Democrats and Sanders’ Revolt Against Democratic Voters And Move To The GOP

Note: This is an extract from the post title above, and comes from my new blog. Check the RSS to “take you there“, as Madonna used to sing. I hope you visit and ‘follow’ my inartfully expressed but interesting political observations. Hey, in the new Age of the Egomaniac President, we can now shamelessly praise ourselves. So there. Now go and check that wonderful new blog.

Thank you for visiting.

Sanders and Democrats To Oppose Hillary Clinton at the Electoral College

Yesterday, Politico published this article about the “Democratic presidential electors revolt against Trump”, but it is a revolt against the voters in their own party.

At least a half-dozen Democratic electors have signed onto an attempt to block Donald Trump from winning an Electoral College majority, an effort designed not only to deny Trump the presidency but also to undermine the legitimacy of the institution.

That quote, unqualified, seems a noble and brave effort from these ‘democratic electors’ to uphold democracy by trying to honor the wishes of the people of their own party who voted in historical numbers for their party candidate, Hillary Clinton.

What they are actually trying to do is unthinkable. To avoid the appearance that I’m misinterpreting the facts, I quote directly from the article.

The presidential electors, mostly former Bernie Sanders supporters who hail from Washington state and Colorado, are now lobbying their Republican counterparts in other states to reject their oaths — and in some cases, state law — to vote against Trump when the Electoral College meets on Dec. 19.

…But the Democratic electors are convinced that even in defeat, their efforts would erode confidence in the Electoral College and fuel efforts to eliminate it, ending the body’s 228-year run as the only official constitutional process for electing the president. With that goal in mind, the group is also contemplating encouraging Democratic electors to oppose Hillary Clinton and partner with Republicans in support of a consensus pick like Mitt Romney or John Kasich.

Looks like Sanders and his supporters are not going to be happy until they see Hillary Clinton (HC) dead or in prison. Who could be “encouraging” Democrats to vote against fellow Democrat and winner of the popular vote, HC, but Sanders and his supporters?

First, what is the logic here? How is it that, knowing that the Republicans are not going to ‘unelect‘ Trump, the only way they see to “erode the confidence in the Electoral College is by opposing the person who suffered the unfairness of that political body, i.e., the candidate who despite getting the most votes was denied the presidency?

 

Advertisements

X-Rays Show: It’s a Malignant Media

As everybody else, I’m raking my mind trying to put the pieces together that would give me a more complete picture of WTF Happened Here?

I know all the usual suspects:

  • ‘I see white people’.
  • Those white bitches
  • Is the economy, stupid.
  • Hillary Clinton (HC) “was a shitty candidate”, explained yesterday Bernie Sanders with all the power of his compassionate heart for women.
  • The Immigrants! Quick! Round them up.

But looking at the recent stats coming out from every fancy research expert’s butt, there are TWO slithering effective crooks who stole your mental sanity and escaped untouched, unharmed, unnoticed, and ever so supremely victorious: THE MEDIA and its wife MISOGYNY.

Hillary Clinton “underperformed” on every category except on one: Black women. A whopping 95% of them voted for HC. Where did Black men go, or everybody else for that matter?

We can confidently assert that Black women is the ONLY segment in our nation that was NOT influenced by the media, be it mainstream (MSM) or Leftist. These women were not affected, they didn’t fall to pieces, like the rest of the nation apparently did, by the last-minute dump of emails that caused so much depression that even HC’ supporters fled in shame from her side.

Of Suicidal Lemmings And That One-Statistical Point

If, as the stats show, HC and the Dem Party lost at least one point in every category (except Black women), then where did that one point go and why?

Let’s be clear, people are not lemmings that commit suicide by leaping en mass to the ocean.

Image result for the rodents that jump the cliff

 

Actually, lemmings don’t do that either. The truth about jumping lemmings is very similar to that of humans.

Lemmings were being chased down and thrown to the cliff by a Walt Disney crew filming “True Life Adventure” series in 1958. They edited the film, you could not see them behind the lemmings doing their inhumane deeds for ‘educational purposes’.

And so with that one-statistical point. They were being chased down the cliff to the ocean of fascism in this presidential election by the media who was hiding behind the “professional journalism” camera, edited to hide their dandy art of pushing public opinion to commit suicide en mass.

Who Exactly Did The Media Attack?

There is agreement across our political spectrum in that the MSM did a horrific, but efficient, job of misinformation and manipulation of public opinion. Unfortunately, there is no agreement on who benefits from what was done, nor on how  that misinformation took shape.

Some people believe that Sanders was ignored by the media, while other believe that he was used to contrast his ‘honesty’ against Hillary’s perpetual dishonest personality; that Trump was unfairly attacked all the time, and some believe that Hillary was NOT attacked by the media, while other believe she was.

There are at least three reasons that explain the lack of agreement in that area.

One,  lack of understanding by regular folks about the art of misinformation and opinion-shaping (because it is an art taught in colleges). Second, because of the belief that freedom of press must be total in a democracy. In my opinion, total freedom of press is like saying that, if I can circumvent your home security system, you don’t need to fix it, just deal with me. And third, because the public ideological position is that the media, even though it belongs to a financial elite, doesn’t bring the owners’ class interests into their job. In other words, capitalist media owners are honest, they just want your ‘clicks’ for money.

This refusal to believe that Murdock or Bezos (WaPo) use the power of the media to advance their class interests is the gem of the elite class. This refusal to believe that there is a class interest behind their journalistic reports must be corroborated and protected at all cost.

Killary Clinton: Because She Is A Babies Killer

Hillary Clinton has been dodged by public lashing in the media since she was First Lady. Character assassination has been the tool used against her all along.

Character assassination is a deliberate and sustained process that aims to destroy the credibility and reputation of a person, institution, social group, or nation.

In May this year, comedian Jon Stewart implied that HC is a sociopath, even suggesting that she is not a human being:

Maybe a real person doesn’t exist underneath there.

That is the picture the media, from right to left, has given us this year. I discussed the history of this attack on her on this blog. Please, check it out.

Misogyny: Because We All Enjoy Attacking Women as Bitches

To be continued tomorrow.

https://wordpress.com/stats/day/crazyusaelections.wordpress.com?startDate=2016-11-11

https://crazyusaelections.wordpress.com/2016/04/16/berniebots-splitting-and-brainwashed/?iframe=true&theme_preview=true

https://crazyusaelections.wordpress.com/2016/04/14/the-great-american-brainwash-half-a-billion-dollars-to-turn-the-public-against-hillary/?iframe=true&theme_preview=true

Clinton’s fearlessness is a beacon for her supporters

When we make peace with our destiny, fear recedes. Hillary Clinton understands that. She knows her place in history. Her detractors do not. It is the source of her strength — and of their desperation.

Photo: HFA

With every bizarre twist in the 2016 election, every new anti-Hillary tempest, every dire warning of her campaign’s imminent demise, I remember Hillary Clinton telling a small group of 2008 aides that she viewed herself as the “tip of the spear” for women and girls.

That phrase has stayed with me, four words that sum up a philosophy of life, a willingness to test limits and smash barriers, an embrace of the unknown and the unknowable, an acceptance of the inscrutable unfolding of each moment.

Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign embodies that philosophy. In her final quest to end a 227-year shutout of women at the pinnacle of government, she has been the tip of the spear, piercing through fierce resistance to reach a destination that is now only days away. She does so without fear in her eyes, only determination and joy.

The intersection of fear and destiny is familiar to me. Growing up in Beirut, I was surrounded by bloodshed and terror. The capriciousness of death, its looming presence, taught me to accept fate at a young age. That acceptance mitigates fear.

It can’t be easy to have millions of people spitting hate at you, many of them wishing you bodily harm. But Hillary Clinton knows it is part of her life story, her fate. She comprehends it. She accepts it. That acceptance gives her strength.

As another wild election week ends and a new, final week begins, her fearlessness is a beacon for her supporters. They are fearless as she is, empowered by a sense of history and the conviction that she will prevail:

david

Politico: Study: Trump boosted, Clinton hurt by primary media coverage

This is an article from Politico. It confirms, as other studies have done, that the media is against Clinton and pro-Trump. The article doesn’t explain WHY the media gives negative coverage to her and positive to him. I can guess the reason: they hate a woman in power, especially if that woman is a self-proclaimed a feminist, the word hated by men in power. It’s not about her politics or ‘dishonesty’. If you are dishonest, you can’t be credible in your accusation of another person as ‘dishonest’: that’s what the media have been doing all along.

Whether we have a fascist as the next president will depend on the mainstream media continued support of Trump.

 

Though he regularly bashes the media as dishonest, scum and the “absolute worst,” Donald Trump disproportionately benefited from the Fourth Estate’s coverage over the past year of the presidential campaign. Hillary Clinton, meanwhile, drew the most negative coverage of any other candidate as she engaged in a longer than expected battle against Bernie Sanders for the Democratic nomination for more than a year.

That’s according to a report from the Harvard Kennedy School’s Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy out this week, showing that the reality TV star turned presumptive Republican nominee made up for his slow start in the polls with a boost from positive media coverage. The report analyzed coverage from eight traditional print and broadcast outlets, including CBS, Fox, the Los Angeles Times, NBC, The New York Times, USA Today, The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post.

“Journalists seemed unmindful that they and not the electorate were Trump’s first audience. Trump exploited their lust for riveting stories,” the report found. “He didn’t have any other option. He had no constituency base and no claim to presidential credentials. If Trump had possessed them, his strategy could have been political suicide, which is what the press predicted as they showcased his tirades. Trump couldn’t compete with the likes of Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, or Jeb Bush on the basis of his political standing or following. The politics of outrage was his edge, and the press became his dependable if unwitting ally.”

Based on the eight outlets studied, the ad-equivalent value of Trump’s media coverage was worth approximately $55 million. The next closest candidate, Jeb Bush, trailed by $19 million, with an ad-equivalent value of coverage totaling around $36 million. As far as the media’s claims that it has been covering Trump in “watchdog” mode, the study appears to discount that notion. The majority of Trump coverage was positive or neutral in all outlets studied, ranging from 63 percent by The New York Times to 74 percent by USA Today.

As far as what brought Trump the most coverage, the study found that 34 percent of coverage related to the candidate’s events and other activities, 27 percent related to “other,” 21 percent had to do with polls, while just 12 percent of the coverage dealt with issues and ideology and 6 percent covered his personal qualities.

Trump received, by far, the most coverage out of any of his Republican primary rivals, earning 34 percent to 18 percent for Jeb Bush, who entered the race in June 2015 as the ostensibly prohibitive favorite for the nomination. Ben Carson and Marco Rubio each received 14 percent, while Ted Cruz, despite running the earliest campaign, earned 13 percent. And while he was technically the last man standing against Trump, John Kasich drew just 7 percent of media attention.

“No candidate filled the ‘losing ground’ storyline more snugly than did Jeb Bush,” the study found. “Early in 2015, he had a large lead in the polls and enjoyed corresponding favorable coverage. As his support declined, however, so did the tone of his coverage.”

The Democratic side of the race received significantly less attention from the media, particularly during the early phase of the campaign in which Clinton jumped out to large polling leads over the likes of Sanders, Martin O’Malley, Jim Webb and Lincoln Chafee. In terms of “good news” vs. “bad news,” Sanders was the beneficiary of the most favorable coverage during what the report calls “the invisible primary.”

Just as media coverage boosted Trump in the polls, it slowly ate away at Clinton’s advantage. Among Clinton, Trump, Sanders and Cruz, the former secretary of state earned the highest percentage of coverage related to issues — a relatively small 28 percent, while just 12 percent of Trump coverage related to issues. For Cruz, just 9 percent of coverage related to the issues, while 7 percent of coverage was issue-related for Sanders. But in issue-related coverage of Clinton, an overwhelming 84 percent was negative in tone, the study found, compared with 43 percent for Trump, 32 percent for Cruz and just 17 percent for Sanders.

From BNR: Trust Me, Hillary Supporters: The Media Will NOT Be Your Friend In 2016

I’m reprinting this thoughtful and inspirational article at the pro-Hillary site BNR.

 

If anyone had an illusion that a GOP candidate as dangerous and reckless as Trump would mitigate the corporate media’s obsessively negative coverage of Hillary, they’ve been quickly disabused of that notion. Even though the fate of their own families hangs in the balance, the media only know how to do one thing when Hillary is a candidate: slam her. Over and over and over and over again.


Hillary supporters: I woke up today and turned on cable news. The first thing I saw was Donald being given a pass for abusive, bigoted comments, while Hillary was being raked over the coals for an email server. This pattern is repeated everywhere — and it will be that way for the remainder of the 2016 race. A few days ago, I shared my approach to dealing with the incessant media hostility toward Hillary and toward you, her supporters. The full text is reposted below.

****

Hillary-bashing is one of the ugliest permutations of American politics and the most toxic part of the 2016 election. It pervades the national media — just watch Morning Joe for five minutes and you’ll understand.

Turn on any news broadcast and listen to gleeful pundits faithfully regurgitate lies and smears against her.

Post a positive word about Hillary online and instantly get flooded with insults and slurs. Even threats.

Listen to her political rivals talk about her like she’s the devil incarnate.

If you believe the chatter, Hillary is a terrible, horrible, despised criminal who is losing in a landslide. Of course we know the opposite is true: She is one of the most ethical and lied about political leaders in the world:

No one has ever produced an iota of evidence that Hillary has behaved improperly because of a campaign contribution. No one has produced a scintilla of proof that there is a quid pro quo when it comes to her speaking fees. From Whitewater to Benghazi to her emails, nobody can point to a single instance of corruption or purposeful wrongdoing on Hillary Clinton’s part. None. Zero. Ever.

Hillary is winning. She will keep winning.

Her Republican opponent is a loose-lipped coward desperately begging someone to mount a third party run so he doesn’t have to face her alone (#WomenTrumpDonald). Taking his lead, the anti-Hillary forces have opened the spigot wide and the vileness is spewing forth.

If you are a Hillary supporter who simply wants a better future and can’t understand why so much venom is directed at her, it’s hard to process all this negativity.

So trust me on this. I worked for Hillary for years, I know who she is and how she deals with it. She puts her faith in you. She ignores the pundits and prognosticators. She smiles at the haters.

hrc portrait 2016

Hillary knows that you’ve been there for her and that you’ll continue to be there for her. She looks past the vitriol and stays focused on what matters. She relies on her own sense of self. She draws on her inner fortitude. She is disciplined; she knows that love and kindness trump hate and fear. That’s not just a slogan for her — it’s her compass in the storm that always seems to surround her.

More than anyone in politics, she understands the ephemerality of news cycles. What seems earth-shattering today is a hazy memory tomorrow.

Just look at the Democratic primary. It seems like a lifetime ago, but recall the doom-saying that started last summer: Emails, Clinton Foundation, Benghazi, and on and on. Breathless predictions of imminent collapse, claims she inspired no passion, hand-wringing over whether a man should jump into the race to save the party from a woman.

Remember all that?

And look where we are now. Hillary will clinch the nomination in a matter of weeks, attaining the first of two milestones on the march to history.

Most importantly: Remember that Hillary bashers have always failed in the long run.

You can make Hillary bashers disappear by focusing, the way she does, on the end game. Trust yourself. Trust her faith in you. Her haters are trying to tear her down, and destroying themselves in the process.

The national media will do everything in their power to normalize Donald, to pretend he’s something more than a bigoted, hostile, intemperate, ill-prepared, sexist bully. It’s all static and noise. All of it.

Here’s the reality: As of this writing, there are three candidates left in the 2016 race. One is mathematically eliminated. The other is a petrified bigmouth who knows he’s outclassed and outmatched.

Of the three, I can assure you that if they had to bet, even her worst opponents would put their money on Hillary as the victor on Election Day.

Yes, her detractors are loud. But don’t mistake volume for impact. Hillary is quietly winning. If you are laser-focused on the prize, the bashers become ineffectual. They are on the wrong side of history and they know it.

If you ever feel demoralized by the endless hate, look at these photos and know who is marching on this journey with you.

hrc supporters 23

22637992262_b05c877ec2_k

23301528815_0dedfa1822_k

23698925295_7832d1cb42_k

24546036694_fdbd79bbdc_k

24319522634_60b5e207c9_h

25007764705_8eb4fc3147_h

22512236799_053c15599c_h

23056940003_6e20b2d329_h

23452145156_4e93b85853_k

24355579293_818e6d1f4d_k

23847781981_37c6a18dfd_h

24977980741_85a5c97759_k

24941582410_6e1f9affe0_k

hillary hat

26472531504_22ac37a24d_k

26227953884_66255a4bd2_k

hrc supporters 8

hrc supporters 22

hrc supporters 25

Peter Daou

Peter Daou

Peter Daou is a former adviser to Hillary Clinton and John Kerry and a veteran of two presidential campaigns. He is the CEO of True Blue Media, which owns and operates Blue Nation Review.

http://bluenationreview.com/hillary-supporters-the-media-will-not-be-your-friend-in-2016/