Why Are The Pundits Not Pressuring Kucinich, Richardson to Drop Out Like They Are Edwards?

[DaLittle Kitty]

Kucinich has NO Resources...

Richardson has No Resources!


Why the different treatment?

Edwards has Resources.

Edwards CAN WIN... :) and defeat the DLC Corporatists! :puke:

[Demeter]

1. Because Kucinich and Richardson Pose NO Threat to Either Media Darling

Silly Rabbit, Tricks are for politics!

[Tennessee Gal]

2. Precisely right!

[Anouka]

3. You're kidding, right?

There's no greater pressure to leave, than being told one can't debate -- and then getting a free ad after the debate to state your positions, all by one's lonesome.

Kucinich is getting the pressure, not Edwards.

But I haven't read all the news. The news I've seen has discussed Edwards having a strategy of teaming up with Obama to get rid of Hillary, and then hitting Obama. Can you name a name of a pundit?

If you mean pressuring Edwards by not mentioning him as often as Obama and Hillary, that's just Edwards not being as 'exciting' as the Obama/Hillary storyline to the media. When Edwards excites, Edwards gets press.

Richardson is there, not because of Nevada (in my opinion), but to balance with Hillary -- as happened Saturday night.

[DaLittle Kitty]

4. Precisely!

[cyclezealot]

12. The reason the NH affiliate gave Kucinich the free air time

They probably got wind of the Kucinich lawsuit before the FCC. AMericans do have the right to protest FCC local affiliate license renewal. And they know Kucinich's people will do it , instead of back down. Not that their license renewal has any threat of being denied by the corporate run FCC. But, its still bad publicity. ABC is too big to worry about pesky FCC protesters. / I read both NH Democrats and Republicans reacted negatively to Kucinich and Paul's exclusions.
About harassment on Kucinich. The media took offense to Kucinich's call to slow down media consolidation from the get go. Kucinich has taken crap off of Blitzer, Stephanalous, from the get go. When has not Kucinich felt their prejudice. And their slander has worked at denying Kucinich ever a fair chance to present his case.

[Anouka]

19. That's horrible.

Thank you for this information. It's news to me. Republicans and Democrats are not each others enemies... at least, grass roots level. Corporatists are.

[cyclezealot]

20. Its an assumption obviously

But, a logical one. You think the US media has a sense of fairness, one would be daydreaming.

[cali]

5. Provide evidence that pundits are pressuring Edwards to get out

I haven't seen anything like that posted here.

[soleft]

6. yeah, I was wondering same thing

[cali]

10. guaranteed it won't be provided. n/t

[MadHound]

7. DK isn't getting pressured to drop out because the Democratic party and the MSM

Are systematically excluding him. From the Iowa debates, from the NH debate, from the ballot in Texas, etc. etc., ad nauseum.

So please, stop with the "poor widdle John" act. He's getting his face in the media, he's on the ballot, and he's getting a lot more exposure than Kucinich, whose platform he shamelessly stole.

Geez, first it's the whiny Clinton crybabies, now it's the whiny Edwards crybabies.:eyes:

Oh, and just for your information Edwards was a huge backer of the DLC, and is still being bankrolled by Wall St and the legal sector. So much for being one of the people:eyes:

[DaLittle Kitty]

9. There are statements daily by the pundit/propagandists

Eg., "Well even if he does well Edwards does not have the resources to compete on Feb 5th." and similar statements made daily, slightly different wording but same message. David Broder's recent column post Iowa. That pretty much sums it up:)Thanks!

[MadHound]

11. Hey, at least he IS getting media exposure

Meanwhile DK is being excluded from debates(and has been since last summer), getting no media exposure, and is being dropped off the primary ballot by those state's Democratic parties. Sorry, but you have absolutely nothing, nothing to complain about. Poor widdle John is getting plenty of exposure, and doesn't have his own party turning on him like DK does.

Methinks thou doth protest too much.

[MuseRider]

8. They do not need to pressure

Kucinich, the media and the loyalty oaths are doing it for them.

I have not personally heard anyone of the pundits pressuring Edwards in particular, maybe they have. I don't watch but get my news here and have not read about pundit pressure in great abundance. No media attention? LOL. Right. Where was everyone when the others were blocked out? In fact where was Edwards? Now you all want to complain? Good luck with it. When you allow it to happen to someone else in order to gain yourself more points then you certainly can't expect it to never happen to you. We all die when we let an injustice happen to another.

[cyclezealot]

13. Edwars fans should heed Kucinich's treatment by the media.

I am sure they do not like his populist posturing. Once Kucinich is totally out of the way, I predict the media 's guns will better aim at Edwards.

[MuseRider]

15. It is the same

always and people never yell loudly until it is "their guy" or "their life" or "their rights". To be fair, there are certainly some here who do not like Kucinich but are smart enough or care enough about our democracy to yell about it all along. Those are the people who see what is happening.

Of course Edwards is next, even if he was not running as a populist. The media and the powers that be decided long ago that in the context of the anger that this society has now been weaned on and now is our political discourse it would be great blood shed to pit the black community against the women with the men against them all. I don't think that will play out exactly as they liked because I do not see any friction between the groups drawing on those lines but the media can still play it that way and it will give them great air time and lots of blood to draw the masses to view.

[peace13]

14. The question is why didn't the public care when the media

failed to ask Kucinich questions in the debates, cut him out of photos of debate participants and when those actions failed to detour him not allow him to debate at all? Only Kucinich supporters spoke out about this. Now the media continues to thin the ranks and people are outraged. Wake up, can you not see that they have been doing this all along? Your process was shit on months ago. I wish people would quite complaining after the fact. Your choices will be presented to you and many here see very happy with that.

[seasat]

16. Because Richardson is getting almost no media attention.

Even if pundits mention negative things, like saying he won't make it all the way due to low funds and accepting public financing, they are at least giving him some mention. Richardson is getting almost no mentions outside of the few appearances where they are interested in his thoughts on foreign policy. At least it keeps Edwards name in the news. Publicity, even if it's not great, is still good in a close race.

Most of Richardson's criticisms of candidate's policy stances have been directed at Clinton. He's even criticized her regarding her attacks on Obama stating that he thought she was getting too personal. He would benefit more from a slip up by her since most voters favor her in polls due to her experience. There was also the rumor, that was disproven but still persists, that Richardson directed his supporters to caucus for Obama in Iowa. However polls show that most of the second choices went to Edwards. This has lead supporters of Clinton and Edwards to state that Richardson is running for Obama's VP.

Richardson has also directed the least amount of policy criticism against Edwards. He'd make a natural fit as an Edwards VP. Edwards would benefit from having someone with his long foreign policy experience on the ticket. Edwards has moved closer to Richardson's position of immediate withdrawal from Iraq with no residual forces. Richardson would make the ticket less of another white male ticket due to his Hispanic heritage. Maybe he's actually shilling for Edwards.

Please make up your minds. Is Richardson supposedly shilling for Clinton, Obama, or Edwards? Or maybe, just maybe, he's actually running for president and thinks he has a long shot chance.

[Sparkly]

17. Neither is Kucinich. nt

[MuseRider]

18. Here is how bad it is,

Maybe worse for Richardson because it is his first run, at least people (some anyway) know Kucinich because he ran last time. Seriously, I pay tons of attention as do all here and I forget that Richardson is running sometimes. He is still getting to debate, that is something but it is not enough. I did not watch the last ?debate? because I have absolutely no interest in any of the others, was it run fairly at least? Did Richardson get a chance?

I feel your pain. If others would just take a moment away from being so driven to see their candidate win and look at what is going on I wonder if it would make a difference. Sadly I don't think many care as long as they have pretty smiles, lots of feel good lingo and an empty suit to vote for.

[AzDar]

21. Because, as in 2004, Edwards is the candidate ' they' fear most.

[jgraz]

22. Um...because they're already out?

Edwards is the only progressive that the corporatists still see as a threat. They know Hillary and Obama will dance to their tune -- Obama will try to finesse it with a veil of "bi-partisanship", but he'll be the same or worse than Hillary in the end.

Edwards is the only threat. That's why he needs to stay in.

[Freddie Stubbs]

23. "I see dead campaigns." Their campaigns are already over. They just don't know it yet.