A more accurate poll: Do you believe that "a certain amount" of the media attention paid to

[jsamuel]

Clinton and Obama have to do with excitement over having the first woman or black President?

[Dawgs]

1. WOW!!!!

:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:

[Totally Committed]

2. Other: I believe Clinton and Obama are the media's "choices" for the Democratic nomination,

because, if elected, they would be the "first woman or black President", and either of them fighting the GOP nominee will guarantee great ratings for the entire campaign... that, and the Corporate owners of the media outlets understand neither of them will rock the boat much if elected for those media outlets.

TC

[Peregrine Took]

3. Absolutely - it would make their jobs easier which, we know, is all they are

really interested in achieving.

[waiting for hope]

4. Here's proof -

From my email on Countdown -

------------------------------------------------------
Tonight on Countdown
------------------------------------------------------

Will Karl Rove be out to get Hillary Clinton defeated in 2008?
Rove said yesterday he thought that Hillary Clinton would be the Dem's nominee, but also called her "fatally flawed". Clinton responded in an interview with Andrea Mitchell: "Well aren't we glad to see him go"


Edwards statement was beautiful in it's delivery and brevity - and HRC gets and interview with Andrea Mitchell and the #5 slot on Countdown. They can talk about four repukes - McCain, Romney, Rudy and even Fred Thompson (the fat ass isn't even running) but only about Clinton and Obama. There is something just not right about that and I'm not saying this because I'm an Edwards supporter, but because we have a great group of candidates and only those two are getting the spotlight.

[NYCGirl]

6. Perhaps Clinton gets the segment because Rove REFERRED TO HER in his

going-away speech yesterday, eh? Not everything in the world is a snub to Edwards.

[waiting for hope]

7. I'm not saying it is - but it just appears

that on any given Dem victory, she gets the first stab at a statement on air and KO has done this before.

[AnotherGreenWorld]

8. She's the frontrunner. It makes sense to show her response first.

Edwards only has himself to blame for running such a shitty campaign.

[waiting for hope]

9. Shitty?

I've seen your posts - you obviously dislike Edwards, I was only making an observation on the media. If his campaign is shitty, my goodness, with all the grass root support he has on many liberal, progressive sites, I guess shitty's pretty good

[AnotherGreenWorld]

10. Well, he's not going to win the nomination. And he really should've had a pretty good shot at it.

He had been campaigning here in Iowa since the 2004 election. And he was generally well-known and well-liked, even among conservatives. There are a lot of reasons, I think, why his campaign is on the decline. But even though I disagree with Edwards on the issues and don't think he has a record that supports his rhetoric, the main reason, at least here in Iowa, seems to be two things: the hair issue and his comment that the war on terrorism is a bumper sticker. Those are pretty much the only things anyone says about Edwards anymore. He is seen as a weak for caring so much about his hair, and regarding his bumper sticker comment, they don't understand his point. Some even think he means to say that 9/11 never happened. I suppose we know what Edwards learned from Kerry, the art of the gaff.

Are either good reasons to dislike Edwards? Of course not. But a good campaign doesn't let things like getting $600 haircuts get out. I bet Romney has expensive haircuts. But his campaign would never let that get out.

His campaign is over if he doesn't win Iowa, and he's in the process of losing Iowa right now.

[nadinbrzezinski]

11. The hair cut issue was manufactured by the media

as to the war on terror, he spoke the truth, it is a bumper sticker

How do you fight a war against a tactic?

That said, he (and other candidates) will be killed by the media

[AnotherGreenWorld]

13. Kerry also had a point when he said, "I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted

against it." It just wasn't a good way of saying what he wanted to say. The same is true of Edwards's bumper sticker comment. Saying "how do you fight a war against a tactic?" is better than saying, "The war on terrorism is a bumper sticker"; most people are too dumb to know what he means. They think he's denying the existence of terrorism.

The hair cut issue should not have been an issue. It never should've gotten out. That's why I say he's not running a good campaign.

[waiting for hope]

12. Really?

"and he's in the process of losing Iowa right now...."

I guess you are into drinking the MSM kool aid.

[AnotherGreenWorld]

14. Actually, I live in Iowa, and I see his support declining first hand, not to mention that Obama

and Clinton have caught up with him the polls. In a few months at least Clinton will have overtaken him.

[venable]

15. polls disagree with you

clinton WAS ahead of him a few weeks ago, and now Edwards has regained the lead.

so, your experience is not based upon statewide movement.

[AnotherGreenWorld]

16. Edwards began with a lead though.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2006/06/edwards_surprises_in_iowa.html

In 2006, Edwards had 30%, Clinton 26%. The trend shows Edwards declining.

[Cameron27]

5. Yes, they probably do get a certain amount of media

attention because one's a woman and the other's a black man, however, I don't believe that either of them had more money donated to their campaigns than Edwards did, simply because he's a white male. They're also #1 and #2 in the polls and in donations, and unlike Edwards, it's a first time presidential run for each of them, so of course they're going to attract more media attention.

[Uncle Joe]

17. I believe the corporate media are the driving force in American Public opinion,

not the other way around. I also believe, this same corporate media is the primary reason, Bush is in power today and we're in Iraq chasing mirages.

In my view, even if your candidate is in current favor with the media, they are riding on the back of a Tiger.

[coco77]

18. Dems won't win for real this time...

( we have won all of the previous elections no matter what the media says) if they keep fighting over little things and saying that they won't back our candidate because of nitpicking on issues. This is not the time to be playing games this country is going down and if the Republicons get in again, I believe that will be it..