It's time to talk about Joe Biden's negative media coverage

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

So The Washington Post should stick to attacking Bernie 16 times a day and leave Biden alone?

[junior chįmp]

The media's influence on elections is pretty overblown

[GeneralMacArthur]

It's almost as if

This isn't Reddit, you don't have to preface your opinions with sarcasm.

[GeneralMacArthur]

But shouldn’t this be a positive indicator for Biden? This isn’t the same as Hillary Clinton in 2016, because her favorability with the public and general election standing plummeted as Benghazi, emails, and general Clinton rehashes took their toll. Biden is still viewed favorably by the public even after he’s been derided and canceled for months. Democrats should appreciate that they have a guy made of Teflon for once.

Yep.  Biden's been attacked and attacked and attacked, in the most unfair ways imaginable, for months on end, and he still has the highest favorability of any Democrat, both among his own party and nationwide.  He still beats Trump by double-digit margins and, forget Texas, makes states like f***ing Alaska competitive.  He still comfortably leads in national primary polling and the vast majority of state polls.

This is a good thing.  We don't have to worry about how Biden will respond under pressure, under attack, in a negative media environment.  We're already there and he's doing great!

Yet there are some who say that simply receiving negative coverage is evidence that a candidate isn't up to the task.  Imagine if the national media started running front-page stories about Bernie's adoration of communist dictatorships in the 80s or his bizarre views on alternative medicine.  Imagine the New York Times running a full issue on Bernie's background, how he was a lazy bum living in a shack in the woods for almost twenty years, writing lunatic essays and ignoring the needs of his family, whom he abandoned for Jane.  Instead those are buried in the opinion columns of the Washington Post, while Biden saying something mildly controversial 45 years ago gets front-page headlines for a week.

[The Mikado]

It's almost as if

This isn't Reddit, you don't have to preface your opinions with sarcasm.

Oh, I am sorry. I've only been here 12 years and am still figuring out the community norms and expected posting style. Thanks for enlightening me.

[eric82oslo]

Yep.  Biden's been attacked and attacked and attacked, in the most unfair ways imaginable, for months on end, and he still has the highest favorability of any Democrat, both among his own party and nationwide.  

According to recent polls (Ipsos & Morning Consult), both Warren and Sanders now have higher net favorables than Biden among the Democratic electorate. You're right it wasn't like that 2-3 months ago though, but times are changing. Among younger voters, 18-50, Biden is probably nowhere near Sanders and Warren in favorability at this stage (I say probably only cause I haven't seen the age related crosstabs).

[eric82oslo]

Biden spoke for twenty minutes at the debate and made one gaffe, the record players thing.  I wouldn't even call that a gaffe.  He didn't say anything wrong or stupid.  He didn't mix up a fact.  He just referenced a technology that people don't use anymore.  So no, it's not true that "all he does is make gaffes" because the other 99.99% of his what he said was gaffe-free.  But 85% of the media coverage has been about that 0.01% of what he said.

Okay but that answer was a lot worse than just citing an outdated piece of technology, and I actually agree that too much focus has been on the record player sound bite in particular.

"We bring social workers into homes of parents to help them deal with how to raise their children. It’s not that they don’t want to help, they don’t want — they don’t know quite what to do."

Here you have the implication that social work is important because black people don't know how to raise their kids.

"Play the radio, make sure the television — excuse me, make sure you have the record player on at night, the phone — make sure that kids hear words."

And here you have Biden offering ~helpful~ suggestions on how black people should be raising their kids.

Agree with every word of this. This answer Biden gave in the 3rd debate is gonna resonate in the media, on podcasts, on YouTube and on Twitter for months. I've seen many people being truly upset and offended by it just in the few days since the debate.

[YE]

He gets a lot of negative coverage on here and AAD but does that count as media now lol?

[Devout Centrist]

The press and commentariat seem shocked that his base of elderly, uncool, and not particularly with the times supporters who aren't the sort of people they socialize with stick with him, and many loudly say that they know no one who supports this person in real life, yet he continues to lead.

It is such a strange phenomenon. I've never seen a candidate like this before.

We're still months away from the start of the primaries. A plurality of Democratic primary voters are undecided, and most have not made up their minds yet. Many are not paying all that much attention to the nomination process yet, even with historically high levels of voter engagement.

Biden can lead every poll between now and January, and still lose the nomination. Primaries are ugly, but fascinating creatures!

[Pericles]

Biden's +2.0% favorability with the general electorate is ok, but not great (Warren's is -0.5% by comparison, but her name recognition also seems to be lower as both her favorability or unfavorability are below 40%, while with Biden it's the opposite).

[Epaminondas]

Biden's constant gaffes and baggage from a lifetime in politics is like 2016 déjà vu. Even the fact that people have to sit here and deconstruct the criticisms reminds me very much of her campaign. At some point you have to ask yourself why this person should be the nominee when they are constantly on defense and seem ill-equipped for the general election.

Personally, I'm not going down that road again, and for numerous reasons. Biden does not encourage optimism for unseating Donald Trump - regardless of what the polls say right now.

The media could do this with any candidate.  They could try actually delving into Warren's policy proposals, or investigating her personal life, or hounding her around at events.  Instead she gets a free pass on everything.  And Lord knows Bernie has gotten away with murder time and time again.  Yet the press picks on Biden.  Does it really matter why?

What you're saying in your post is we should basically let the media choose our candidate for us because constant negative coverage is, in and if itself, a disqualifier, regardless of the subject of the negative coverage.

There's something to be said about the contamination of Democratic campaigns by the toxicity of GOP internecine backstabbing. Sadly that is the legacy of Ailes and is here to stay.

But could you entertain for a moment the concern that a Biden-like candidate hasn't won a Democratic presidential election in over 40 years, and hasn't won in a blowout in 55 years? (55! At best even you were a child)

Put otherwise: today, a majority of Democratic voters cannot remember a successful elderly Democratic president. How can you claim this performance ought to reassure them?

[heatcharger]

He gets a lot of negative coverage on here and AAD but does that count as media now lol?

Did you try reading the original post?

[YE]

He gets a lot of negative coverage on here and AAD but does that count as media now lol?

Did you try reading the original post?

Outside of a reference to an explicitly published WaPo piece, the source of the complaints in the OP wasn’t traditional corporate media.