On May 2, 2:23=A0pm, "Ubiquitous" <web...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> =A0The nation's top Democrats are suddenly ru****ng to appear on the Fox
Ne=
ws
> Channel, which they once had shunned as enemy territory as the nemesis
of
> liberal bloggers.
Who the heck are "liberal bloggers"? Why should they carry any
influence? Anyone can be a blogger, there are no checks, balances, or
controls on what they write.
The Democratic party has to be very careful of how much influence its
elitist Maureen Dowd salon leader****p has on the rest of the party.
Unless of course they want to lose yet again.
What that leader****p doesn't understand is that while they see Obama
as a 'centrist', the rest of the country--the people who actually
decide elections--see him as a far left liberal. Hillary ain't too
far behind.
Bush has screwed things up so much and McCain wants to continue the
policy. Given that, the Dems have an excellent chance of winning in
the fall. But it is not a guarantee. Ol' Tricky Dick beat 'em twice.
> The d=E9tente with Fox has provoked a backlash from progressive
bloggers, =
who
> contend the party's leaders are turning their backs on the base - and
> lending credibility and legitimacy to the network liberals love to hate
- =
in
> a quest for a few swing votes.
As said, who cares about the bloggers? They are NOT the party's
base. The party's true base are the working folks in Pennsylvania who
voted for Hillary over Obama. The working folks in Florida and
Michigan, if they weren't denied a chance to vote. (Screwing up those
primaries was a REAL smart move! Talk up future voter resentment!)
The working folk don't spend all day blogging on the 'net.
Anyway, love it or hate it, Fox News attracts far more than a "few"
swing votes. Many people watch Fox News. As such, it makes sense for
the candidates to appear on it. If the Fox News people are jerks (as
they so often are), it would strengthen the candidates, not hurt them.
|
