and the reaction of the male panelists proves it. For what it's worth...I'm male.

that's what I thought might have been part of the problem. I don't watch the "media" anymore but from what I've read on DU and the reason I stopped watching them in 2002..was because they manipulate and manufacture the news. And, from what I've read it's only gotten much worse. It's who they choose to say nice things about and who they choose to excoriate over the least thing. Think President Obama's tan suit..

Glad Nicolle Wallace talked about this and stuck to it in spite of ".. the
men trying to talk her out of it.. " shocking.

We certainly know from experience what happened with Hillary and their obsession with her emails 24/7

Nothing has changed much in my lifetime.

Is Women Rising (to get out the vote).

https://www.democraticunderground.com/104022174

versus the boy genius Mayor was especially striking.

Do we blame black people for not supporting Harris or Booker but instead supporting Biden in very large numbers especially in SCarolina.
Identity politics doesn’t always work.
I really liked Harris but she let her sister run a lousy campaign.

Why, for example, does the media so often mention his Rhodes scholarship and much less often Cory Booker's? Why are they more likely to mention Buttigiegg went to Harvard than that Booker went to Stanford and Yale (for law school)?

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/buttigieg-booker-rhodes-scholar_n_5dcf18ebe4b0d2e79f8cb305

HuffPost searched mentions in U.S. publications for 2019, finding that news outlets cited Buttigieg’s Rhodes scholarship 596 times.

Booker had just 79 mentions.

SNIP

A number of articles that mentioned both Buttigieg and Booker and their background often noted that Buttigieg was a Rhodes scholar without mentioning that Booker was too.

Openly gay and married.
Speaks openly about his religious faith.
Military veteran.
37 years old.
Mayor of small town.
Speaks seven languages.

I’m not saying any of those things makes him qualified to be President.
I don’t support him.
He’s not liberal enough for me.
He’s too young.
I don’t think he would win.
Plus, I think we are way past due for a woman.

But, I must admit that his story is very interesting.

And yet his Rhodes scholarship is mentioned 6 times as often as Booker's.

I think what's most interesting about Buttigieg is that someone with so little experience thinks he's the best person to be President. And I agree with Klobuchar -- no woman with his background would be taken seriously.

Last edited Wed Dec 4, 2019, 06:56 AM - Edit history (1)

after one occasionally incoherent debate performance let alone four or five. Or did something innocent like nibble her husband’s finger in public.

Outrage when they cannot. And if they are perfect they're accused of being over-prepared and unlikeable.

having the mindset “It’s my way or the highway”.

post enough! Thank you, Hekate!

It is largely due to our so-called "liberal" media coverage that we have the Worst Human Being in the World as President!

They let him have a free pass on EVERYTHING!!!!!

But her emails .....

Is about the “horse race” narrative to fill airtime between ads for drugs we never knew we needed.

It is infotainment and while it occasionally brushes us against journalism it is about making money, not providing information. The best thing to do is turn it off.

SHE (and all of her cohorts at MSNBC) could actually, you know, make a difference w/r/t to this problem, rather than complain about it.

I like them both, for different reasons. Nicolle generally has quite good panels, and conducts them well. She lets people finish their thoughts, as a general rule. She's bright and well-informed.

Rachel is overwhelmingly intelligent. She uses her first 15 - 20 minutes to lay out history and groundwork, takes a commercial break, then comes back and lays out the day's news in that context. If you don't like an intense seminar, either tune in late or don't bother.

But don't tar the entire "media" with the same brush. The three women I tune in for (Katy Tur being the other, still learning) are substantive journalists and don't bullshit.

That was the guiding principle of her message. Everything pointed back to core principle. Her message appealed. Her debate attack of Biden reflected that principle as Biden touted his ability to reach across the aisle in another era, apparently not realizing how out of touch with reality that message currently is. I will miss her.

But it can't be overlooked that she had not put together a good organization. Some suggest that making her sister co-campaign manager was a big part of it. I have no insider knowledge so I can't comment on the legitimacy of that statement but something was missing. It also showed up in her lack of black support.

And there is no doubt but what the good old boy network of oligarchs is still well entrenched as the top post correctly points out. For that, follow the money.

I heard that yesterday, too.

I have seen these memes here on DU since yesterday and it makes me so angry. "Kamala wasn't genuine," "Her campaign made mistakes," etc.

So I missed Nicolle's show but her comments about women needing to be 'perfect, no gaffes or mistakes allowed' is on point. This has been going on for generations and though the US likes to think of itself as forward looking (before Trump), we've proven again and again that women get short-shrifted when it comes to taking up positions of power.

I've always loved the quote on Ginger Rogers (Hillary mentioned it in 2016):

Ginger Rogers did everything Fred Astaire did. She just did it backwards and in high heels.

That pretty much sums it up. Women are required to do far more than their male counterparts to earn equal respect.

Btw, I was saddened and surprised by Kamala Harris' campaign suspension yesterday. The winnowing has begun in earnest at this point. I'm sure Harris' supporters are hugely disappointed. She's a class act! Loved her response to Trump's snarky tweet. She rammed in back at him, perfectly.

to Harris who we're going to see and hear a lot more from!