IceSpear's above post is spot on. The media attacks Hillary unfairly, I just think it's because they have the attention span of a squirrel. Marco Rubio, the Hispanic Republican version of Obama, and John McCain, the war hero maverick senator are very appealing things to the media who want interesting stories and articles. Hillary is easy to attack with all of those "scandals" at their disposal to make some interesting headlines.
So is DimpledChad going to be pro-O'Malley or anti-Hillary? I could have sworn he said he liked Hillary but simply preferred O'Malley more.
I am pro-O'Malley and pro-Hillary. I don't dislike her, I just get annoyed when any criticism of her or anything that looks bad on her is handwaved as a media attack on Hillary. I've said it before, I'll say it again, Hillary would make a great president. I just happen to believe that Martin O'Malley has a very good progressive record in Maryland. He legalized gay marriage, his state was the first state in the country to pass the DREAM Act, he enacted stricter gun control standards, he invested in education and gave Maryland the best public schools in the nation,
Maryland was one of just eight states to maintain a AAA credit rating throughout the recession, and because of his policies, Maryland has the highest median income rate in the country.
I just think we as Democrats have a perfect opportunity right now to nominate a progressive. When the Republicans had that long winning streak in the 70s and 80s, they took advantage of it. They nominated Ronald Reagan, they went for the win. They didn't nominate Bob Dole and self-compromise. We need to go for the win.
You can't deny the media are less favorable towards Hillary than they were towards Obama '08, for instance.
They're typical opportunists that you would expect in the media. They're looking for a headline. They did the same thing with Obama. Why do you think that Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, birther nonsense gained any traction? The media is simply being its typical slimy media self. It's exactly what you would expect, and Hillary is an easy target. I don't endorse those phony scandals, but are you really surprised? They do that to everyone. Hillary is just a very easy target because the right keeps bringing up phony scandals which are easy to exploit.
And for the record, conservatives who argue that certain media outlets are biased against them have a point, too. You don't have to be an actual conservative to see a basic truth. When's the last time the New York Times endorsed a Republican candidate in a general election? What about the Washington Post? Even if you agree with these newspapers' endorsements (and I do), you cannot deny that from a national conservative's standpoint, they have rarely been friendly to them.
That was sort of a random example. I guess not a very good one, haha. But, my point stands despite that, I think.
