The media (the ones that I have kept up with and I think wield the most influence, are Time magazine and New York Times) wanted Obama to be the Democratic nominee so it ran a free campaign for him–consistently portraying Rodham Clinton in an unfavorable light.
New York Times was a little more subtle about the whole thing, but Time magazine was so blatant (and continues to be so) that it was ridiculous. When the Democratic presidential primaries were close to ending, it even started launching the anti-John McCain campaign…..
So, the media has now decided that they want Hillary Rodham Clinton to be on the ticket with Obama. In fact, that’s what they have wanted all along. So, now they are launching a fierce campaign towards that end. I guess that’s what’s going to happen.
You don’t really need to vote. You just have to sit back and watch who the media wants the nation to vote for and that person will be sworn in. How boring and ridiculous.
June 11, 2008 at 8:39 pm
I’m not sure if I agree with you. Once the Reverend Wright controversy flared up, the media focused on it ad nauseum, very much to the detriment of Obama and of his margin of victory in the later states. If he hadn’t won that string of early caucuses, giving him a solid lead early on, Hillary may have taken it.
In any case, at least this was unlike the other primary candidates, who dropped out after Iowa or even earlier, based primarily on their lack of funds raised. Hillary stayed in it till the end, so while I concede that the press was a little hard on her, everyone did get a chance to vote. If any primary was decided more by the people than the press, this was one.