Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Skwmom

(12,685 posts)
Fri Feb 26, 2016, 02:01 AM Feb 2016

Maddow: Spinning like crazy for Team Clinton, ethics and critical thinking are cast aside.

Last edited Fri Feb 26, 2016, 03:38 PM - Edit history (3)

Maddow: OMG Republican Turnout is up.

I don't know Ms. Selective Outrage, have you bothered to notice that Trump has had CONTINUOUS coverage by the corporate controlled media, he adopted a portion of Bernie's platform prior to the majority of the voting public turning in, every time a primary vote is getting ready to take place the corporate hacks work hard to drive up the vote for Trump (WARNING, WARNING they cry Trump might lose the primary and be out of the race or they will cite polls (fake or not) that Bernie is so far ahead or so far behind hoping that voters will think that Bernie doesn't need their vote so if they want to make sure there is an anti-establishment candidate in the race, vote Trump), they push Clinton manufactured negative Bernie memes, and the dog and pony Town Halls to drive voters away from Bernie, etc.

You think with that big fancy degree of yours you'd be able to engage in a little ANALYTIC AL thinking. Of course, there is that old saying, blinded with greed...

Maddow: Democrat Turnout is low.

OMG, why could that be?

1. As discussed above games were played to drive votes away from Bernie.

2. Planned chaos reigned in Iowa and NV, dirty tricks were reported, the results have never been audited (even though the paper that endorsed Clinton in Iowa called for a review to ensure the integrity of the voting process) and the breakdown of the vote by candidate was never released in Iowa. In addition, can we rely on the numbers? Based on the actions of the Democratic Establishment to date I sure in the heck wouldn't place a bet on the validity of those numbers. Especially not if it wrong numbers would fit into a narrative they were trying to spin.

3. There were ONLY two people in the race unlike 2008 where there were multiple candidates which had a following that they could bring to the polls.

Now you are selling the meme that the Democrats low turnout will change in South Carolina and that will show how popular Clinton is, etc. Forget about the swing states and how independent voters DO NOT support Clinton OR trust her. Obviously, the political machine has kicked into high gear to try to sell a new phony message for Clinton and you are right there alongside trying to sell it to the American Public.

And about that political revolution ... The more people hear about Bernie and hear him speak the greater his support will grow. But the Corporations, the Billionaires, the corrupt politicians and their families and friends who want to be able to feed at the public trough and prey on the American Public don't want that so they pump up Trump and Clinton.

And now I see this bullshit post that Democrats should heed your warning. Keep it up Rachel and you might just become the Clinton's favorite interviewer (of course you''ll have to beat out the fawning twits on Morning Joe for that honor).





15 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

jillan

(39,451 posts)
3. But - Rachel is missing the biggest point of the 2008 race - and it wasn't even Obama.
Fri Feb 26, 2016, 02:46 AM
Feb 2016

Dems were beyond motivated to take back the WH after 8 disastrous years of Dubya.

Hello?!

Stainless

(718 posts)
4. I quit watching MSGOP when they let Ed Schultz go and became Faux Lite
Fri Feb 26, 2016, 02:58 AM
Feb 2016

I thought Rachel would stay impartial, but she started whoring for Hillary and I couldn't stand to watch her any longer.

msongs

(67,420 posts)
7. imagine a group of voters who are so dumb they can be kept away from voting by a tv entertainer lol
Fri Feb 26, 2016, 04:30 AM
Feb 2016
 

silvershadow

(10,336 posts)
10. Rachel is doing what they all do- she's become accustomed to celebrity, and she's fawning
Fri Feb 26, 2016, 04:55 AM
Feb 2016

over it. She's not going to endanger her paycheck. She saw what happened to so many before her. It is sad.

 

mythology

(9,527 posts)
11. Just because she doesn't fawn over your candidate
Fri Feb 26, 2016, 06:47 AM
Feb 2016

doesn't mean she's on the take. Just because Sanders lost Iowa and Nevada, doesn't mean the results are suspect.

If you want to impugn somebody's reputation, you need more than name calling and innuendo.

betsuni

(25,549 posts)
12. The Case of the Mysterious "Mrs."
Fri Feb 26, 2016, 07:00 AM
Feb 2016

I'll give ten dollars cash money to anyone who can tell me why this poster keeps calling Maddow "Mrs." Or I'll bake you a coffeecake. Whatever you want. Just solve the mystery, I beg you.

Nonhlanhla

(2,074 posts)
15. Rachel Maddow is an important progressive voice
Fri Feb 26, 2016, 08:57 AM
Feb 2016

And whichever candidates she supports (which is not all that clear), I would still say so.

I don't see why we should cannibalistically eat our own.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Maddow: Spinning like cra...