Comments
Yeah, how about the voters? If we hold Michigan and Florida voters accountable for the leaders they chose to elect in their respective states, then those two states would be held accountable for choosing to defy DNC rules and we wouldn't be discussing whether or not to allow them to redo their primaries.
But I digress...
Thanks for visiting. I like your site.
But I digress...
Thanks for visiting. I like your site.
Initially, I agreed with Carolyn Kay that the voters deserve some blame. Unfortunately, they're only following the rules, using the democratic process. The real "blame" for the deadlock should be put on the media for deciding early that this was a two-person horserace. The reason is the arrogance and mercenary self-interest of talking heads of various political stripes.
I blame the media for a lot of things, but I don't blame them for this. You don't blame the sun for a sunburn.
The other candidates were all lacking in some crucial way. To be a real contender for the presidency, a candidate needs widespread appeal, money, organization and the ability to stay on message for a year and a half.
The media focussed on the only two candidates who met the criteria.
The other candidates were all lacking in some crucial way. To be a real contender for the presidency, a candidate needs widespread appeal, money, organization and the ability to stay on message for a year and a half.
The media focussed on the only two candidates who met the criteria.
Intentionally or not, you've reinforced my point about media gatekeepers. You apparently agree that the pundits and others at the top of the media food chain have the right to determine preemptively who is an acceptable candidate for the presidency and who is not. This view is somewhat disappointing in that I would've thought you'd allow that decision to be made by American voters, not media oligarchs and their henchmen. For me, Tim Russert and Anderson Cooper are not a sufficient improvement over Rupert Murdoch's stooges in the decision about who I should listen to. I accept these people only as fair, impartial interlocutors and sometime referees, not as judge and jury. Where it exists, their knowledge and experience may be used to illicit answers to appropriate questions, not to prevent input from other viable candidates. Biden, Dodd, Richardson, even Edwards, all had as much, and usually more, in their resumes as Clinton or Obama. The televised debates were notoriously "framed" by these talking heads, a point cleverly made by Tina Fey in a Saturday Night Live program that still resonates in the public square. The sketch was overdone and I prefer Obama to Clinton, but that doesn't change the truth in it.
You missed my point. I think the media followed the public's lead. They correctly identified the most viable candidates based on the public's response.
How much attention did Kucinich get early on in the campaign? He got tons, way more than the 3% of the vote his popularity should have warranted.
Kucinich, Edwards, Dodd and Biden supporters cried foul, but each of those men had ample opportunity to shine before they were vetted out of the process.
What I think a lot of people refuse to accept is that charisma (or at least the ability to garner widespread support) and money are essential parts of the democratic process.
People always point at a candidate's message. Sorry, man, but it's not the message that wins the White House. It's the messenger.
Can we move this discussion into the forum? I'm getting ready to shut off the post comments soon. Gracias.
How much attention did Kucinich get early on in the campaign? He got tons, way more than the 3% of the vote his popularity should have warranted.
Kucinich, Edwards, Dodd and Biden supporters cried foul, but each of those men had ample opportunity to shine before they were vetted out of the process.
What I think a lot of people refuse to accept is that charisma (or at least the ability to garner widespread support) and money are essential parts of the democratic process.
People always point at a candidate's message. Sorry, man, but it's not the message that wins the White House. It's the messenger.
Can we move this discussion into the forum? I'm getting ready to shut off the post comments soon. Gracias.
This item is closed, it's not possible to add new comments to it or to vote on it
Click here to manage subscription
Carolyn Kay
MakeThemAccountable.com