The NYT is trying to do an overview of the political ads, and it begins with what is plainly the most effective ad, the Bernie Sanders ad with the Simon and Garfunkel song. The article proceeds to talk about a bunch of other ads and to fit them into the tepid template did they make us feel happy and hopeful? The author, a political science professor, is trying to do an overarching analysis of how political advertising works.
But the readers' comments are all just crying out for Bernie — Bernie, the President who could have been! They're not analyzing ads. They're reliving the experience of loving Bernie and anguishing over having been deprived of him. And they are blaming the NYT. The most up-voted comment is:
I started to cry watching Sanders' ad.
And then I started to get angry. Angry at the Times for never showing the enormous crowds gathered at his rallies. For always having some kind of put down in stories on him. For framing stories about him in terms of what it meant to Clinton, eg, if Clinton was up in a state, it said, "Clinton winning." If Sanders was winning, it would say "Clinton within 2 points of Sanders."
I'm angry at the Clinton supporters who trashed Sanders supporters, while demanding they vote for Clinton.
I'm angry at all the media who took the unpledged delegates--not supposed to be counted until the nomination--as part of the running total of delegates for Clinton during the primaries.
Mostly I'm angry because if it hadn't been for the DNC having its thumb on the scale; for media obsessed with getting a woman, Clinton in particular, into the White House; for journalists who thought it clever to ignore voters in favor of their own bias…
We might not be looking at Trump being the president-elect.
पोस्ट्स
७६ टिप्पण्या:
Hahahaha. What a putz.
I got angry when I read an analysis of gun-control efforts recently. It missed all the pro-gun-rights arguments and highlighted all of the control arguments. Soldier of Fortune really let us readers down with that one.
I think Bernie would have beaten Trump. Hillary and Bill just have too much baggage. Bernie was all about change and helping the people...
We might not be looking at Trump being president-elect.
Forget Mars, Trump has already succeeded in sending millions of AmericaIs to colonize an alternate universe. Huuge scientific achievement!
it New Year's in the parallel dimension too?
Ah ha. Bernie is a Russian KBG Agent whose face was hacked by Putin's plastic surgeon to control Amerika's electorate.
Bernie was all about change and helping the people, and using unspent money from the campaign to buy a nice third house with lake shore.
Hahaha. Oh, the angst! This is going to be a great 4 years.
I never understood the appeal of Sanders. Probably because I only have one 100+ year old house.
Welcome to the party.
Boo fucking hoo. Same commenter had no problem with the NYT's actions when it favored Obama. So in the words of SNL's faux Celebrity Jeopardy's Sean Connery:
Suck on it. Suck it long. And suck it hard.
"Mostly I'm angry because if it hadn't been for the DNC having its thumb on the scale; for media obsessed with getting a woman, Clinton in particular, into the White House; for journalists who thought it clever to ignore voters in favor of their own bias…"
Much of what Hillary and the DNC did to Bernie was found out through Wikileaks.
You'd think these people would be thanking the Russians for exposing the crimes against Bernie.
But, no, the Russians are now The Bad Guys.
They are peeing on their own legs and telling themselves that it's raining.
I am Laslo.
I guess maybe that sort of idiotic, pointless anger makes a kind of sense from the perspective of evolutionary psychology.
sunsong said...
... Bernie was all about change and helping the people...
You've had Obama running the country for the past eight years. Why would you want "change"? Unless Obama simply wasn't far enough left for you.
Bernie wouldn't have won. Americans don't want out-and-out socialism. We've seen what happens when socialist countries (Venezuela being the most recent example) run out of other people's money.
I see "the Russians" tried to hack Bernie's power grid. We know it was them because they used a tool that is publicly available on the web. We know it because Trump.
All the news fit to paint.
I am pleased that you continue to study pathology by reading the NYT---So I need not do so.
"Bernie was all about change and helping the people..."
So was Chavez.
What was supposed to be so moving about that "America" ad beside the music?
For example:
1.) It never connected the people shown working with the people gathering at his rallies, only reinforcing the parasitic image of his followers.
2.) It seemed entirely Vermont-based, undercutting the message of his appeal as a national candidate.
I leave it to Scott Adams to explain the appeal of the "America" ad. Here in Nevada it ran against a Hillary ad which showed clips of her through the ages, from college onward. All this demonstrated was that HRC had been a pain in the ass her whole life.
When it looked like Bernie had a shot, Harry Reid made a few phone calls and mobilized his machine to deliver for Hillary.
Name one thing Bernie Sanders has accomplished in life besides getting elected to Congress from Vermont.
"Blogger sunsong said...
I think Bernie would have beaten Trump. Hillary and Bill just have too much baggage. Bernie was all about change and helping the people..."
Take a good look at Venezuela to see the results of the kind of help Bernies ideas would've done for the people.
In a capitalist country, the rich get powerful. In a socialist country, the powerful get rich.
Good to know that some NYT readers hate the NYT as much as the rest of us. For different reasons, obviously.
Ah, socialism. The gift that keeps on killing.
As sunsong and those who are still moaning over Bernie, who would have been the best president evah!!, will be sure to point out re: the socialists' failure known as Venezuela - "they just didn't do it right! Bernie would do it right! The US of A would get it right! We aren't those other countries that fail! We're better than they are! We would do socialism right!!!"
But I do think it's possible Bernie would have been much more competitive in the states Trump flipped - for the reasons Trump flipped them. And a whole bunch of millennials, raised and indoctrinated with the everybody gets a trophy mentality, really do think socialism is the answer. Really.
The left has lived by the media sword for many years. This year, part of the left died by the media sword. (By the way, an old fraternity brother of mine who worked for the NYTimes made no secret of his love for Bernie on his Facebook postings.)
And a whole bunch of millennials, raised and indoctrinated with the everybody gets a trophy mentality, really do think socialism is the answer. Really.
I agree and thank God they don't vote.
I have a beautiful and talented daughter who was a Bernie supporter. We can talk about politics, unlike two of my other kids who are Democrats, but nothing I can say will convince her. Recently she began to talk about how she wants to make more money, which is a hopeful sign.
She did go to Cuba about 15 years ago to see if Socialism works. Sadly for her, she is fluent in Spanish and quickly realized Cuba is a prison. The message about Socialism eluded her.
I want two trophies.
The upside of a Sanders administration is that it would have lengthened Larry David's career. SNL couldn't make fun of the Black guy, but it's always open season on Old Jews.
Directing anger at the Clinton’s is a step in the right direction. Everyone who has jumped on the Clinton train, from McDougal to Podesta, has had their reputation ruined. The Clinton’s leave a stain on everyone the meet.
Imagine, the US electing someone further to the left than Obama!
Wait, so in Bernie's ad they all come to racist, sexist, homophobic, horribly unequal America? Shouldn't an honest socialist have warned black and brown people against entering this den of inequity? Or should we conclude that lefties don't believe their own BS? That for Dreamers et al. the real nightmare is to be removed from America?
Sanders was screwed by both the media and the DNC. He should have run as an Independent. OTOH, his failure to fight showed his weakness.
Not that I would have voted for Sanders at any rate. I actually liked what Trump had to say right out of the gate.
I agree that the Bernie lovers have a legitimate complaint with how the media framed the Bernie/HRC race, clearly putting their finger on the scale for HRC. The problem is how many who feel that way also think the media did not do enough to stop Trump. They are not demanding unbiased reporting - just more bias on behalf of the candidate they prefer.
New York Times readers not getting the point of the NYT.
It is Pravda of the old days, part of a propaganda machine.
The only reasonable way to read it is as enemy propaganda, as the political faction it backs is inimical to most people.
"his failure to fight showed his weakness"
Not that the DNC would have let him win anyway, but I always wondered how much that episode where he submitted meekly and was bullied out of his own rally by a couple of BLM harridans might have hurt him. I was appalled by it, but I wouldn't have voted for him anyway.
These little slappy cunts don't know what anger is, but when they do what they are gonna do, because they are them, they shall awake my giant beast of anger.
And sister, like the great Tom Reagan in Miller's Crossing told your dumb ass, "when I've raised Hell you'll know it."
If it wasn't for the media, it wouldn't have been President Sanders, it would have been President Romney's second term.
Welcome to the club, snowflake.
"OTOH, his failure to fight showed his weakness."
Al from CHICAGO Say: "it is money"
If it wasn't for the media, it wouldn't have been President Sanders, it would have been President Romney's second term.
Yes. But Romney let them do it to him. Trump didn't. MTP today talking about how they are going cover Trump.
In their dreams.
It burns! It burns!
"Not that the DNC would have let him win anyway, but I always wondered how much that episode where he submitted meekly and was bullied out of his own rally by a couple of BLM harridans might have hurt him."
That and when he announced that everyone was tired of hearing about Clinton's emails. Really? Your opponent has a huge vulnerability, but you won't take advantage of it? How well does that work in politics?
Bernie talked tough about bankers and one percenters but underneath all that bluster he revealed himself to be pretty much of a wuss. Either that or he never expected to win and found, when he was doing better than expected, that he really didn't want to win.
"I started to cry watching Sanders' ad."
The ad touched me too. It was Reagan-esque. But it only worked because, as a kid, I heard my parents playing that Simon & Garfunkel song and it made a healthy, positive evocative impression on me.
But while it conveyed an emotional appeal, it didn't convey an intellectual appeal. It didnt help anyone get a job or pay the rent. After the emotional impact wears off, it's just Bernie's socialism which remains flawed and dangerous.
exiledonmainstreet wonders: Either that or he never expected to win and found, when he was doing better than expected, that he really didn't want to win.
I've wondered the same thing.
I agree with exhelodrvr1.
My thoughts FWIW. (1) Trump would have taken a different line of attack against Bernie using, for instance, Bernie's failures at jobs most real men can do, e.g., journeyman carpenter; his wife bankrupting Burlington College when she was its president (not to be confused with venerable Bennington College, where ugly young women run around topless so they can call men who look at their teats "misogynists"); Bernie's quaint notion that increasing the regulatory burden on businesses is a way to save money. I think Trump would have won an additional state or two, and would have won the ones he did by greater margins.
OTOH (2) Trump would not have had a ready comeback when the Billy Bush "pussy grabbing" tape came out.
(3) I'm sure Trump factored the near-certainty that his opponent would be Hillary Clinton when he decided to run in the first place.
(4) I'm equally certain that Donna Brazile, Debby Wasserman Schultz, Mr. and Mrs. Clinton, and a lot of journalists on the political beat think of themselves as politically savvy. How did they miss that this was going to be a change election? Use Obama low key to get out the Black vote, maybe. Put him front and center and tie Clinton's election to his legacy in a change election? Suicide.
Trump is like Trumbull, they both managed to tell the busybody scolds to go to hell.
Trumbo, autocorrect can go to hell too.
They might complain but they're still reading the NYT - subscribing or giving it online ad revenue. There's no reason for the paper to care if the readers agree or disagree with how it does business until they stop coming.
The WSJ is a far better news source than the NYT and better written but I never see its articles featured here.
It would have been a historic occasion. The first "Bernie Sanders" as President. The class diversitists had other plans.
That said, Deep Plunger of Clinton WaterCloset fame was either a disgruntled Sanders' dissident or Obama dealing retributive change to the Clinton faction.
Snap out of it. It's a TV ad, a video designed and produced specifically to make you feel what you feel. It's not a viable plan, demonstrated leadership, or sensible reform ideas.
Bernie's ideas are simply stupid, and so is anyone falling for that ancient serial failure dinosaur of an ideology. It's the kind of people who keep answering ads that promise millions in your spare time counting waves at the beach, and who have banking relationships with mysterious men in Nigeria via email and Western Union. Talk to a real successful person who has actually made something, employed people, and satisfied customers. Bernie is not such a man. His campaign did exactly what his presidency would: collect a bunch of money, make ridiculous promises, and in the end produce nothing but wealth for himself and his friends. It's the collectivist way, unwavering in its techniques and inevitable failure. He wanted us to emulate Venezuela, not the America the ad speaks of.
Sanders torpedoed his own campaign almost at the start by shelving any attack on Clinton's biggest personal vulnerability- the e-mail scandal. Had he not done that, he may well have defeated her soundly, though it is likely that he would have been tossed aside at the convention for Joe Biden in that event.
I agree that the Bernie lovers have a legitimate complaint with how the media framed the Bernie/HRC race, clearly putting their finger on the scale for HRC. The problem is how many who feel that way also think the media did not do enough to stop Trump.
The media and the Democrats (but I repeat myself) tried to manipulate the election in Hillary's favor. They thought, initially, that Trump as a candidate would be a joke and that Hillary would easily be able to defeat him. So....they gave Trump tons of exposure during the Primaries in hopes that he would actually be the candidate. LOL...they thought.
When it appeared that Bernie was going to do way better than expected, they (Hillary, DNC, and the media) went all in to sabotage Bernie. We know this because of the leaks from the DNC that appeared via Wikileaks.
Once Bernie was out of the way, paid off to be quiet and effectively stabbing his supporters in the back, they thought that it would be clear sailing to the finish line with Trump, the joke candidate. Ha ha....we really screwed the GOP.
However, the people who support Trump didn't think he was a joke. Those supporters were sick and tired of the machinations by the DNC, Media and sick and tired of being the saps. Sick and tired of being called racists and all sorts of other names for supporting common sense ideas, like safe borders, law and order, demanding an economy that would be helpful instead of hurtful.
The people were not in on the joke and overwhelmingly gave a giant middle finger to the media, the DNC and the GOPe.
Guess who got the last laugh. This is what happens when you are so cocksure of yourself and think you can manipulate the processes. Jokes on YOU Hillary, DNC, Media. Ha ha ha ha.
The most effective ad of the year begins with the line
"We are now cutting live to Donald Trump's rally at..."
The WSJ is a far better news source than the NYT and better written but I never see its articles featured here.
Agreed, but a copy of the NYT under one's arm is the universal badge of the bien pensant, almost as potent as getting your kid into the Sunday wedding announcements.
The WSJ, for all its worth, has none of the cachet of the NYT.
If not for the NYT, the New Yorker, and New York mag, how would our Hostess garner so many commenters ?
Phil 3:14 said...
The most effective ad of the year begins with the line
"We are now cutting live to Donald Trump's rally at..."
Yup.
The real power of Sanders winning the Dem nomination would be the giant middle finger from both major parties to the elites.
I believe Bernie would have lost against Trump but the impact of having a Trump-Sanders contest would have completely "shock and awe-d" the elites.
Sort of like what will happen in the coming French elections now that Hollande realizes he would only receive about 10% or less of the vote, given his utter and complete leftist failure.
You nailed it, DBQ!
The Media is garbage and their bias destroys any reason for giving them power--breaking news to the NYT crowd, apparently!
Poor dears.
Anyway haven't we all heard enough about those damn emails by now?
How does the Left repay putting party loyalty above taking principled stands, again? Oh yeah, Bernie Sanders! "Let's be fair to the Clinton's, they'll surely be fair to us!"
Surprise.
Liberals criticizing the NYT is sort of like U.S.Jews criticizing Obama. All lemmings running off the cliff.
Hillary Clinton came within a few thousand votes of winning the election. It is hard to believe that Sanders would have come anywhere close. People who can't afford a house because of their student loans are a large demographic, but nowhere near a majority. And I suspect that a lot of the NeverTrumpers, who were ready to tolerate a Clinton win in order to regain control of the GOP, would have had to draw the line at an avowed Socialist.
Trump stole the GOP's base from the GOP. Sanders failed to steal the Democrats' base from the Democrats. Pretty simple, really.
"Hillary Clinton came within a few thousand votes of winning the election"
Over a hundred thousand. The California vote makes it look closer because she got 70% of that.
Berno's been Tweeting up a storm.
Here's a fine nugget:
Bernie Sanders @SenSanders 29 Dec 2016
The number of Native Americans per capita who are imprisoned is 38% above the national average. This is discriminatory and unacceptable.
Zero current attention to votes attributable to last minute, court bypassing felon voting eligibility maneuver by Terry McAuliffe.
The number of Native Americans per capita who are imprisoned is 38% above the national average. This is discriminatory and unacceptable.
Good grief! I get sick of hearing this kind of crap. Yes, Native Americans, blacks and Hispanics are imprisoned more than are whites and Asians. It's because they are responsible for more crimes.
The number of Native Americans per capita who are imprisoned is 38% above the national average. This is discriminatory and unacceptable.
It is NOT discriminatory. And it IS acceptable to arrest and put in jail people who commit crimes, drive drunk, beat each other up and all sorts of other things in a much higher percentage than the national average. The national average, I might add, also includes people who demographically commit very little to NO crimes. Amish, Menonites, Little old ladies, Jehovah witnesses etc etc etc.
The percentage of people in those ethnic groups, as mentioned by Mockturtle, who commit crimes is HIGHER and therefore more from those groups will be convicted.
Here is a hint. If you don't want to go to jail.....stop doing illegal stuff. If your demographic group commits crime at a higher rate....you might want to look in the mirror and figure out why.
Otherwise. STFU about it.
Bernie Sanders @SenSanders 29 Dec 2016
Mr. Trump might want to think about starting to believe in climate change, considering his resorts will be underwater in a few years.
Mr. Trump might want to think about starting to believe in climate change, considering his resorts will be underwater in a few years.
Scientism is going to miss you people with your pretensions to intelligence,
Are you expecting a hill of ocean water near Florida ?
There are stone piers in the Mediterranean that have been there thousands of years. No change, at least since the last Ice Age, which might be coming again but that makes the ocean go down, not up.
Yancey Ward said...
Sanders torpedoed his own campaign almost at the start by shelving any attack on Clinton's biggest personal vulnerability- the e-mail scandal. Had he not done that, he may well have defeated her soundly, though it is likely that he would have been tossed aside at the convention for Joe Biden in that event.
1/1/17, 1:40 PM
Exactly this. Your opponent is under investigation by the FBI, why should you not use it against her. Make her explain how she's not a crook!
That said, if he wanted to have the courage of his convictions, the time to do it would have been at the democratic convention. At that point the DNC/Podesta emails were out and he could have stood up in his speaking slot in primetime and said in essence "The corrupt people in this party have frozen me out, screw them, I'm running as an independent because this is a corrupt party machine." Ideally concluded by turning to Hillary or wherever the DNC bigwigs were sitting and throwing them the finger on national TV. :D
(I'm a big closet fan of going back to the more raw versions of party conventions, say from the 1850s :) )
That said, since 2016 was a change election, it was clear that he wouldn't have won since the country was sick of eight years of Obama-esque disasters. Also, since he has name recognition and a comfortable and safe senate seat, he's set for life. Nice work if you can get it.
Jupiter: "Hillary Clinton came within a few thousand votes of winning the election."
Hillary came within a few thousand votes of losing the election worse than she actually did.
I liked the America ad. Lots of wholesome White folks doing wholesome, productive White folk stuff. I certainly don't begrudge them their Midwest populist enthusiasms, which, after all, are another wholesome White folk tradition. They probably had a nice dinner downtown after the rally and caught a theater venue Rhonda Vincent concert after that. Sounds like a pretty good day to me.
But I do think it's possible Bernie would have been much more competitive in the states Trump flipped - for the reasons Trump flipped them. And a whole bunch of millennials, raised and indoctrinated with the everybody gets a trophy mentality, really do think socialism is the answer. Really.
Their standard of living has been slipping for decades now. For at least two generations people have watched communities go on life support for lack of jobs. The only sound advice they can give to their children is "move somewhere else". People in those states are desperate - they aren't sure what will help, but they know the status quo is slow death. So of course they're going to vote for a Sanders or a Trump. They're willing to try anything, and I don't blame them.
Free trade and open markets are the fastest way to grow an economy. But the people who benefit and the people who suffer are not the same people.
Trump was the worst candidate of 22 but Sanders was the second worst. Had he gotten the nomination against Trump there undoubtedly would have been a serious third party candidate. What would come of that, who knows. I very much doubt a Sanders presidency would have been the result.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा