Which Democrat does the Corporate Media prefer?

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

It looks like the powers-that-be are finished with the Bush team's failed management. Their team has given us 911, a mess in Afghanistan, a mess in Iraq, and a failed economy.

So which Democratic candidate is the Corporate Media going to promote? What kind of candidate does General Electric (NBC), CapCities/Disney (ABC), Westinghouse (CBS), and Newscorp (FOX) want?

I guess it will be someone pro-corporate, why would they want to promote a troublemaker? They will want someone who can read speeches well, rile up an audience, but not do anything that will upset the rich and powerful. After all, they may think Halliburton's war-profiteering is getting out of hand, but they don't want anyone questioning their own corporations. Remember, when Gore's populist pose got out of hand, Lieberman just assured everyone it was "rhetorical flourishes" - the DLC didn't want to scare off the money.

So which is it? Will they go with one of the liberal rich Yalies, Kerry or Dean? They support corporate power, but a kinder, gentler corporate power. Perhaps we'll all have to fall behind the front-runner, Lieberman? Maybe Clark or Edwards will come out as "moderates" and tell us we need more privitizing, more free-fair trade agreements, and less corporate regulation?

Which candidate is most acceptable to the corporate media, and the giant defense contractors and entertainment conglomerates that own them? Which candidate will be able to get along with the press whores, and politely answer inane questions about issues that don't matter?

Which Democrat can be trusted to say all the right things, but never threaten the establishment?

[rabid_nerd]

1. Al Gore

Draft Gore!

[dajabr]

2. Why mince words?

Just come out and say it without couching it in a hypothetical.

You like Kucinich, and you're upset that he was lambasted on Hardball.

I didn't like what happened either - I thought Tweety was extremely unprofessional.

But, I could make that point without taking a shot at the other cabdidates.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

4. Am I mincing words?

I think I'm pretty clear. I think Kucinich, Moseley-Braun, and Sharpton will never be allowed to win by the DNC and the media. I suspect they'll be dropping out soon. Gephardt will run a serious campaign if and when the AFL-CIO tells him too, but they don't seem to be in a hurry to pick him.

It looks like the press whores will get to decide who they give favorable coverage to, and most likely all the Dem groups will fall into line.

So who's our biggest whore?

[dajabr]

7. Why would you even belong to a Party...

Who's nominee will be considered by you to be, "the biggest whore?"

I'm not saying you don't have a point about the Media, but do you think (for example) Dean's 100,000+ registered supporters flocked to him because he was annointed by the Media? Yes, he got some favorable press early, only because he really was looked at as a novelty. The buzz and support he generated was of his own doing, and serves as an example of how a candidate "outside of the mainstream" overcomes the Media Whores.

And if that's what you thought, why not mention Kucinich, Moseley-Braun, and Sharpton in your original post?

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

14. Dean is the Ralph Nader of rich white liberals

The rich and upper middle class white liberals got pretty scared by Bush, for good reason, so they decided to pick an "outsider" to challenge the DLC - Dean, a member of the DLC who has been cut out at some point.

Dean is unelectable, and the upper middle class white people think his not quite populist, pretend to rock the boat, false reformism is going to catch America on fire. That's exactly what the college commies and vegans hippies thought about Nader, and they were willing to blow the whole deal to make a statement.

Will the white upper class do the same thing?

There is more to the United States than socially liberal white collar corporations and the professionals who work there. Dean people have done a REALLY good job organizing, I'll give them that. But so far, you've given the unions, black people, and the white working class little reason to make common cause with you.

You trash the other establishment candidates like Kerry, but Dean is the exact same thing, just didn't make it as high up as Kerry. You are polite to Sharpton, but never take him seriously, and you expect black people will just fall in line. Since Kucinich is white, you don't even bother to be polite, you just call him ugly white trash and say he yells too much. And of course Gephardt, the traditional union candidate, is just a Bush whore right? After all, lots of blue collar workers supported the war in Afghanistan and many Iraq as well, and Gephardt represented them. So you discount them as sheeple and really expect your righteous anti-war but not-too-crazy Howard Dean is going to convince everyone that he's our man?

I'm willing to compromise and make common cause with all the Democratic groups. Upper middle class white collar professionals better realize that you don't get to control the terms of the debate in the Democratic party.

[theriverburns]

19. Great post

"There is more to the United States than socially liberal white collar corporations and the professionals who work there. Dean people have done a REALLY good job organizing, I'll give them that. But so far, you've given the unions, black people, and the white working class little reason to make common cause with you." WhoCountsTheVotes



Dean being considered a liberal, or being painted as the great white hope of the left, reminds me of those extremely caucasian, extremely boring, boy bands singing "Negro Music" in the early sixties to make it more palatable to the white audience. They butchered some really fantastic music.

Dean is Pat Boone singing Tutti Frutti.

[chimpymustgo]

20. Bull's-eye, WhoCounts.

Very good summary of the real world political situation. I'm an Edwards supporter. Who do you like - Gephardt?

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

21. Gephardt is my compromise candidate for right now

He led the fight against NAFTA, which I give him a lot of credit for, and he is a strong union supporter and has a consisent record of representing working class families.

If Edwards or Clark come out as "free-traders" they won't get my vote.

[John_H]

16. "allowed" to win?

Those three candidates have cumulative support of less than 3 percent. You can blame the DNC, the DLC, or the delta delta deltas, but it's not a question of allowing or disallowing when almost nobody wants you to be president.

Look on the bright side, DK will go back to doing the tremendous job he does in the House. That's a good thing. Sharpton and Mosely Braun will help keep the DNC from taking the African-American vote for granted (which actually is one of the serious and potentially fatal flaws of the party, not the BS conspiracy theories that get floated around here).

But , just for the hell of it, can you explain the mechanism by which the DNC is not allowing DK,AS, and CMB to get to a combined five percent?

[TheDonkey]

3. Whoever is most popular

They would be all over Gore if he was running. But sadly he will not be in 2004 (and I can't see him ever trying to run and be sucessful after).

The one thing that the newscorps will follow is the polls. Whoever gets the highest ratings and isn't insane liberal (Kucinich, Sharpton, the good people ;-)). That is why Dean has recently been plastered all over the media, and Edwards was last quarter, and Liberman right from the start.

[Octafish]

5. Each Dem has their attractive qualities.

This is conjecture: Whoever it is has a lot of experience carrying water for the Establishment. There'll be no visible tie to the Establishment. The candidate's message will resonate and divide. He may even win the nomination. For our kids' futures, I hope not.

This is obvious: Establishment truly is a great word to describe "Them." The propertied class, the Establishment represents the 5-percent of the population who own 90-percent of the Real Property: money, land, stocks & bonds, patents and limited resources. The Establishment got to put their money, through the backing of the kind Mrs. Harriman and the generosity of the hedge-fund-minded Jackson Stephens, on Bill Clinton in 1992. He really helped the little guy in his 8 years.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

9. I agree

So which candidates does have the most experience carrying water for the Establishment? I'm willing to be realistic. I want (almost) anyone but Bush.

So who is it? Who is the most pro-corporate, pro-rich candidate that the media will like?

[Cascadian]

6. The one who is the most centrist and less threatening.

One who supports Bush's Iraq war and will continue on with the same stagnant policies like the death penalty, the Cuba embargo, NAFTA/WTO, the drug war....

John

[blm]

8. WCTV...a question...

what makes you think corporate powers like Kerry, when his 17 year record shows more anti-corporate tendencies? He has promoted legislation favoring small business over large corporations and labor over corporations, helped craft the Kyoto Accord, is working to overturn the FCC decision, and has the best environmental record of any candidate. Kerry almost entirely on his own brought down an entire corrupt banking system in BCCI. Corporate lackeys don't rack up records like that.

Kerry and Kucinich are two of the most liberal candidates in my lifetime, and I am delighted to support them both.

[mdmc]

10. Gore or Dean

They want a story, a name they can recognize. The press won't build someone up, but if they are already built up, then the press will run with them.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

15. Okay, why did Kerry support NAFTA?

That's a corporate power issue, and a really big one - the biggest one of my lifetime. I'm not going to settle for a candidate that turns over all power to the companies than promises to nag them if they aren't nice enough.

I want a representative that will put power in our hands, and how has Kerry ever done that?

And as for BCCI, Kerry's hearings DID NOTHING - if he wants to make an issue of it now, if he wants to speak openly about his past battles and his future plans, I'm all ears...

[sangha]

17. Why don't you answer blm's question?

It was a good question, and instead of speaking about the contradiction between your misportrayal and Kerry's record, you offer the "litmus test" of NAFTA.

[blm]

18. BCCI didn't close its doors?

Gee...I must have read the wrong newspaper that year.

btw...Kerry is for free trade WITH environmental protections AND livable wages, with minimum wage indexed to the cost of living, with a goal of making it standard WORLDWIDE for international corporations. Do you think the Kyoto Accord was meant to HURT working people? You are woefully uninformed with your blanket statements.

[Terwilliger]

11. Who fucking cares?!!?

Are Democrats about image or substance?!?!?!?! :nuke:

[jmcgowanjm]

12. kerry n/t

[carolinayellowdog]

13. Lieberman

Worst of the lot IMO but they raved about what a brilliant choice he was for VP. Then he ended up giving away the election by conceding illegal ballots for Repugs in Florida. (Under pressure from the media whores, BTW.)