Well, the mainstream media is overwhelmingly dominated by leftists, and it's nearly impossible for leftists to comment coherently on anything but leftist politics. We see that here on this site, which is predominantly leftist, and the commenters and blogger just really have little understanding of things outside their bubble. They miss even on the simplest and most obvious bits. And I'm not talking about partisan disagreement... I'm talking about simple realities... what's actually occurring right in front of their faces... the plain and the obvious.They can't perceive lines of thinking outside their bubble, and of how folks think and act outside that bubble. The what, the why, the how. It's a process of which they seem incapable. All must fit inside a leftist template. It's rigid and reactionary. So it'd be pointless to speak of a single thing, or case, or instance. They just can't get it, and that's all needs said.
There's a whole lotta projection going on in the movie industry.
Are you a young man in need of training and direction? Become a projectionist! A trained projectionist can make as much as 30 dollars a week!
Fortunately, conservatives can comment on anything and be absolutely right, including their perceptions of "lefties!"
The first four comments give a strong case for requiring people to use a name when they post.Huntsman is frequently described as the least conservative. I don't see how he is less conservative then Romney.
"The first four comments give a strong case for requiring people to use a name when they post"And appropriate medication...
Mercer, I tend to agree on Huntsman, although there are a few things that tend to stick in people's minds. When defending his support for civil unions, he said something link 'I don't think there's enough equality in this country.' That really floored me.The Media is most wrong about Gary Johnson, for their decision to completely ignore him.
Actually, over on the other thread, Jeff made an especially perspicacious point: adnministrations tend to suffer from whatever baggage candidates had in the campaign. Tying to that comment, the misperception of Romney may be that he is essentially baggage-free. Jeff's diagnosis was that Romney's baggage was unusually unbridled cynicism; seems to me that the strange last several months could see his cynicism migrate toward dangerous paranoid bitterness. (Well, not really paranoia; pretty much everyone has learned to dislike the guy lately).There's a perception in the media that each of the clown show surges in the Republican primary is for your entertainment only; soon enough we will say goodbye to the circus and just go ahead and elect Romney. Problem is, if you were Romney, you would be quite agitated by the circus; indeed, if your Presidential aspirations were as thinly-veiled as Romney's, you would likely be looking to settle scores in the WH, perhaps using the apparatus of the modern security state fully at your disposal.So the misperception is that the clown show of the Republican primary is essentially harmless fun. That assumes a quality of character and patience from likely nominee Romney that no one would otherwise attribute to the guy.
BTW, my argument just above is inconsistent with the CW, but consider: what is Nixon's most famous bitterly paranoid quote? "You won't have Nixon to kick around anymore", after he lost the 1962 California gubenatorial election?Are we not rapidly approaching a "You won't have Romney to kick around anymore" moment?
Agreed, the mainstream media is most wrong about Huntsman. They immediately slipped him into their leftist template, drafting him as an ally into their never ending jihad against their evil Faux News enemies. That's the prism through which the lefty media views the world. It's just rigid and reactionary. Now, that said, the guy doesn't have much charisma, or name recognition, and hasn't run much of a campaign. So like Pawlenty, he hasn't helped himself, identified an opportunity and developed a strategy to take advantage of that opportunity. Pawlenty bailed, and didn't have the belly or smarts to do all of the above. Huntsman is self funding, and is sticking around, but he's pretty much analogous with TPaw, in campaign concept. The lefty media may have defined their campaigns, but these candidates have willingly participated in that known-known of lefty media reactionaryism, and haven't worked within that known environment to build a campaign. TPaw must be just KICKING himself right now. He read the headlines, listened to the talking heads, believed them all, and dropped. Here's something old school that I'd recommend to any future presidential candidate. Stick around 'til February election year, no matter what it takes. The Perry/Bachmann boomlets are piled upon a historical mountain of boomlets. They come and they go... they come and they go. If you want the prize, you gotta stay in it to see if a boomlet comes your way, at the right time. And don't get involved at all, if you can't stick it out. Huntsman seems at least disciplined enough to do that much.
@First Anon,Based on what you point out, I've resolved to get more non-lefty media. Where do I go online for good, compact summaries? I really want to hear the arguments I don't hear in the MSM, but with some filter on the repetition and pointless trash talk. Suggestions? By the way, I'm not a troll, but a moderate who wants more info. I totally agree that MSM is biased.
Nothing much to do besides ignore the mainstream media, and they won't be around to be ignored much longer, it appears. After that, go for whatever you want. I even read stuff on this site. Although it's hard partisan lefty in nature, it does give indication of current status. There's no shortage of information, and no trick to acquiring it. You just gotta avoid wasting time with those who DON'T provide it.And it's often a good idea to avoid links being pimped on websites. ;-)
@Anon, so no particular websites? That was no help at all. No thanks for nothing.
JB: Maybe you should have tried the question: "Which of the presidential candidates, if any, do you think the part of the press that likes to see a Republican in the White House is getting wrong? Not the chances of winning, but stuff about the candidate him or herself?"
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.
At The Washington Post
At The American Prospect