying from laughing so hard! :yourock:

[AP]

106. Very funny.

Very very funny.

[arwalden]

117. Dizzying. Truly Dizzying.

Thanks for the contrast.

-- Allen

[salin]

104. once again

duers from other camps say... want a little salt to go in that wound?

sometimes this forum is such a 'pleasure' to watch. :eyes:

[MidwestMomma]

105. Sorry Dean supporters

I've already tried to fight this fight for Clark. After numerous threads complaining about the media's bias by the Clark supporters, I got the message...it's just sour grapes. We were told your candidate would get better coverage if they were a better candidate. We were told it's just whiny to BLAME THE MEDIA!

I find it ironic that on the same discussion board where media bias AGAINST our Party and our representativees and media bias FOR the commander-in-thief and his rogues is a daily talking point that anyone who attempts to bring up the subject of the media's bias and influence in our primaries is literally shouted down.

I missed the memo where the media is the good guy. I just pray that the media stays on our side...wait, there's not a side....wait, it's okay for them to pick sides if it's my side...wait, they're spinning against us...no wait, that's not spin, that's just reporting the facts.

Does anybody else remember how the media said Al Gore said he invented the internet? Or spent days reporting on him getting a makeover? Meanwhile letting the AWOL story go unreported and all the other Bush bullshit. We all agree Bush was not the better candidate, don't we? We used to agree that the media was partly to blame for his selection. Was that just sour grapes?

[LWolf]

118. Okay. So....

Clark supporters feel his campaign was victimized by the media.

Dean supporters are feeling it now.

Kucinich supporters have known it since day 1. When no one was a front-runner, and no campaign was "ahead" of another, and he was still ridiculed, marginalized, and ignored. When the media loved Dean, we heard the sour grapes, not "major," not "front-runner" rhetoric from Dean to explain why Dennis didn't get equal coverage.

If it's your candidate, it's bias. If it is an opposing candidate, it's because they earned it.

What democratic candidate hasn'tbeen Gored by the media?

What candidate proposes legislation to address the wrongful manipulation of the democratic process?

Dennis Kucinich will, as President, work for serious media reform, including substantial free air time for candidates and parties. Given the high cost of campaigns, the power of corporate special interests, and the fact that the networks are given free use of the public's airwaves, Kucinich will require that the networks give something back other than "reality" shows.

Media conglomerates are currently among the most powerful lobbyists against media reform, but Kucinich believes that were the media to provide substantive coverage of politics it would actually boost both media ratings and voter turnout.

In addition to requiring free air time for political campaigns, Kucinich will create a greater diversity of viewpoints in the media by breaking up the major media conglomerates, encouraging competition and quality, as well as diversity. Kucinich will place new caps on media ownership and would ban the granting of exceptions to those caps. Kucinich will limit the number of media outlets one corporation can own in a given medium, such as radio, print, or television. He will strictly prohibit cross-ownership and vertical integration.

Kucinich will involve people in the maintenance of their airwaves, creating public media outlets controlled by community boards similar to the model of Pacifica Radio. He will greatly expand funding for public broadcasting channels on television and radio, assuring the existence of media outlets free of the influence of advertisers.

Kucinich will promote knowledge of the public process through which citizens can challenge the licenses of local broadcast outlets failing to provide local coverage and coverage directed at the whole community, or outlets airing excessive violence.

Kucinich will allow not-for-profit groups to obtain low-power FM radio-station licenses. He will encourage the development of new, community-based, noncommercial broadcasting outlets.

Kucinich will work to withdraw the United States from the World Trade Organization, which media companies are currently lobbying for the creation of trade sanctions against countries that fund public broadcasting, limit foreign ownership of media, or establish standards for local content. For similar reasons, Kucinich will block US participation in the proposed Free Trade Area of the Americas.

Kucinich is the only presidential candidate in the race with a strong record on media reform. He is the only one who has filed formal objections with the FCC to their deregulation of the media. He is the only one who has held hearings on Capitol Hill on what the media weren't telling people about a war.

Kucinich holds a Bachelor's and a Master's degree in speech and communications from Case Western Reserve University. He was honored by Case Western Reserve as being one of the top 50 students in that program in the last 50 years.

Kucinich worked as a copy boy for the Cleveland Plain Dealer and a copy reader at the Wall Street Journal. He has had his own radio shows, did on-camera television reports for Channel 8 in Cleveland, had his own TV production unit, and carries a card as a member of the IATSE, the cameraman's union.

One of the leaders of Kucinich's campaign in Iowa is former FCC commissioner Nicholas Johnson.

http://www.kucinich.us/issues/media_reform.php

[janx]

110. Good night sweetie! And thanks for asking.

blanket

[sugarcookie]

114. Just want to say....

stickdog,

:yourock::yourock::yourock::yourock: