MSNBC showed an Ad that stated that Hillary and Obama are "unelectable" and that only John Edwards

can win for the Dems on TeeVee this morning.

This was an amateur made commercial that spoke of the fact that although polls are showing Hillary first and Obama second, most real life people haven't been polled, and that it is John Edwards that is most electable. The argument in the video is the exact one that I have often heard here at DU by Edwards supporters.

I tried to locate this ad on Youtubes, but haven't yet.

But my question is.....if Edwards is the one that the Republicans are most afraid to have win the Dems primaries, why was that commercial shown in morning primetime on the Super Tuesday Show?...considering that it didn't have to be, since a producer had to actually locate this ad, and get an OK to air it (free publicity.....as the ad was ran as part of the Super Tuesday show, not as a paid ad)?

What would make General Electric's (fifth largest defense contractor in the U.S.) Cable news channels feel the need to showcase what some here would tout to be totally true and accurate...since the MSM is "supposed" to be ignoring and smearing Edwards? In other words, why would MSNBC feel compeled to promote John "worst nightmare" Edwards so far ahead of the vote, considering that he is supposed to be the biggest threat to corporate interest...which is all that MSNBC is? :shrug:

Fred Thompson, who is the GE Corporate candidate. Maybe they just don't think Edwards stands a realistic chance?

.....the ad first shows a pic of Hillary, than of Obama. The ad states that although they are polling 1st and 2nd, they are not electable (doesn't say why or why not).....than it asks....."have you been polled?"...and then it states No, No, No (all done in text). Then it shows in text...."only one Democrat is electable", and then it shows a pic of John Edwards (again, it doesn't say "why" he might be most electable....just shows the pic).

really think that Edwards is a big threat to corporate interests ? Not so much.

considering that "they" liked him enough to be the "VP" nominee last time round, and his appearance at the "power that be" bildenberg big meeting in 2004 was a "hit" and all.......

That's why I'm asking Edwards supporters why the help from GE for Edwards when it wasn't "forced"?

I'm sure it was just a slip up from some low intern. She/he will be quickly taken to the woodshed, once GE gets a call from the Hillary campaign.

Have you read the meeting minutes?

See how easy it is when you don't have any proof ("most real life people" doesn't count).

BTW, here's what the polls say (hint/Obama leads against every other Republican candidate).
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/national.html

It seems no one else but you seen this ad. Please.....

telling me that I'm making shit up?

I'm too much of a gentleman to do that. I'm sure you seen what you thought you seen.

"Hardball's Campaign Ad Challenge

Make your own campaign ad about your favorite presidential candidate or the candidate you like the least. We'll play the best videos on "Hardball."

YOUR ADS: Watch entries featured on Hardball
UPLOAD YOUR AD HERE
More on the challenge"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036697/

If you scroll down it is on the right side.

edit to add - it has a link to go to so you can watch the ads that were submitted. That should take care of any accusations of lying, Frenchie.

As in "look how delusional Edward's supporters are". And there will be other ads supporting other candidates, so they will cancel each other out.

although I didn't find the ad that I am referring to among those posted thus far.....(if this is all of them).

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19858606/

But yes, this could have been what I saw......as I said, it was "homemade".

They've shown several for both parties' supporters....and non-supporters as the case may be.

Corporate ownership is about making money. Content is way down at the bottom of the pecking order.

Now if this was on the Today Show or NBC Nightly News, maybe the Clinton "activist" might have a beef.

Only at Fox it is micro managed. Like Hillary calls Murdoch who then calls Susan ....

I didn't see this, so I have no idea how good it was, what the tone was, or anything like that.

Here are a few thoughts, though.

One of the few things the commonfolk have going for them in times of information control is that a story is still a story; if numbers show that he's got the best chance and people haven't heard this, it's news. Even a hardcore reactionary will be tempted to report this, because laurels in the info biz come from breaking stories that others have missed.

Perhaps they're "showing the other side" of things so they can point to this when accused of being too biased.

Why I really wish I'd seen this is to see the performances of the newsspeakers who tossed to this clip and to see the context within the show. If it was amateurish or could be sneered at as so, it could have been shown to laugh at the folly of the little dears; this is a standard method of conservatives and others who perceive themselves to have the upper hand. This is a version of hiding in plain sight: "look at these cute little liberals, they ACTUALLY think this waffling Commie Breck-Girl homo has a chance. Hahahahaha."

Perhaps his moving up in the polls of late is concerning them to the degree that they'll be giving him more press to set him up for the inevitable smearballs that are coming.

Not having seen it, I can only guess, but from what you say, it's hardly "proof" that the conservatives aren't afraid of him at all.

A story like this can't be COMPLETELY dismissed, after all...

Let's also remember that these people are looking to the future for their own personal credibility, and if THEY'RE the only ones who even suggested that Edwards might be a good standard-bearer and he's then nominated and wins, their career gets a huge boost. This is show-biz, and these people are supremely self-interested.

More than anything, though, a story's a story. The world is sloppy and journotainment still revolves with the capitalistic dynamic of a dog chasing his/her tail; as Lenin put it: "the capitalist will sell you the rope with which you hang him."