If you have "no place to go," come here!

The media hates Hillary Clinton

DCblogger's picture

New poll showing Clinton beating everyone is reported as bad news for Hillary

A new Quinnipiac University poll shows Hillary Clinton coasting to a crushing victory in a three-way race against Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden, winning 45 percent of the vote, compared with 22 for Sanders and 18 for Biden.

And the good news for Clinton doesn't stop there.

The poll shows Clinton beating Jeb Bush head to head.
The poll shows Clinton beating Marco Rubio head to head.
The poll shows Clinton beating Donald Trump head to head.
The poll shows Clinton winning in a landslide in scenarios where Trump runs as an independent.
The poll did not test Clinton against Scott Walker or other possible nominees.

So how did the media report this poll showing that if the election were held this week Hillary Clinton would win? Well, as bad news for Hillary Clinton!

Bloomberg: "Biden More Competitive Than Clinton Against Leading Republicans: Poll"
Politico: "Poll: Biden outperforms Hillary in general election; Trump leads GOP field"
Time: "Voters open to Joe Biden presidential bid in new poll"

The press has hated Hillary ever since she burst upon the scene in 1992. One of the reasons the press has not gone after Sanders the way they went after Dean is that they are too busy hating on Hillary, that and they don't believe anyone styling himself a democratic socialist can get elected. It is a great advantage to him, and I hope Sanders and his team understand that once he defeats Hillary the media's guns will be turned on him.

No votes yet


V. Arnold's picture
Submitted by V. Arnold on

I do not know about the media (USA), but why would they not hate her?
She's a part of the machine; an integral part of the machine...
There are no viable candidates in the race; to support one is to support the mainstream and thus the status quo.
Radical change or status quo; your choice....

Submitted by Dromaius on

But they're all but supporting Biden and he has "Status" and "Quo" tatooed in script on his ass.

IMHO, it isn't about the status and the quo.

V. Arnold's picture
Submitted by V. Arnold on

...there are no viable candidates for 2016.
Jill Stein? Sure, but she's not viable...
Americans just don't get it; they're just so screwed, but can't get off the merry-go-round.

jo6pac's picture
Submitted by jo6pac on

by your comment. I myself are a little confused by this because the owners of the so-called liberal press are her friends. Then what better way to support your paid for friend by this action;)

nippersdad's picture
Submitted by nippersdad on

The Clinton hate has always struck me a being just a little too convenient. The Clintons have always been a part of the neoliberal/neoconservative bipartisan Washington Consensus; no one has been friendlier to the interests of big business than have the Clintons.

Part of being friendly to big business, however, is the ability to move the Overton Window in favor of their interests. They may not like being the butt of every Beltway joke and conspiracy theory, but no one can deny that they are effective foils to their Republican counterparts and (at 200 million plus, thus far) no one say that their schtick has not been lucrative. They have been well paid for their humiliations. If one is talking about the death of Vince Foster, no one is talking about the concentration and deregulation of the media industry because all of the oxygen has already been burned off.

This just looks like a lot of kayfabe to me.