Tag Archives: hillary

No, Hillary Clinton Isn’t Being Attacked for Being "Not Qualified"

by AidenBenes01 Posted on May 31, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Over the weekend, Janell Ross interviewed a couple of experts in gender and politics to get their take on whether Hillary Clinton is held to a different standard than male candidates. Julie Dolan, a professor of political science at Macalester College in Minnesota, had this to say:

Clinton is the most experienced candidate in the field, but campaign rivals Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders are leveling attacks against her that she’s not qualified for the job. In doing so, they’re playing into a long-standing narrative that women lack what it takes to succeed in the male-dominated world of politics. The fact that two less-experienced male candidates are leveling this attack against her is telling. Neither Trump nor Sanders feels compelled to shore up their own credentials or justify their own relative lack of experience because they don’t need to; they benefit from a gendered double standard where men are automatically presumed qualified for public office and women are not.

This illustrates the problem of viewing politics through too narrow a lens. For starters, Hillary Clinton isn’t the most experienced candidate in the field. Bernie Sanders has served in Congress since 1991. That’s more experience than Hillary even if you count her years as First Lady. And while Trump has no political experience, he’s running on his business background—just as lots of other candidates have. This year alone Carly Fiorina and Ben Carson joined Trump in the Republican primary as candidates with no political experience at all.

Nor is it true that Hillary’s opponents have been slamming her for being unqualified—aside from the usual sense in which political candidates always claim to be better qualified than their opponents. There was a single incident in April where Hillary tiptoed a bit around the question of whether Bernie was qualified, which led to a misleading Washington Post headline (“Clinton questions whether Sanders is qualified to be president”), which in turn led to Bernie losing his temper and kinda sorta saying she’s not qualified if she’s taking lots of money from Wall Street. But even there, Bernie was pretty obviously using “unqualified” in the sense of “bad policies,” not in the sense of having too little experience.

As for Trump, again, there was a single incident a couple of weeks ago in which Hillary called him unqualified, and he naturally hit back in his usual nanner-nanner way: calling her judgment bad and saying she’s the one not qualified to be president. Just the usual Trump bluster.

Hillary Clinton simply isn’t the target of an unusual number of attacks on her experience and qualification. She’s rather famously running on the fact that she has more of those qualities than anyone else in the race, and no one has really disputed that. Quite the contrary: this year, having a lot of experience is something of a problem, one that both Sanders and Trump have capitalized on. If Hillary Clinton is being slammed for anything, it’s for being too qualified, not the opposite.

Source:

No, Hillary Clinton Isn’t Being Attacked for Being "Not Qualified"

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on No, Hillary Clinton Isn’t Being Attacked for Being "Not Qualified"

Trump accepts climate change when it hits his golf course

by RichardWieck11 Posted on May 23, 2016

Trump accepts climate change when it hits his golf course

By on May 23, 2016Share

Donald Trump is pro choice, until he’s not. He’s self-funding his campaign, except when he’s taking donations. He thinks Hillary Clinton is a “terrific woman,” until he’s running against her. And he thinks climate change is a hoax, until it threatens his business.

Politico reports that the presidential hopeful has applied to build a seawall by Trump International Golf Links & Hotel in Ireland, citing erosion caused by “global warming and its effects.” Yes, that is the same global warming Trump is pretty sure was dreamed up by China.

Even a fellow Republican is shocked by the inconsistency.

“It’s diabolical,” former South Carolina Rep. Bob Inglis, who advocates for action on climate change, told Politico. “Donald Trump is working to ensure his at-risk properties and his company is trying to figure out how to deal with sea level rise. … You have a soft place in your heart for people who are honestly ignorant, but people who are deceitful, that’s a different thing.”

As for Trump’s sea wall — which would compromise 200,000 tons of rock along two miles of beach — he’s going to need it: Rising sea levels and escalating storms spell bad news for coastal sand dunes. Trump’s businesses could go the same way if they ignore climate change.

Get Grist in your inbox

Original post:  

Trump accepts climate change when it hits his golf course

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Trump accepts climate change when it hits his golf course

Donald Trump and the Men’s Rights Movement: It’s Complicated

by DanStringfield Posted on May 20, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

At a Trump campaign rally last week in Spokane, Washington, Donald Trump slammed Hillary Clinton for “playing the women’s card” to gain campaign support. When citing Clinton’s criticisms of him, Trump mimicked the candidate, straightening his shoulders and flattening his voice to convey a cold, prim demeanor. He concluded the performance with the pronouncement: “All of the men, we’re petrified to speak to women anymore…You know what? The women get it better than we do, folks. They get it better than we do.”

The audience erupted into cheers and applause.

Moments like this one—where Trump’s unabashed political incorrectness and machismo are on display—resonate with many of his supporters. But his message in Spokane made headlines in part because the notion that men have it worse off than women echoes a central tenet of the Men’s Rights Movement (MRM), a network of activists who believe that in many contexts, men are a disadvantaged class. New York magazine even offered its readers a quiz: “Who Said It, Trump or a Men’s Rights Activist?”

It seems like a no-brainer that men’s rights activists would admire Trump’s rhetoric on gender and thus support his candidacy for president. But several leaders of the movement who spoke to Mother Jones are ambivalent about Trump, at best—one has even donated to Hillary Clinton—and say that many others in their community haven’t been won over by Trump’s bluster. But why do many members of a group that would appear to be his natural constituency not support Trump for president?

“It’s nice to hear him say” things that align with the men’s rights movement says Dean Esmay, now a contributor to and formerly the managing editor of A Voice for Men, a blog and men’s rights discussion hub, but those talking points aren’t enough. “Somebody had the guts to say that men have it tougher than women, it gives you an emotional rush,” he continues. “But when you listen, where’s the meat behind it? What’s he offering? I see nothing.” Trump isn’t offering much by way of policy substance, Esmay says, both on issues key to MRAs, such as incarceration or the treatment of fathers in family courts, or on others.

“Why do I think he would make a bad president?” asks Esmay. “Because he is a loose cannon. You don’t know what he’s going to do. We have a student loan debt bubble that’s going to burst. We have a middle class that’s imploding. And Donald Trump is going to fix it all by saying ‘Believe it, baby?’ Give me a break.”

Warren Farrell, widely-considered the father of the men’s right’s movement and the author of one of its foundational texts, The Myth of Male Power, says he’s a “very strong supporter” of Hillary Clinton. He has attended several campaign events for Clinton and donated the allowed maximum of $2700 to her primary campaign. Still, Farrell says he thinks Hillary is “the worst candidate in recent history, in my lifetime, on gender issues from the perspective of understanding and having compassion for men.” But Farrell, who has a Ph.D. in political science, still supports Hillary in part because, he says, “Even though I care about men’s issues a lot, I care about this country being led by the most competent person.”

“Its very hard for me,” he continues, “because Trump does have a clue about what’s happening with men’s issues. But Trump is the quintessential example of the immature man and men at their worst.”

Farrell falls into a more liberal faction of the men’s rights community, says Gwyneth Williams, a professor of politics at Webster University who also studies men’s movements. But some of Farrell’s more conservative colleagues also have serious concerns about Trump.

“I think Trump was right on for saying that men are afraid of upsetting women,” says Paul Elam, the CEO and founder of A Voice for Men. But Elam notes that he doesn’t buy that Trump would be “some sort of savior for” the men’s rights movement, and that there are other Trump positions he finds especially worrisome.

“Trump talks a lot about building a wall and the outlandish proposition that he’s going to stop drugs from entering the country—which is impossible” says Elam. He’s wary of a candidate who would further criminalize drugs, leading to greater incarceration of men. While Trump hasn’t directly promised this, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, one of Trump’s surrogates and a potential vice-presidential pick, has said he supports the criminalization of marijuana use. That’s why both Elam and Esmay say that the possibility that in a Trump administration Chris Christie might be elevated to a position of power might push them to vote for Hillary.

But many men’s rights activists are definitely not Clinton fans: Both Elam and Esmay referred to her as a “lizard” in speaking with Mother Jones, and men’s rights forums on Reddit and elsewhere are filled with anti-Hillary sentiments. But in spite of their Clinton scorn, many MRAs say that it’s obvious that Trump is more swagger than substance. “Trump doesn’t have the ability to successfully call out Hillary on her sexism. He is to sic crass and doesn’t grasp the issues,” writes one user on the men’s rights subreddit. Another sums things up: “Trump VS Clinton. Whoever wins, America (and the world?) loses.”

More here:  

Donald Trump and the Men’s Rights Movement: It’s Complicated

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Donald Trump and the Men’s Rights Movement: It’s Complicated

Where’s the Idealism?

by LouellaBenjamin Posted on May 19, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

It’s a funny thing: the usual take on Bernie Sanders supporters is that they’re a bunch of idealistic college kids who want a revolution. But whenever I write a post critical of Bernie, I sure don’t seem to get much criticism from the smart set. Here’s a random baker’s dozen tweets responding to my post from last night:

I know you can’t draw any conclusions from the cesspool of social media. And I’m not a woman, so I escape the worst of this stuff. Still, this is the kind of barely literate nitwittery that I get from the tea party types when I write about Benghazi or the IRS. Full of passion, for sure, but not a whole lot of idealism. Just rage and lame middle-school insults.

Would I get the same quality of stuff from Hillary supporters if I wrote something negative about her? In the past I haven’t, but my criticisms of Hillary have been more targeted. Plus she’s winning, and that makes it a lot easier to let criticism wash off your back.

I dunno. I suppose the lesson is not to draw any lessons from Twitter (though my inbox looked pretty similar this morning). But I’ll draw a lesson anyway: We’re no angrier than we’ve ever been, but social media sure does make it a lot easier to express our rage publicly. In the past all we could do was yell at the TV in the privacy of our own living rooms. All things considered, this probably isn’t such a positive change.

Originally posted here:

Where’s the Idealism?

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Where’s the Idealism?

Conservatives Are Drooling Yet Again Over Hillary’s Email Account

by AraceliClucas Posted on May 5, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Several years ago a Romanian hacker broke into the email accounts of several high-ranking US officials. One of the email accounts he hacked belonged to Clinton pal Sidney Blumenthal, and it was this hack that eventually led to the revelation that Hillary Clinton had a private email address.

In early April he was extradited from Bucharest, where he had been serving a seven-year prison sentence, and conservatives have been drooling with anticipation ever since. Well, guess what? It turns out the hacker claimed in a jailhouse interview that he had, indeed, downloaded “gigabytes” of Hillary Clinton’s email. Imagine that! Let’s listen in:

“It was like an open orchid on the Internet,” Marcel Lehel Lazar, who uses the devilish handle Guccifer, told NBC News in an exclusive interview from a prison in Bucharest. “There were hundreds of folders.”

….A source with knowledge of the probe into Clinton’s email setup told NBC News that with Guccifer in U.S. custody, investigators fully intend to question him about her server.

When pressed by NBC News, Lazar, 44, could provide no documentation to back up his claims, nor did he ever release anything on-line supporting his allegations, as he had frequently done with past hacks. The FBI’s review of the Clinton server logs showed no sign of hacking, according to a source familiar with the case.

Well, I’m sure he’s telling the truth, not just making up shit. Naturally Fox News is on the case with a more recent jailhouse interview:

Wearing a green jumpsuit, Lazar was relaxed and polite in the monitored secure visitor center, separated by thick security glass. In describing the process, Lazar said he did extensive research on the web and then guessed Blumenthal’s security question. Once inside Blumenthal’s account, Lazar said he saw dozens of messages from the Clinton email address.

Asked if he was curious about the address, Lazar merely smiled. Asked if he used the same security question approach to access the Clinton emails, he said no — then described how he allegedly got inside.

“For example, when Sidney Blumenthal got an email, I checked the email pattern from Hillary Clinton, from Colin Powell from anyone else to find out the originating IP. … When they send a letter, the email header is the originating IP usually,” Lazar explained.

He said, “then I scanned with an IP scanner.” Lazar emphasized that he used readily available web programs to see if the server was “alive” and which ports were open. Lazar identified programs like netscan, Netmap, Wireshark and Angry IP, though it was not possible to confirm independently which, if any, he used.

In the process of mining data from the Blumenthal account, Lazar said he came across evidence that others were on the Clinton server. “As far as I remember, yes, there were … up to 10, like, IPs from other parts of the world,” he said.

So there you have it. Not only did Lazar hack into the Clinton server, but nearly a dozen other hackers did too. And every single one of them, apparently, has said nothing about it until now. Nor have they released any actual hacked emails. And they were all able to do it without leaving behind even the slightest trace.

Nonetheless, the resident expert at Fox News called Lazar’s story “plausible.”

Sigh. I’m sure this will lead to yet another whirlwind of emailgate activity. Buckle your seat belts.

Visit site: 

Conservatives Are Drooling Yet Again Over Hillary’s Email Account

Posted in alternative energy, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, solar, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Conservatives Are Drooling Yet Again Over Hillary’s Email Account

Clinton is in coal country, and it’s getting messy

by ZFMHeike036 Posted on May 3, 2016

Clinton is in coal country, and it’s getting messy

By on May 3, 2016Share

Hillary Clinton had one hell of a day during part one of her two-day swing through Appalachia.

Holding back tears, an out-of-work coal miner confronted Clinton at a roundtable event in West Virginia on Monday. His concern was with remarks Clinton made on the campaign trail earlier this year about putting coal miners out of business.

“I just want to know how you can say that you’re going to put a lot of coal miners out of jobs and then come here and tell us how you gonna be our friend,” former miner Bo Copley told the presidential hopeful, CBS reports.

Clinton apologized, and told Copley that her comments about miners at the CNN town hall in March were taken out of context — which they were. While Clinton did literally say, “We’re going to put a lot coal miners and a lot of coal companies out of business,” she was touting her plan to transition away from fossil fuels and toward a renewable energy economy. The $30 billion plan Clinton outlined would rebuild infrastructure and invest in education, public health, and initiatives to help rebuild communities ravaged by the coal industry.

“I do feel a little bit sad and sorry that I gave folks the reason or the excuse to be so upset with me, because that is not what I intended at all,” Clinton told Copley. “I’m here because I want you to know whether people vote for me or not, whether they yell at me or not, is not going to affect what I’m gonna try to do to help.” Copley, for his part, seemed unconvinced, and told CBS afterward that he was not swayed by Clinton’s apology.

Outside, protesters — whom Copley said he represented — chanted, “Go home, Hillary!” and “Benghazi! Benghazi!,” sounding, for a moment, an awful lot like Congress.

Guess who else showed up to one of Clinton’s events? None other than coal baron Don Blankenship, who was just sentenced a year in prison for creating an unsafe workplace that led to 29 coal workers’ deaths.

Share

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

Read more:  

Clinton is in coal country, and it’s getting messy

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Clinton is in coal country, and it’s getting messy

Hillary Clinton Wants All Millennials to Feel Free to Use Her Lawn

by evurlgvvc Posted on April 27, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

I guess I’m finally curious enough about something to write a post about it. The subject is The Kids Today. Here are a couple of recent posts from Atrios:

I know I keep returning this subject, and I probably don’t have anything especially new to say about it, but I guess support for Bernie by The Kids Today has brought a lot of it out recently. I’m increasingly amazed that The Kids Today seems to include anyone under 40, and that the olds (#notallolds) hate them with white hot passion. The Kids Today are Generation Screwed, and the Old Economy Steves of the world really should shut their pie holes.

And:

Hope to be wrong, but suspect that team Clinton (very broadly defined) will still be talking about Berniebros in September. I’m quite happy for Hillary Clinton to be the nominee, as I always thought she would be. I’m not happy with the months of “we would have won it easy if not for these meddling kids who won’t vote in November” rhetoric. Better figure out how to appeal to them. Stop calling them immature and stupid. The goal is to win, not to make early excuses for why you’re going to lose.

I realize that our personal takes on this subject are strongly influenced by which blogs/tweets/etc. we happen to read, and Atrios and I are probably reading different stuff. But I still wonder where this is coming from. Do older folks really hate millennials with a white hot passion? Is Team Clinton obsessed with Berniebros? I just don’t see it. What I’ve seen is a competitive primary where both sides have been sniping at the other, just like 2008. And now that it’s over, the sniping will fade away. Just speaking personally, my Twitter feed and general reading list has been about equally full of rancor aimed at both sides. The youngs are starry-eyed idealists’ the olds are corrupt sellouts. Berniebros are disgusting; Hillarybots are cutthroat. Bernie is clueless about how to get things done; Hillary is a warmonger. Etc.

If you yourself are a millennial, I suppose it’s only natural to pay special attention to every single op-ed ever written on the subject of millennials. But I don’t think this particular genre is any more prevalent today than op-eds about young Gen Xers a couple of decades ago or op-eds about young boomers back when I was graduating from college. They’re no more critical, either. Just the same old stuff about middle-aged folks trying to understand younger folks, sometimes with sympathy and sometimes without.

I guess I’m doing that annoying oldster thing where I use my personal experience to shrug off what’s happening today as just more of the same. But honest, I wouldn’t do it if I saw endless streams of criticism of Bernie and Bernie supporters—and millennials in general—that truly seemed way out of proportion to what I’ve seen before. But I just haven’t.

As for Hillary, I can guarantee that the only thing she and her team want from millennials is their support. That’s been crystal clear from the start, and the fact that there are some assholes on her side doesn’t change that. There are always assholes on all sides. But Team Hillary itself, even broadly defined, has no greater desire than to prove itself to millennials and get their votes in November. Just wait and see.

From – 

Hillary Clinton Wants All Millennials to Feel Free to Use Her Lawn

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Hillary Clinton Wants All Millennials to Feel Free to Use Her Lawn

Party Unity Time Is Coming Soon for Bernie and Hillary

by AudreaMinchin Posted on April 25, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Greg Sargent thinks that Bernie Sanders has already conceded to the reality that he’s not going to win the Democratic nomination. He’ll continue to go through the motions for a while, but will then start up “serious unity talks” with the Clinton campaign:

At that point, the question of how the Clinton campaign, not just the Sanders campaign, handles the conclusion to this whole process will play a big role in influencing what happens. It’s still unclear whether the Clinton camp will see a need to make any concessions to Sanders in order to win over his supporters and unite the party. But it will be in the interests of Clinton and the Democratic Party to ensure that this process goes as smoothly as possible. They’ll likely conclude that there is greater risk in not making any meaningful gestures towards unity than in making them. What this might look like is the subject of a future post.

Speaking very generally, it’s obviously in Hillary Clinton’s interest to have Bernie on her side. But what kind of concessions can she make, if indeed Bernie demands some? She can’t credibly make any major policy switches, but perhaps she could make some minor ones. She could make concessions on future appointments, but that would have to be done privately, which is always a danger. What else?

My own take is that Hillary probably doesn’t have to do very much. Past candidates haven’t, after all. In theory, the difference this time is that Bernie’s followers are so loyal and committed that they’ll withhold their votes if Bernie even hints at it, but I just don’t buy that. By the time September rolls around, the prospect of a Trump presidency will have every liberal in the country fired up. Hillary’s weaknesses simply won’t seem important anymore. If Bernie seems even slightly less than completely enthusiastic about her campaign, that will reflect back on him, not Hillary.

So…I think there’s less here than meets the eye. Hillary and Bernie will make nice, because that’s what candidates do when primaries are over, and perhaps Hillary will make a few small concessions—either privately or otherwise. Then it will be all hands on deck to defeat Trump. No one who doesn’t want to be drummed out of the liberal movement entirely can afford not to be a part of that. Bernie Sanders, of all people, knows this very well. When the time comes, he’ll be there. He’s much too decent a person to sulk in his tent just because he lost a campaign that he never expected to win in the first place.

Visit link: 

Party Unity Time Is Coming Soon for Bernie and Hillary

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Party Unity Time Is Coming Soon for Bernie and Hillary

Silicon Valley Not Really Feeling the Bern

by FrancescaMackino Posted on April 21, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Based on donor data, Brian Fung says that Bernie Sanders has a lot of fans in the dotcom biz:

This wouldn’t be worth mentioning except for the fact that Sanders appears to have a broad-based appeal among Silicon Valley workers compared with his rivals. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Sanders’s campaign committee seems to be by far the biggest recipient of donations from employees of Alphabet (Google’s parent company), Apple, Microsoft, Amazon.com and Intel.

….This sets up a few possibilities. It’s conceivable, for instance, that Clinton’s support among tech companies is actually higher than what we can observe from her list….Another possibility is that tech-industry folks are donating to Clinton but in amounts too small to break into the lists we’re looking at….What we can say is that Sanders appears to have much more support than Clinton across a wider range of tech companies, even if the amount of that financial support is relatively small.

Nah. Google employees are split nearly evenly between Bernie and Hillary, and employees of the other four companies probably are too. We just can’t see them because their totals fall below the top 20 in Hillary’s donor list. But why guess about this? All we have to do is look at the overall industry numbers. Here they are:

Compared to overall fundraising, this represents a bigger tilt toward Hillary than average. And despite the size of this sector, it represents a dismal 0.43 percent of Hillary’s total campaign donations and 0.36 percent of Bernie’s. So we can draw the following conclusions:

Hillary has broader support in the internet sector than Bernie.
Hillary gets a bigger percentage of her donations from the internet sector.
Silicon Valley is full of cheapskates who don’t care much about politics.

So there you have it.

Read original article – 

Silicon Valley Not Really Feeling the Bern

Posted in ALPHA, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Silicon Valley Not Really Feeling the Bern

Campaign Reporters Hate Everyone

by RRIAbraham Posted on April 16, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Who gets the most positive campaign coverage? Vox asked Crimson Hexagon, a social media software analytics company, to run the numbers, and the answer is John Kasich. Who gets the most negative coverage? Hillary Clinton.

No surprise there, I suppose. As usual, though, I’d caution against making very much out of this. For starters, there’s not a lot of difference between the candidates. And sometimes there’s just bad news to report. I think that Hillary has been the target of some poor reporting on her email problems, but that doesn’t change the fact that she was bound to get a lot of negative coverage no matter what. That’s life.

The chart on the right shows net coverage (positive minus negative) for all five of the remaining candidates, and the most telling statistic is that campaign coverage is just overwhelmingly negative, full stop. On average, each of the candidates received about 5 percent positive coverage and 35 percent negative coverage. It’s no wonder that everyone thinks they’re treated uniquely badly by the press. They obsess over the fact that they (really and truly) get overwhelmingly bad coverage, without realizing that everyone else does too. Apparently campaign reporters just hate the idea of writing anything positive about anybody.

See original article:

Campaign Reporters Hate Everyone

Posted in Everyone, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Campaign Reporters Hate Everyone