Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Anyone else think that the media is trying to take down Dean and Clark?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
last1standing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-04 09:00 PM
Original message
Anyone else think that the media is trying to take down Dean and Clark?
For the last month, we've heard nothing but how angry Dean is. From gaffes to screams there has been nothing but negative media for Dean. Now that they think they've taken him down, I'm hearing how arrogant Clark is, how he's belittling Kerry for being a "junior officer".

And the saddest thing is that so many DUers are buying into it. Dean and Clark are both tremendous men who would make excellent presidents yet we have helped the right wing in assassinating our own. Someone posted a cartoon awhile back showing Democratic donkeys feasting on the carcass of one of their own. How sad that it should be so true.

Anyway, why is the media so interested in attacking these two candidates? I'd love to hear ideas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Melodybe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-04 09:07 PM
Response to Original message
1. They are trying to tear down Clark for sure.
Sharpton should be banded. He has no reason to pick on Dean but still keeps digging every f'in chance he gets.

They are all over Clark giving him weird questions, making him look bad.

This entire debate seems to be centered on how great Kerry is, his lighting is even different it is weird. I bet the pundints praise Kerry afterwards.

I am not suggesting that they didn't do this to Dean, they did the same to him, saying he won debates when he didn't, forming questions around him.

The media is building our boys up just to tear them down, that way we are so confused and agitated at our candidate by Now. We don't vote.

Face it folks we are being played.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quixote1818 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #1
27. Proof they want to take down Clark
Please go to the following website and see what the Right is up to.
http://www.moderateindependent.com/v2i2elections2004gop...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Qutzupalotl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 12:55 PM
Response to Reply #27
34. Holy Cow! A must read, everyone!
"The basic idea is to push Kerry and Edwards early on, then turn on them. The goal is to bury Clark who they are worried is the best candidate to beat President Bush and ensure that Dean wins the person they consider easiest to beat."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ayeshahaqqiqa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-04 09:08 PM
Response to Original message
2. They know that these two are the strongest candidates
Dean has a proven track record of effective governing, and he is a centrist, despite the "far-left" label the media has tried to pin on him. Clark is a military man who is unafraid of telling things like they are, especially about AWOL. Rove wants both of them out of the picture asap.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snyttri Donating Member (488 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-04 09:16 PM
Response to Original message
3. They can change their biases. Dean is due for underdog sympathy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
creativelcro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 12:19 PM
Response to Reply #3
24. After the Deans performance on ABC last night, I don't see
how the press can not show sympathy...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ACPS65 Donating Member (217 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-04 09:18 PM
Response to Original message
4. Yes!
That's why Dean is on Primetime and David Letterman! :crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
last1standing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-04 09:22 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. Very insightful.
Maybe you could follow your :crazy: with something more than mentioning a couple of shows that Dean happens to be on. Maybe, if you want to deny my allegation, you could contrast what I've said with your own insights.

Or maybe you could just make silly emoticons as a way to not have to say anything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Melinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-04 09:19 PM
Response to Original message
5. Fasten your seat belt, corporate media is out to destroy them all
They went after Dr. Dean first because he was the perceived front runner; the others will each suffer the same fate as their numbers rise.

The key word is "Corporate" - the answer should be obvious.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas_J Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-04 09:20 PM
Response to Original message
6. Why?
From late August until The second week in January, the media was building up Dean to the point that virtually everone stated that he was the leading cnadidate, that there was no way that anyone would overtake his lead, and that he was invevitable going to sweep all of the states starting with Iowa. Guess they were wrong.

This is not uncommon. I picked up a stack of the Economist magazine at a free magazine exchange in my public library, dating from late November 1999, though Iowa Caucuses in 2000, and by the second week of January, the Economist had stated that it was all over, and that the two people who would be battling for the presidency in November of 2000 were definitely going to be Bill Bradley and John McCain.

In late December and early January, Zogby repeatedly stated that it was obvious that Dean would start winning in Iowa, and keep winning, and that there was no scenario in which he could see Kerry's campaign reviving at all.

So there is no media plot against Dean. They want to sell papers, magazines, and get ratings for their advertisers, and they are going to focus on whoever seems to be the leading candidate.

Both Time and Newsweek were raving about Dean in articles in July, and are now have had cover articles talking about "Who is the Real Howard Dean?"

U.S.A. today was pitching for Dean, and this week he is being compared to a aging rock star who is forced to play ever smaller and smaller rooms as his career goes downhill.

The media is comprised of whores basically. All of it.And all of the candidates must deal with the inevitable problems that come from contact with whores. If they approach unprotected, they arent going to get much sympathy when the symptoms of contact arise.

Dean played the media when it was advantageous to him, but the flip side is to expect to be torn apart if he stumbles at all, which it is best to handle the media as Kerry has. By keeping a safe distance and remaining aloof, only dealing with them when it is absolutely necessary. Dean liked, And to be honest in the beginnning when he was the insurgent, needed the free attention. I think he just got to like it too much and fell into their trap which was to throw all caution to the wind.

But Dean's problem now is that he has too frequently had to repeat the four words that virtually always bury a candidate. Those four words are "What I meant was". If you have to explain what you meant too often, it will cause the media to focus on that candidate in areas best left alone if that candidate wants to win.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
last1standing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-04 09:27 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. So you don't think the timing was suspicious?
I can understand the media acting like jackels, but the timing of this teardown has been too well timed to be a fluke. I think the timing of the Clark teardown is also suspicious.

I do think you answer was well thought out, and if I was a little less cynical, I'd agree with most of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas_J Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-04 10:08 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. Not at all
They look at polls like everyone else, and when te polls had Dean in New Hampshire running at as much as 30 points ahead of the distant second, Kerry, Dean was their baby.

GO back to the same period in 1999 when Bradley was as further ahead than Gore than Dean was ahead of Kerry, 39 points, and the same thing was going on. Bradley was everywhere in every form of media, was the media darling. When Gore started slaughtering him, the media started slaghtering Bradley. Its just the way these guys are, they just seem to be insecure and want to be loved or something. Consider back last year before Bush went into Iraq, when Terry Moran was caught without being aware that he was on mike stating that, "President Dummy" is getting ready to come out. How often do you hear the media calling the President, "President Dummy" out in the open on the air. Bush was popular, the war, and supporting it was popular, the anti-war protests barely got mentioned on the news, any of it, and I sit most nightw watching all of the networks, with the closed captioning on, while having my shortwave tuned to the B.B.C. or Deutshe Welle to see which stations come near to providing a balanced news picture, and for the most part, only A.B.C. and Peter Jennings ever come close to reporting the same items that I am hearing on the beeb.

The media is just going to cover what is news, and to be honest Dena is no longer really news. His campaign is no longer news. As a matter of fact, in todays world anything older than 6 months is ancient history, so while Dean was able to bring himself up to national status by starting to campign in Iowa two years ago, he faced the danger of spouting a message that was very old to Iowans when he faced the caucuses. As the media, and the other candidates started bringing up Deans actual record as Governor, and the disconnection between what he did as Governor, and what he is saying as candidate, and having to explain the "What I meant when I said that Newt Gingrich and slowing the growth of Medicare was" became more widely known, Dean was going to have to account for those inconsistancies. His message was old news, his record as governor and his statements as governor become New News, and that is simply the case of it. THe local media does not focus on the candidates as thoroughly months before the caucus or primary as it does a week or two before the caucuses. Again, Deans error. What strikes me as totally unbeleivable is that Dean, who easily has the most conservative record as Governor, has run a campaign far, far to the left of anything he has ev er actually done while in office, While Joe Lieberman, who is far more liberal than Dean, has run as an arch conservative, which he aint. Dean needed to do this to gain a base outside of the mainstream, yet he has gained a base that is relatively so far to the left, and in fact, a base of youg supporters who have done a good job of irratating the average voter in places like Iowa, that the media in Iowa pointed out on the night of the caucus, that for Dean to do well, he was going to have to keep the 3500 supporters hesent in to shore him up due to his falling polling numbers, from angering and annoying undecided, or people who were leaning towards other candidates but not totally sure of who they would support to support Dean. I have done a lot of phone banking to Iowa both before and since the caucus to see what people thought and one thing that stood out is that a lot of people started avoiding anything that looked orange in the last days of the campaign leading to the caucus. I know that this interpretation will get arguments, but you see it here on DU as well. with a lot of people claiming that they dont support Deean simply because of what they perceive as the excessive fervor of his supporters, who again for the most part seem to be young, and rather highly enthusiatic in their support of Dean and opposition of anyone else. These supporters may consist of the majority of Deans support, but they are the most highly visible, attacking the media whenever they reported anything negative about Dean, however true it might have been (after all he did say that Medicare was one of the worse federal programs ever conceived, and reporting it is not out of line). The members of the fourth estate are as human as the rest of us and likely to use their positions to get hit back at a candidate, or those who hsve abused them in that candidates name.

Which is also why you see Kerry, Edwards and even Lieberman getting newspaper endorsements, while Dean has picked up few, if any of those, and Deans recent comments about the media getting a life simply will not win him kudos among them. Dean was satisified to use the media when it suited him, but attacked when they began to report a less than shining picture of him, and his campaign. Not very wise. And I do not anticipate that they will do much to now paint him as the person running from behind, the long shot, as he had his shot, and to be honest, I think he blew it.

He should rather, ride out the criticism with a cool head, as Kerry and other do, and explain himself after counting to ten. A newspaper endorsement is worth the endorsement of dozens of ex presidents and ex presidential candidates, as in general, they know their readership, and their readership tends to pay attention to them, as they have a daily, if indirect relationship.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
last1standing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-04 10:17 PM
Response to Reply #11
15. I think your timing is off, though.
The media started attacking Dean weeks before his slide in the polls. Same with Clark now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
faithfulcitizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #15
29. Dean led in Iowa & NH-Clark didn't
Republicans train sights on Clark
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040121-101231-5987r...

With Kerry leading in NH after winning Iowa, why does the RNC still
consider Clark the biggest threat? hmmmm....
:think:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Melodybe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-04 09:35 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. Ok think that, but why a week before the caucus did the local networks
mention the Dean tapes every single day. He made a valid point that coorperations have way to much pull in deciding who the people get to vote for. But that is not what the people of Iowa saw, they saw over and over again Dean saying that the caucuses were silly. They even had polls that asked if Iowans were offended by Dean's comments. Dean never even mentioned Iowans in particular, it was a smear job.

They just ripped Clark a new one. The fact that they hate him, just restored all of my faith in the man.

Dean is on Letterman and Diane Sawyer b/c people like me have been on the phone since Monday night demanding that he go on these shows.

Kerry folks enjoy your moment, Kerry has plenty of flaws that they are waiting to pounce on. I just hope it is not saved for the GE, cause I personally don' t think that Kerry is tough enough. I also want to ask why in the world do they have footage of Kerry in Vietnam? Most soldiers that go to war don't get a camra crew along with the assignment.

Divide and conquer folks, that is their game and at the moment we are bleeding.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zoeyfong Donating Member (508 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-04 09:25 PM
Response to Original message
8. of course the corporate media is trying to take dean and clark down
There is no doubt that the corporate media is backing bush, and opposing his strongest opponents (dean and clark). Corporate mangement knows which side it's bread is buttered on; sure, they'll run some more liberal programming to get the ratings, but when it comes to news and political reporting, they will not bite the hand that feeds them. Dean and clark are threats in that they more than anyone else (and kucinich) have dared to speak the unvarnished truth and threaten the status quo. If there is anything that those in the elite cirlces of power do not want, it is a change in the status quo. Kerry and edwards, on the other hand, are thoroughly invested in the status quo, and signalled their willingness to be a tool of the washington-corporate elite by their jumping on the iraq war bandwagon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newyawker99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #8
18. Hi zoeyfong!!
Welcome to DU!! :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kerry-is-my-prez Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-04 10:11 PM
Response to Original message
12. Yes they definitely are....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CabalBuster Donating Member (282 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-04 10:13 PM
Response to Original message
13. Agree, the media sees Dean and Clark as the *outsiders* n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goodhue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-04 10:14 PM
Response to Original message
14. Faux is clearly trying to take down Clark at the moment
Dean I think they are leaving alone with the knowledge that he is already sunk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kathleen04 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-04 10:25 PM
Response to Original message
16. This Kerry vs. Clark
Edited on Thu Jan-22-04 10:28 PM by Kathleen04
military rank stuff is irritating me, because it's completely manufactured. Clark has said positive things about Kerry, Kerry has positive things about Clark. It's a non-issue, yet they've been pushing it even though it doesn't exist. I watched a news piece today about Kerry and Clark and they showed the clip of Clark responding to Bob Dole's attacks, but selectively edited out what Bob Dole had said preceding that.

And they've done the same thing to Dean over and over, like when they did the selective editing with Dean's comments about the caucuses and so forth.

The media is definately on my nerves today.

Editing to say that it's especially irksome because only us political junkies do any research to get both sides of the issue. Most people just casually watch the news and read the paper and this is what they're being given.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreeperSlayer Donating Member (666 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 06:33 AM
Response to Original message
17. no
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SeattleRob Donating Member (893 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 11:51 AM
Response to Original message
19. Agree...
and it's going to get nastier as we go along. The media - establshment or voice of the elite - will do everything to prevent
real change.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theboss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 11:56 AM
Response to Original message
20. I think they are doing a good enough job themselves
They may be attacking Dean, but Dean is giving everyone plenty of ammunition to throw back at him.

And it pains me to say this because I was all prepared to jump on the Clark bandwagon, but I don't think he is ready for prime time yet. Clark is actually beginning to resemble Perot in that he has answers for every question but has obviously not worked out the details yet. It's getting a little late in the game to not have the details to your platform.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CWebster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 11:59 AM
Response to Original message
21. i just noticed them setting the targets on Clark
Edited on Fri Jan-23-04 12:24 PM by CWebster
Guess the establishment decided he was too great a liability and they are pulling the strings to herd the outcome to Kerry. Like election 2000, you just know it is all being worked out behind the scenes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quixote1818 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #21
28. A MUST READ
Please go to the following website and see what the Right is up to.
http://www.moderateindependent.com/v2i2elections2004gop...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Woodstock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 12:17 PM
Response to Original message
22. Agree, I think for some reason the thugs want it to be Kerry vs. Bush
Edited on Fri Jan-23-04 12:19 PM by Woodstock
and their plan is to smear Dean, Clark, and Edwards.

It sickens me to see us repeat their slime here.

Discuss policy differences, but don't spread right wing propaganda.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Rinaldo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #22
26. Just wanted to say that I have really appreciated your posts lately n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 12:19 PM
Response to Original message
23. From day one of each one's entrance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LuminousX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 12:20 PM
Response to Original message
25. The media wants to take down all the Dem nominees
Dean and Clark are just easy targets at the moment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uzybone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #25
30. At least one person here gets it
its all the Dems. People are just acting pissy because their "guy" is faltering at the polls. When Kerry and Edwards were polling low there were no posts about why the media is trying to take them down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #25
31. We'll see if they go after Kerry or Edwards
LOL or Lieberman
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
faithfulcitizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #25
32. Newsflash! Kerry's Leading...
in NH and just won Iowa...Why not him? The RNC has been attacking Clark for some time, and he never led in Iowa or NH. Now, they are taken it up another knotch, and it's not directed at Kerry or Edwards. Sure makes ME wonder...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
denverbill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 12:54 PM
Response to Original message
33. That's my suspicion.
Edwards, Kerry, and Lieberman will have an incredibly hard time taking on Bush because of the very limited number of differences in their votes over the past 3 years. Rove has been planning on running against them all along, especially Kerry.

They've voted almost identically to Bush for 3 years. Kerry and Lieberman can also be tagged as 'northeast liberals'. Edwards is also an 'inexperienced politician, and a trial lawyer.'

About the only place they differ is on tax cuts. Wow. That's a big help. So, Bush, Kerry, Edwards and Lieberman are almost identical on most votes, except Bush favors tax cuts and the others don't. Guess who Joe Averages votes for?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-04 12:57 PM
Response to Original message
35. Yes.
Kerry and Edwards are the "chosen" ones.

I find this all very fascinating. The way they have chosen our candidate for us. The way they blatantly went after Clark last night. Did Clark have ANY follow up questions? Did he speak over his allotted time...OR "Could I just finish making this point?" and go on for 5 more minutes? The FAUX NEWS hatchet job following the debate. The Hardball hatchet job following the debate where it was reported 2 of the campaigns had join in on the piling on of Clark. Anonymously, of course, so noone will know that they REALLY ARE running "dirty" campaigns. It's interesting to note also, on Hardball, just prior to the debate, a Kerry campaign worker was on and mentioned Acxiom and The Stephens Group as it related to Clark....then minutes later, the same question was asked at the debate? Wow. Now that's a coincidence. And the saddest thing is, they very well could have gotten that Acxiom/Stphens Group information from right here on Du. I'm sure the RNC and the Dem campaigns read the posts here. If Rush reads DU, they do too. Eat your own? Damn right. Then, not a mention of the chimp being AWOL on CNN. (I'm sure it will be on Crossfire) Is it because they fear the WH? :shrug: Is it because they think it's a non-isse? :shrug: Is it because they don't want to give air time to Clark? :shrug: Is it because they have their chosen candidate and want to stay focused on him...a campaign their parent company has donated huge anounts of money to? :shrug: It's all so fascinating.

CNN is owned by AOL-Time Warner a contributor to the Kerry campaign. That says a lot. At least, to me, it does.

Now we have Michael Moore thrown in the fray. He's going to kick some butt! Go, Michael!

Where the hell is Bill Clinton when we need him???? :shrug:

I'm putting MY faith in the NH voters.

Go, Wes!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Dec 11th 2017, 08:26 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC