No Hillary, Not Yet

I have about had enough of the media playing queen-maker with this election. Never has my respect for journalism in general been lower, and it was pretty bad to begin with. From the early days of the primary election the media has been dishonestly including super-delegate totals along with pledged delegates. This has given Hillary Clinton an air of invincibility that she just did not deserve. Now they have taken it to the next level.
Last night, Associated Press – on a day when nobody voted – surprised everyone by abruptly declaring the Democratic Party primary over and Hillary Clinton the victor. The decree, issued the night before the California primary in which polls show Clinton and Bernie Sanders in a very close race, was based on the media organization’s survey of “superdelegates”: the Democratic Party’s 720 insiders, corporate donors and officials whose votes for the presidential nominee count the same as the actually elected delegates. AP claims that superdelegates who had not previously announced their intentions privately told AP reporters that they intend to vote for Clinton, bringing her over the threshold. AP is concealing the identity of the decisive superdelegates who said this.
Although the Sanders campaign rejected the validity of AP’s declaration – on the ground that the superdelegates do not vote until the convention and he intends to try to persuade them to vote for him – most major media outlets followed the projection and declared Clinton the winner.

This election is almost over, but not quite. Hillary is the likely nominee, but it does not require a huge stretch of the imagination or wild conspiracy theories to understand that this is not yet a done deal. By calling the election on the eve of the last Super Tuesday of the primary election the media has over stepped its boundaries and is attempting to make the news rather than report it. 


  1. Honest reporting does not include willfully blind reporting. Please, under the rules the SDs matter. I don't like it either, but don't be a fool. It would be like me saying you are not gay despite the fact that you say you are.

  2. That's an analogy fail right there 2:28. My gayness isn't an election to be decided on July 25th, it's my perpetual state of being. I can't change being gay. I tried. But if Hillary Clinton is indited or if one of her many hackers releases a campaign ending email these delegates may and can change their votes.

    A correct analogy would be to do a poll showing that Hillary or Trump was wining the general election and then to call the election based on that poll. WTF? We haven't voted yet!

  3. funny, don't think you made such noise eight years ago, when the media called it for Obama under the exact same situation. Plus, superdelegates by their very nature are establishment people, who would not vote for Sanders in a million years. Media is only being realistic, unlike you.

  4. Both Obama and Hillary were establishment candidates. There is a zero sum gain between the two.

    The choice between Bernie and Hillary is a clear establishment v anti-establishment.

    But I'm not being unrealistic. All this time I expected to do my little Bernie protest vote in the primary and then Hillary in the general. That's still what I expect will happen. But the media is not playing its proper role and that's what this post is about.

  5. You claim to be gay, SDs claim to be committed to voting for Hilary. Seems like we sometimes have to rely on people's word.

  6. @7:11

    If you don't know the difference between an immutable characteristic and a vote that can change with the wind I don't know what to tell you. There's really no comparison.


Post a Comment