https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/19/politics/tulsi-gabbard-ends-2020-campaign/index.html

On top of that endorses Biden. Could it be because Yang also endorsed Biden? I can't believe she stay in the race as long as she did when she knew she had no chance. She made a smart move this time.

She had two paths. Either fully embrace being the turncoat Democrat who goes on Fox News to trash her own party, or do the right thing and potentially have a political future. She chose wisely.

the likes of yang, tulsi, warren, beto, and kamala are very revealing examples of how powerful the democratic establishment is, and how little words about alleged principles matter when money and political careers are on the line. i'd say i hope that voters will remember that, but then i have to remind myself that they are going to choose between a bigoted and completely incompetent game show host, and a demented warmongering corporate puppet...

Voters are the ones who created the circumstances for those political figures(except Warren) to endorse the presumptive nominee. Creating a narrative of the establishment vs the people doesn't work if your "people's candidate" can't win the most delegates or the popular vote.

that makes a lot of sense - if you accept the premise that those candidates value political career over alleged principle. which was my point...

as to your usual 'the people's choice' argument, i've gone into detail about it, explaining the influence of main stream media (in framing the whole debate against progressives, fearmongering about change that would hurt their bottom line, having completely different standards for corporate establishment candidates, who never get fact checked and held accountable for their political record and lies...), the dnc (backroom deals to get endorsements at crucial points / clearly picking a side, which secures the establishment candidate a huge advantage of a reliable base that will vote for literally anyone who gets the nomination, no matter their policies), the 'electability' myth (that, should trump at some point stop being completely incompetent about covid-19, will be exposed massively when just the two of them are left), and the disconnect between policy preference and candidate choice.
no need to explain that again, i think you understand it. i know, i know. all a conspiracy, and not illegal anyway...

tldr of this rage essay: if only voters knew what was good for them, like I do. If only they were as smart as me. The media establishment were out to get Bernie!

are you seriously gullible or stupid enough to suggest they weren't / aren't? that's cute...

CNN pretty much got Trump elected with all the free coverage. They literally gave him more coverage that any candidate could buy.

Even the real billionaire couldn't buy that much coverage.

This post was edited by Skinned on Mar 22 2020 05:43am

In 2016 some of the media favoured Clinton by giving her more coverage and it mattered because plenty of people didn't know who Bernie was.

This time round, everyone knew him and he got a lot of spotlight, but he still ended up losing.

When are you going to admit that everyone except young voters just didn't like him and his ideas that much? Move on, find a hobby.

This post was edited by dro94 on Mar 22 2020 07:19am

you're moving the goal post. are you suggesting that msm treats establishment candidates with the same scrutiny they treat bernie with? are you suggesting they apply the same standard? are you suggesting that had bernie repeatedly lied about his record during the debates, that wouldn't be all over the news? that's stupid.
those media outlets are (unsurprisingly, because funded by the same corporations and dependent on their money) extremely biased against progressives, ALWAYS frame the conversation against them, and almost never have progressive voices featured on their panels. that's not a conspiracy, it's blatantly obvious and makes perfect sense of course. stop uncritically regurgitating shitty establishment talking points...