Obama vs. Hillary - is this real?

[laura888]

Hello?

Is anybody out there?

When and where did it become a done-deal that this would be a face-off between these two camps? We can argue all we want to at DU, but the media is covering nothing but this supposed rivalry.

I'm asking - are we gonna let this slide?????? It seems that the Democratic Party has been hijacked and these are our 2 choices.

What say you, DU????

[NYCGirl]

1. Calm down. It'll change a lot in the next year. NT

[Colobo]

2. It has not been hijacked; people seem to like Hillary and Obama above the other candidates

[laura888]

4. well...only because they are the only ones....

...in the "people's" faces.

I'm asking - when and how did these 2 candidates become "front-runners"?

[Clark2008]

5. You mean the six or so who are paying attention this early?

[laura888]

7. Ummm. No.

This supposed rivalry is being covered every Sunday.

If anyone else gets air-play in July 2007 (or friggin July 2008)(hello Kucinich hello Edwards hello Richardson) - it will be a surprise to CNN viewers.

Who exactly is determining our "front-runners"?

[Clark2008]

13. No - I was talking to the other person who said a lot of people

seemed to like them both.

I said, "You mean the six or so who are actually paying attention right now?"

I meant that NO ONE is a front-runner, technically-speaking, because more than half the country doesn't CARE who the media-appointed "front runners" are right now. Few, outside of us political junkie, are thinking about the 2008 primaries. Most are trying to put food on their families and hope wings take dream... or something like that.

:hi:

[laura888]

18. This doesn't seem like a good excuse to me.

50% of people don't pay attention to the media until November 2008, so we should ignore what they're doing now?

Are Obama and Hillary actually front-runners? Is Edwards really "far-left"? (really - can you answer that one?)

Shouldn't DU be answering these questions NOW???

[John Q. Citizen]

6. Yeah, just like they like Walmart and American Idol. The numbers speak for themselves.

[laura888]

8. What does that mean? What is that process exactly? N/T

[John Q. Citizen]

11. Lots of advertizing, lots of media. Repitition works.

[laura888]

14. Let's take that a few steps further...

how does one enter this contest?

[John Q. Citizen]

30. Many will enter, few will win. They say it can't be won, the way the game is run.

My candidate, at this time, is Kucinich. Here's how I see it;

Hillary, Obama, and Edwards divide the status quo vote, and Dennis gets the progressive "change" vote, arriving at the convention with 25% to 30% of the delegates.

This gives him the leverage to demand progressive concessions in the platform and from the eventual nominee.

Of course, if Gore enters, I would support him.

I have three criteria for my candidate(s) this time.

1. Stop the empire building military aggression against our scapegoat "boogie men countries"

2. Single payer fee for service universal healthcare

3. Election integrity.

I know it seems like the game has been rigged, because it has.

But if you choose to stay, you wind up playing anyway.

[natrat]

22. howbout some nice warm cookies and milk with that statement

people are so fucking stupid it makes me sick

[orleans]

3. tweety has been yacking about hillary for the past year! n/t

[SaveElmer]

9. Well I think you are exaggerating...however...

If these are the two choices I think we are in good shape...

Personally I think Richardson is going to make a run at these two (and Edwards), and I think will supplant Edwards...

[laura888]

12. Why isn't the media covering Edwards?

A huge huge mystery to me and many others.

An obviously beautiful, charismatic, intelligent man.

Friggin WHY is he not a front-runner now?

[Clark2008]

15. Because he's wishy-washy.

He changes positions more than underwear.

And, despite the accent, he's really not all that popular in the South.

[BeyondGeography]

19. I'm sure it has something to do with the fact that he ran 4 years ago

and was ultimately rejected by the voters.

[laura888]

21. Barely. And as VP.

There is no reason for the media to favor Obama or Hillary or any other candidate over Edwards or Richardson, etc. etc.

That's my point.

[BeyondGeography]

24. The media always gravitates towards the new

That's basically my point. With Iowa 10 months away, they are unlikely to cover the specifics of John Edwards' health care plan. And the reason Edwards is getting so specific so early is not just tactical, it's out of necessity. We know him and his wife, so the, "Hi, I'm John," stuff (which is really what the media would rather focus on right now) just isn't an option.

It cuts both ways. Since voters know and don't necessarily dislike Edwards (thanks in part to all the media coverage he has received in the past), he's still a very strong #3 right now.

[laura888]

27. I so disagree.

The election of 2006 might as well be of 1978.

We (and especially the media) is well aware of Americans' attention spans.

Do you think the average American could recite what Edwards' position was in 2006? Honestly?

[natrat]

23. because he stands a chance and the corporations wont show him to all the dem sheep

like a black man or a woman stands a chance -its a fucking charade with politically obtuse simpletons as the audience

[lvx35]

10. I like my media chosen candidates.

What would I do with out the media, choose candidates myself? Geeze, what do you think this is, the dark ages? Modern Democracy is so much more user freindly! The user doesn't need to do anything at all!

[BlooInBloo]

16. Easy to see why the media loves it.... The Articulate, Uppity Negro vs. The Bitchy, Conniving Woman

EDIT: What better celebrity deathmatch/ reality show could the be for a stupid electorate?

[BeyondGeography]

20. Yeah, anyone who ranks HRC and Obama in the top two is buying into cartoon stereotypes

and stupid to boot. :eyes:

[Colobo]

26. Yep, some people seem to think that way

[Benhurst]

17. This happens every election cycle.

Check back in seven or eight months.

[laura888]

25. Really? Can you honestly say that...

...Dean and Kucinich (or any specific candidate) were media favorites in 2003?

Favorites in the sense that they had their photos in the Washington Post every friggin day in 2003?

[Benhurst]

28. Yes. It's far too early for any of this to matter.

Most people won't really tune into the campaigns until next year, so name recognition and media hype over-influence the results.

[OHdem10]

29. While it seems a long time

many credible Journalists and Commentators have
explained that because of all the "frontloading";
that is so many states are moving their primary
elections up: California, Fla etc large states
with large numbers of delegates, the candidates
can realistically win the primaries all almost
one day. Then they have almost a whole year
to raise funds and campaign for the 2008 election.

The Media seem to believe Hillary and Obama
possibly Edwards are the only serious candidates.

If this is true, the frontloading etc, it is already
almost too late for anyone to break through or
get into the race.

[mmonk]

33. Undemocratic

[mmonk]

31. No, not as far as I'm concerned.

[NDP]

32. Because that's what the media want, so they are going to act like no one else exists in hopes that

they can manipulate the public into going along with it. "Out of sight, out of mind."