Why has the MSM now picked Obama for us in '08?

[MoonRiver]

I thought their fav was Hillary. :shrug:

[BootinUp]

1. This is their way

of warning us. "Either go with Obama or we will have to trash Hillary 24/7!"

[MoonRiver]

4. Do you think they can do a better job than we do here? ;o)

(And that includes moi.) Not that I wouldn't get behind her if she's the nominee. I just don't want her, or Obama, to be IT.

[formernaderite]

19. I figured this would put him in the running for VP

I am still not going to vote for another third way, moderate Clinton.....I don't care who they run as VP. And really I've never been in the Obama fan club...he's pretty middle of the road too.

[AJ9000]

36. They favor republicans and know a black man cannot not win.

Middle America won't go for him or Hillery in 08.

[snowbear]

2. Don't worry... she'll always be Chris "Tweety" Matthews first pick..

I don't watch Faux, so I have no idea if they're pushing Obama in '08? .. If they are, good for them.. I'd rather see him run that her!

[MadMaddie]

3. I think that they are doing it to set the stage to get the

racist bigots riled up.....this is what they do.....

I think he would be a great President in 8 - 12 years..

[blm]

5. Because Obama is NOT going to run in 2008, but corpmedia will say Dems are

being racist for not clearing the way and begging him to run.

[lastknowngood]

6. because he is a sure looser

[FrenchieCat]

7. They need a horserace! and they need it now.....Doncha Know?

I mean, it wouldn't be fun for them if they didn't decide our entire line up.

The media's favs so far;
Hillary and Obama pushed to the starting gate!
Edwards' positioned himself and is brushing his tail...
Kerry's coming up from the rear....
Bayh is just now getting there!
Wes Clark is still driving to the course, cause his driver didn't show.....
Al Gore is still sitting in his chair mulling it over while reading a book....
Dodd is looking for his shoes.....
and Biden already jumped the gun (somebody, go and get him...he's ahead of himself, but the race hasn't started)! LOL!
Warner disqualified, and we do not yet know truly why! :shrug:

ON YOUR MARK, GET SET......GOOOOooooo!

[MoonRiver]

10. Lol

Doncha know! :D

[karynnj]

39. Nice summary - and fun to read, thanks

With Obama, it seems the media is looking for the "new face". The quetion is whether this is the time for a new face.

[gully]

8. Time magazine

and Oprah.

[Imagevision]

9. gotta a link? who says so?

[MoonRiver]

11. I've been hearing it for weeks now.

Check out Time's latest cover, btw.

http://www.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,20061023,00.html

[AtomicKitten]

12. I don't know why anyone takes this MSM crap seriously.

It's sensationalism for the sake of ratings.

[pretzel4gore]

20. they're waging war on you; they don't give a crap about ratings...

they try to identify the democratic party, the 'left' progressives, liberalism etc as something provocative to the racists, which in the USA means a significant demographic.....it's dirty trickery. i WISH our fukking people would just look at the pigmedia, recognize that they are now outright criminal run entities, and ignore when they pull our strings.
but we won't.....we're too fukking nice

[AtomicKitten]

22. good news -- it's ain't working (on me).

I understand where you are coming from but I don't agree that they are provocative for anything other than ratings. The bottom line is the almighty $$$$$ for most corporations, and while the MSM is indeed rightwing owned and operated, Faux News crappola isn't going to sell everywhere. I still think a good deal of it is sensationalism on the level of junior high school gossip. My opinion.

[pretzel4gore]

24. after the last 15 years of constant pigmedia lies

which set junyer bush's family up to seize power, maybe the pigs in the media should be forced to PROVE they're not bush mediawhores, all of them.....
time magazine/fox/cnn/abc/pbs/cbs/nbc/nytimes/latimes/washpost etcetra are criminal run organizations. there's nothing more to it - if they tell truth, it's because there's a twist in their scheming

[glitch]

13. They need a charismatic newbie. Old-timers know too much and may not be

sucking up to the corporate media sufficiently. (Not that Obama is, but they may assume it since he's still a newbie.)

[saltpoint]

14. Whichever candidate Paul Zahn tells me to vote for, that's who I vote for.

[FrenchieCat]

16. Now that IS creepy!

I remember that whenever Clark was her guest, she wore leather outfits head to toe! :wtf: was that about?

[saltpoint]

21. I hope I don't offend any Zahn fans out there, but I just can't help it --

I think she's extremely marginal as a journalist.

In truth I don't have much of a chance to even watch her program, but a couple of her interviews and "town meetings" in 2004 were pretty superficial.

That outfit sounds like hot stuff. But she wore it for naught. I think General Clark is happily married.

[saltpoint]

30. Paula. Not Paul. Get it right you moron.

[Nictuku]

15. I was wondering that myself...

[MoonRiver]

18. My knee jerk reaction is, if that's who they want,

he must be the worst choice. Guess it's the whore consensus that Obama will send us down in flames better than Hillary.

[Imagevision]

17. When Queen Oprah says to vote for Obama, will 'they' listen?

[Totally Committed]

23. From another thread, but I believe this is the answer....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=2884924#2885881

As soon as the *code* starts to work, and the Dem #'s start to trend down again for 2008, they'll start beating the Hillary to-toms again. In the meantime, we all look like hypocrites every time we say we won't vote for either of them, because one is an African-American, and one is a Woman.

It's a win-win thing for the MSM and the RNC.

TC

[beaconess]

25. I don't equate covering someone with "picking" them "for us"

Obama is new, he's interesting, he's photogenic, he's the top campaign "get" next to Big Dog and he's turning on crowds across the country. If they DIDN'T cover him, we'd be complaining that the MSM was ignoring him.

Everything is not a rightwing conspiracy - sometimes the media just cover people because they're newsorthy.

[FrenchieCat]

26. AND sometimes the media don't cover people EVEN if they are

newsworthy.

I don't buy what you are saying. I do think there is colusion on the part of the corporate national media, just like there is on the part of the oil industry.


Look, ABC/Disney is "partnered" with CNN/CNN Headlines and with Time Magazine and other periodicals. While GE has CNBC, NBC, MSNBC, Newsweek are partnered with WAPO. Fox's got Washington Times, New York Post, National Review and a few other Right wing Rags. Which leaves CBS/Viacom as a possible honest broker who has to keep up with the other three. Far as I am concerned, it takes much less than you would imagine for them to all agree...cause we ain't talking about a whole lot of folks once you get to the Top top...which is why you see the same news and virtually identical talking points no matter which talking head you watch....and they cover nearly the same thing no matter where you look.

I don't consider it just a coincidence.

I watched our last elections closely....and it was pretty clear that the media had its nose straight up all into our election business.

[loyalsister]

37. Good points

It is a legitimate question to ask when after he gives the speech at the Harkin steak fry and dozens of people ask him TO run.
Senate candidates are asking him help bolster their campaigns as if he had coattails even in a red state like Missouri.
Why would the media not follow that story?

[Withywindle]

43. It's also because he's got a new book out and is on tour for it!

Geez, everybody gets on the media rounds when they do that, from professors to movie stars.

Interesting & charismatic + lots of "buzz" + new product to sell + political angle = media coverage.

Not rocket science to anybody with an inkling of how the media really works and what really drives it.

That's no slam on Obama at all--of course he wants to get his ideas out there, that's why you write a book in the first place. I think he probably finds all this '08 talk kind of unsettling but it's still a big question on everybody's mind and he's gotta deal with it.

The media exists to sell itself, and anybody who's popular and newsworthy is gonna get the hype; that's just what it does.

[Le Taz Hot]

27. And what's really amusing?

All the DUers falling in lock-step -- especially the last few days, every other post is "Obama for President" "Why Obama is not a DLC lackey" "1001 Reasons Why I'm for Obama." One does have to wonder if these guys are on the payroll.

[beaconess]

29. What's even more amusing is that you seem to think that none of us can

think for ourselves or are able to make political decisions on our own or could possibly have formed an opinion about Obama before he appeared on the cover of Time Magazine yesterday or that Obama is the only potential candidate supported by DUers (since no one ever posts positive messages about Clark or Edwards or Feingold or Kerry or Warner or anyone else but Obama) or that any DUers whose views about a politician apparently differ from yours must be on someone's payroll.

That's a hoot.

[Le Taz Hot]

31. I haven't seen

4,286 pro-Kerry/Edwards/Clark/Feingold/Warner posts in the last 3 days either. It's pretty common knowledge that campaigns pay people to swarm the blogs. Is this one of those situations? I've no idea. My guess is that at least some are based on some new DUers low post counts AND the fact that those same people post ONLY about Obama (look it up if you don't believe me).

[beaconess]

33. Or maybe they're in response to the "Obama's a DLC sellout"

and "Too much hype - JUST BECAUSE HE IS BLACK" and "Obama is a phony" and "I see another Republican in the WH if the Dems go with Obama" and "So a white woman isn't scaring the Republican base enough, Time has to go for a black man?" posts that sprung up on DU within hours of the magazine hitting the stands. That's what prompted me to post.

And I did look it up and I see a lot of 1000+ posters weighing in.

[Le Taz Hot]

41. You're pulling the race card?????

Outta here. <flush>

[beaconess]

42. See ya!

[Imagevision]

28. Obama is no slouch, very far from it...

[Crunchy Frog]

32. I like Obama, and think that someday in the future

he could be a formidible presidential candidate. He just hasn't got the qualifications yet. For God's sake, at least let him serve one full Senate term before beginning talk of his presidential candidacy.

[leesa]

34. Because he's their corporate finger puppet.

He'll bluster, make noise put forth caring bills that are destined to fail and when the vote is important he will always go the corporate route. He will be quite dependable.

[MODemocrat]

35. As much as I like Obama; he's too inexperienced to be president

Of course, George knew nothing about being president, and still doesn't after 6 years in office. He had a Father who had been president, and had appointed some of the supreme court justices who "chose" our president for us. Obama doesn't have this. IMHO I believe he needs to stay in the Senate for a while before reaching for the moon. Charisma helps, but it isn't everything. :dem:

[JNelson6563]

38. He'll be easier to slaughter

Why else?

[CJCRANE]

40. Because with B*sh

and the Repubs taking a nosedive in the polls the MSM figured that Hillary could actually win in '08.