Many people, like myself, when they sit down to watch the first Democratic primary debate don’t have their minds made up. Fortunately, for us, the media has decided to make up our minds for us.
Hillary Clinton seems to know it, the self-assured way she took the stage last night. Sure, she didn’t say anything, and she used a lot of words to do it, but hell did she look presidential. Having been told by many PR reps that she should smile more she was smiling, and having been told that not enough people find her likeable she was doing her very best to be come-grab-a-beer-with-me. She toted important issues like education, working mom’s benefits, and the ever-current ‘Ain’t the hard-working (but not working class) middle class great?’ In short, issues that only a soulless, orphan-kicking, saluting supervillain could really take issue with. She nodded in agreement when Bernie Sanders talked about reforms for Wallstreet corruption, but when it came her turn to talk about her “five point plan” she talked about shaking her finger at Wallstreet, telling them to “cut it out,” while her top donors at CitiGroup and Goldman Sachs nodded in approval, I’m sure.
She risked nothing, said nothing, did nothing. Her job was to do nothing: the media would do the rest.
Because the next day what did the news cover, but Hillary? From the New York Times to BBC, it’s Hillary’s face plastered on every headline. And the rest of us on the internet are here thinking, ‘What debate did they watch?’
Call him a socialist, a Nader, or whatever, Bernie Sanders is drawing crowds. And there’s a reason: when staring into the abyss that constitutes the eyes of any well-taught politician (like Hillary) it’s pretty refreshing having an actual human running who maybe perhaps might even have a value. Aside from a few remarks (like Hillary’s patented “having a woman president would be change enough”) Bernie was the only one really getting the applause, and it was obvious why. In this carefully orchestrated circus, Bernie seemed like a lion on the loose–he was no O’Malley, bending over for Hillary for a chance at the VPship, or the other weirdoes with their plastic veneers. Bernie clearly doesn’t give a damn about anything but the things he’s fighting for, or so it seems to the young, Millennial eyes. No matter how many times Hillary panders to the young vote, and the feminists, she’s not getting it–we’re still naive enough to believe our politicians don’t need to be entirely full of shit.
From the “we don’t need to hear any more about the damn emails” moment, to the talk on breaking up Wallstreet, to the call for Republicans to fire their representatives who weren’t doing their jobs, to the call for a “political revolution,” Bernie was nothing if not exciting. Anderson Cooper was clearly digging it, as he kept returning to them as Sanders did the unheard of, and engaged in actual debate instead of small memorized speeches about his life like everyone else. When someone asked him “Do black lives matter, or white lives matter?” he responded with a straight “Black lives matter” as a matter of course, going on to talk about the problems facing blacks in America today (Hillary, meanwhile, seamlessly turned her disparagement of the plight of blacks into a talk about the middle class.)
And yet, when the New York Times wrote its article about the debate, it mentioned “Clinton” 36 times, and Bernie Sanders a measly four. Even Biden, not yet running, was mentioned 23 times. So why’s the star of the debate trying to be erased by the media, instead of voiced?
Obviously, because it’s a sham. The primary’s been decided by better, wiser and richer people than ourselves already. And the phrase that the Republicans like to drop, the “Liberal Media” to me is suddenly making sense. Of course it shouldn’t be the job of the media to relay important information to us: it’s their jobs to tell us what to think in order to beat the Evil Republicans. Any dissent is treasonous and will hurt the great Not-As-Bad-As-the-GOP Party (ie the Democrats,) so any good journalist should just ignore Sanders until he goes away. Us streamline, bloodless, educated Democrats know better than our Republican friends; Fox is propaganda, while we’re just objective and right. Right?
Whether Bernie could win or not, it’s unforgivable that he’s being erased by the press. We don’t cover the election process just to see who’ll win–the debates are an important moment for outsider politicians to bring new ideas to the national front. When has anyone last questioned capitalism in an election? When has anyone last talked about poor people, about the welfare state (Bill) Clinton slaughtered to the gods of compromise in ’96? When have we last talked about prisoners, about the failings of the judicial system, about institutional racism? Debates are the one time we can really be idealistic, or they could be if the media wasn’t just looking for a way to buffer the Supreme Chosen Representative of Us Liberal Intellectuals.
Don’t let them get away with it. If Hillary wins the election, she has to work for it; she claims she’s worked hard for all her billions so she’s used to sweating. And let her sweat. This isn’t just a show to me: it’s someone asking for the greatest responsibility in the world. Literally. If Hillary wants to get my vote she has to beg more than rich people: she has to talk to us.
In the meanwhile, my advice? Don’t trust the papers. Stick to the primary sources.
this is real this is fiction 
I know its uninteresting to say this – but I completely agree with you. In both debates thus far Hillary has essentially stood there looking and sounding like the focus-group definition of presidential. She said nothing substantive, and – in fact – her “cut it out” policy on wall street was (to me) an obvious gaffe, yet the mainstream media didn’t call it out at all.