How the Media Manufactures Hatred of Hillary Clinton

When I read about the Clinton email Dog’n Pony Show, it seems to boil down to a relatively simple and straightforward explanation,
with the Republicans being single mindedly obsessed with destroying Clinton’s career and in reality not at all interested in how much her
‘mistakes’ impacted our nation’s security and well being which is why they are already planning on years worth of investigations of this dead horse.
All the while ignoring W Bush’s truly relevant emails
(http://www.newsweek.com/2016/09/23/george-w-bush-white-house-lost-22-million-emails-497373.html)
Even after all the investigations, looks like she could have handled the emails better, but there’s nothing hideous in there. When it comes to
Benghazi, that’s even a more ridicule cynical political goose chase, with even less substance and this time the mistakes seem entirely on the
Ambassador’s unfortunate misreading of the situation and perhaps too much faith in himself.
I know that I’ve often said I don’t like H. Clinton, I know that for me it started with how she handled the Clinton Heath Plan back in the early 90s.
Since then I need to admit that my dislike has been mainly formed by background media headlines and her own off-putting facade, combativeness
and inability to enunciate herself in a way that regular people can relate to.
For instance she (and her staff) still haven’t figured out how to boil down the email contrivance to a couple sharp relatable paragraphs.
I’ve seen some writers manage it, why can’t they and she? But then the Democrats have a tendency to be utterly inept communicators and
campaigners in election after election (Bill and Obama being exceptions in my life time) why should I be surprised by current news. :down:
But, you bet I’m voting Democratic!
Still, now when I’m forcing myself to fully examine her faults and my attitude or impression - I find precious little reason not to start lightening and
perhaps offering her the benefit of the doubt for a change. After all the President is never going to be who really want it to be. The debates started my
process some cringe worthy moments, fair amount of frustration, still over all I had to concede her points in all three debates.
That’s when I started reassessing my attitude. Then a fews days ago read a fascinating enlightening article that I’ve been wanting to share here.

How the Media Manufactured Hatred of Hillary Clinton
BY NEAL GABLER | OCTOBER 25, 2016 | Moyers and Company
http://billmoyers.com/story/last-night-3/
Clinton’s popularity didn’t start to plummet until the press focus turned to her emails.

… We all know the story. This is the hate election, the lesser-of-two-evils election,
the most-unpopular-candidates-in-the-history-of-modern-presidential-politics election.
Everybody hates Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. If only we had different candidates from whom to choose, the pundits say,
as they roll their eyes and emit heavy sighs! No doubt, you don’t like either one of them very much.
You will pull the voting lever with resignation. Or so we are told.
But I began to speculate on how much of the Hillary hatred at least (Trump was very unpopular as reflected in polling data from the get-go)
was driven by the press coverage, how many Americans were effectively brainwashed into hating Hillary or felt peer pressure
to join the anti-Hillary chorus because the media kept telling us how awful she was, and we didn’t want to be outliers to the hate brigade.
And while there is no definitive way to measure the impact of press coverage on public opinion, I think a fairly powerful case
can be made that the media narrative created the media narrative – yet another case of political post-modernism.
The fact is that Hillary Clinton wasn’t unpopular when she announced her decision to run in April 2015. If you look at the Gallup
survey in March of last year, 50 percent of Americans had a favorable impression of Clinton, only 39 percent an unfavorable one. …
And that wasn’t all. As reported in a study by Harvard University’s Shorenstein Center on media coverage in the pre-primary period,
Clinton received especially negative coverage — overwhelmingly negative. At the same time, both Sanders and Trump received extremely
positive coverage. As the report put it: “Whereas media coverage helped build up Trump, it helped tear down Clinton. …
Anyone have any thoughts about this evolving campaign or your own perceptions of the actors involved?
What about the Republican embrace of fiction and fantasy to win rhetorical points, while totally evading the actual issues of concern?

The problem with her presidency will be how does she deal with a faction that just wants to destroy her?

I think it all goes back to Lee Atwater and Paul Weyrich. Google them and the speeches they made to Republicons in the 80’s, aka the beginning of the end. It’s when Republicans truly realized they were losing the long term battle of ideas, and had to switch gears to stay in power. These two put forward ideas on how to do this. And it wasn’t “to present our ideas better”. It was to rig the system by limiting minority turnout, by doing things like ruin government, but blame the ruining on Dems, and most importantly, learn how to wordsmith things so as to disguise the true intention. And, Cons being what they are, they went at it like a pack of dogs knowing full well the Dems were a pack of cats, limp, unstructured, incapable of combined effort, etc. They knew their enemy better than the enemy knew itself.

The “Beginning of the Beginning" goes back to “the 60’s" and Barry Goldwater. I recently reread his book “Conscience of a Conservative" wherein he promoted the idea that a proper Conservative must be a Radical Conservative. No more liberals. No more moderates. It was the beginning of flipping the GOP from the Party of Lincoln to the party of white Christian supremacy (winning over the South with support for segregation as right and just). He planted the seeds that bore fruit in the 80’s.

The “Beginning of the Beginning" goes back to “the 60’s" and Barry Goldwater. I recently reread his book “Conscience of a Conservative" wherein he promoted the idea that a proper Conservative must be a Radical Conservative. No more liberals. No more moderates. It was the beginning of flipping the GOP from the Party of Lincoln to the party of white Christian supremacy (winning over the South with support for segregation as right and just). He planted the seeds that bore fruit in the 80’s.
Yes, I read parts of that too. That is THE source, and the two I mentioned are two of the most hideous results.
The “Beginning of the Beginning" goes back to “the 60’s" and Barry Goldwater. I recently reread his book “Conscience of a Conservative" wherein he promoted the idea that a proper Conservative must be a Radical Conservative. No more liberals. No more moderates. It was the beginning of flipping the GOP from the Party of Lincoln to the party of white Christian supremacy (winning over the South with support for segregation as right and just). He planted the seeds that bore fruit in the 80’s.
Yes, I read parts of that too. That is THE source, and the two I mentioned are two of the most hideous results. Agreed. Atwater certainly showed the way for right-wing absolutism and ruthless dirty-tricks as a way to achieve goals. I find the rejection of honesty, honor, 'a person's word' meaning something, respect for others, desire to learn from others, all that and more. So sad. Now this election and once's again the Democrats seem a bit lost and totally inarticulate and no match for a hustler. :down:
Now this election and once’s again the Democrats seem a bit lost and totally inarticulate and no match for a hustler.
The advantage of the Conservatives and the "hustler" is they (attempt to) present a united front. Full buy-in to the party platform, no compromise, no moderates, no intellectuals and you're with us or you're against us. Their philosophy is not clouded by facts or differing opinions. The disadvantage among Liberals and Democrats is different opinions are allowed, diversity is embraced and there is room for compromise. When compared to the uncompromising monolith that is the remnants of the GOP, this appears weak and indecisive. Oh, sure, there were Republicans who expressed dissenting opinions regarding Trump early on, but they are all falling in lock-step (goose-step) with the Party as the election approaches.
Now this election and once’s again the Democrats seem a bit lost and totally inarticulate and no match for a hustler.
The advantage of the Conservatives and the "hustler" is they (attempt to) present a united front. Full buy-in to the party platform, no compromise, no moderates, no intellectuals and you're with us or you're against us. Their philosophy is not clouded by facts or differing opinions. The disadvantage among Liberals and Democrats is different opinions are allowed, diversity is embraced and there is room for compromise. When compared to the uncompromising monolith that is the remnants of the GOP, this appears weak and indecisive. Oh, sure, there were Republicans who expressed dissenting opinions regarding Trump early on, but they are all falling in lock-step (goose-step) with the Party as the election approaches.
Ain't that the truth. But, there is a difference between what you're describing and Hillary Clinton's apparent inability to confront her email "scandal" and explain it in a clear concise manner. Hell any number of late night comedians have already provided succinct descriptions she could crib. Then there's ignoring exactly why we got into the middle east mess and oh yeah, those 22 million Bush/Cheney emails that might explain if any actual serious crimes were committed by the Administration while drumming up support of that insane war. Or answers to what happened in Cheney's National Energy Policy meetings - also a potential source of actual serious crimes against the American People and future. And so on and so forth. It's really tearing me down, first Reagan, then Bill Clinton turning out never to have outgrown his idiot adolescent phase and how that damaged our country. Then Gore's inept campaign, Nader's f'n treason, the insanity of the build up to invading Iraq which promised nothing but mounting self-inflicted disaster after disaster. Any thinking person with an ounce of compassion for what goes on inside of other people knew, and knew with certainty, that doing what Cheney and Bush were frothing at the mouth to do, would bring us nothing but disaster. I just forgot about the part, that it would make certain masters of the universe even richer and more powerful than ever. The humanitarian and political disaster turned out to be expendable for the sake of the greater goal of creating a war for fortune. And so American's turned off their brains and waved their flags and we did the unthinkable. And now the bastards have managed to make it all the Democrats fault and of course the Democrat roll over like punctured blowup dolls. It's funny we got a poster around here who can't seem to muster the interest to take anything in life serious and me I simply can't get myself to ignore it even if I want.