Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Bias!!!
Are Josh and TPM biased for Hillary Clinton this week? Or for Barack Obama?
Sorry, I lost track.
Advertisement
- TPMCafe Book Club
Weeklong book discussions with authors and experts who read them. - House Brew
The daily grind of housekeeping, announcements and editors' picks. - Special Guests
Quick shots from big names and big brains. - Special Features
Discussions on pressing issues and trends. - Table For One
An expert pulls up a chair to make their case for a week. - The Coffee House
TPMCafe's regulars discuss it all. - Warren Reports
Elizabeth Warren and her law students on bankruptcy, debt and the law. - All Reader Posts
TPM readers know all and say all.
Subscribe to TPMCafe's feed.
Subscribe to TPMCafe's reader blog feed.
Comments (31)
depends on who you ask.
March 24, 2008 7:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
You didn't hear this from me CSCS but I hear he's actually pulling for McCain this week!
ssshhhhhhh!
March 24, 2008 8:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
I won't say a work. Thanks.
March 24, 2008 8:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's word.
Not work.
Where's the effing edit button when ya need it???
March 24, 2008 8:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's all part of Josh's insidious plan to push McCain on us. In case you use the wrong word - Lieberman will whisper the right one to you - and then everyone will just ignore the gaff.
Simple.
March 24, 2008 8:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Clear proof that Josh is backing McCain: all the time he wasted on Romney when he could have been offering factual analysis of the Democratic campaign ..... including Edwards.
March 25, 2008 9:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's comments like this that make me really, really miss the old rating system...
Funniest thing I've seen in a while. Thanks, mcboo! And thanks cscs too, for the desperately needed comic relief.
March 25, 2008 7:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Darn! Did I post that out loud?
March 24, 2008 8:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've always said this site has a raging Mike Gravel bias. If you don't see it, you're crazy.
March 24, 2008 8:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think it's less of a pro-Gravel bias as it is an anti-Kucinich bias.
But seriously, and I hope he doesn't read this, but is it just me or is unattractiveness one of the last allowable shallow reasons to dismiss a candidate? Almost every liberal I know said that Kucinich's views came closest to their own, but no one (including myself) was planning on voting for him mainly because of the perception that he wasn't going to be in the running. Won't someone fight for the unattractive?
March 24, 2008 9:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know, we would be lucky to have someone like Kucinich in the White House. It's a shame that we live in a country where looking like a hobbit means you're automagically disqualified.
Kidding aside, I was in it for Kucinich before he dropped out.
March 24, 2008 9:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's really funny because I was an Edwards guy. And now you're an Obama guy and I'm a Hillary guy and we're both way farther from Edwards and Kucinich than we either intended to be. And they say we won't vote for the other's candidate in the general! I mean, how much more flexible can we be?
March 25, 2008 12:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hah!
March 25, 2008 5:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yoda would totally get behind an unattractive Presidential candidate.
Especially when that unatttractive candidate has a smokin hot wife.
March 24, 2008 9:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did Yoda ever have a wife, say between ages 40 and 200? I'm just wondering because your experience might be close to mine. I'm sure you know all about Ric Ocasek's wife... what I'm wondering is-- what will Ric Ocasek look like in 300 years??!
March 25, 2008 10:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Almost every liberal I know said that Kucinich's views came closest to their own, but no one (including myself) was planning on voting for him mainly because of the perception that he wasn't going to be in the running.
Well that just proves that no one cares about "the issues" when it comes to politics.
It's a tough thing to face, but we like candidates that make us feel good.
March 25, 2008 6:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Personally, I hated a lot of his views. I agree with him on the fringe issues that I don't give a damn about this time around, but I felt that Biden's policy (the polar opposite of Kucinich's among Dems) was the most sensible, and on NAFTA, I actually like the Republicans best (at the moment, I'm banking on the two candidates just giving rhetoric there). Especially on foreign policy, I never felt that Kucinich was really in touch with reality. But that's just one Dem's view.
Full disclosure: Before Iowa, I was a Joe Biden supporter, after which I switched to Obama.
March 25, 2008 7:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
I should clarify: Kucinich's views came closest to our own when we used one of those "matching" web-sites (I believe it was glassboth.com). Unfortunately, I don't feel that these do a great job of capturing just how important some issues are to you (a few of them try, but don't hit the mark, IMO).
Up until the last couple years, I was almost a single issue (or set of issues) voter: the environment.
Bush has really opened my eyes into all of the other ways that a president can really foul up our country, however. For example, I'd also like a candidate that doesn't use our Constitution as toilet paper. That said, I'm pretty sure that all of the Democratic candidates matched that criteria well enough for me.
March 25, 2008 9:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
True, true. ^^ On Facebook, there's a political app that lets a person give his or her top three issues, but as far as foreign affairs were concerned, they only had Iraq listed. I looked for simply a blanket "Foreign Policy," but couldn't find it. -_- I eventually simply had to mark myself down as "other." Ultimately, my top three things are Iraq, Israel, and China. I like to think that both the economy and national security are subsets in foreign policy, but it's never counted that way. -_-
March 25, 2008 12:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know if anyone else has mentioned this, but as a long-time reader (5 years +) I tend to think of TPM Election Central as separate from Josh and Talking Points Memo.
From my POV, there has always been a significant difference in tone and methodology between the two blogs since the beginning. Greg has always seemed more breathless and editorial, especially when compared to Josh's level and pragmatic tone.
In fact, when TPM Election Central first started, I wondered what the hell Josh was thinking. It seemed to me that Election Central was a frivolous distraction from the REAL work that was happening over at Muckraker and on the main stem.
Now I literally spend HOURS commenting here (and hating myself for it afterward) so I guess they've got my number.
March 24, 2008 8:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now I literally spend HOURS commenting here (and hating myself for it afterward)
That's the first sign of blog addiction.
Admit the problem -- that's the first step. 11 more to go after that...
March 24, 2008 8:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
I object! You used numbers, and numbers are biased.
(everyone says so, so it MUST be true,)
March 24, 2008 8:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed. This should simply be called TPMBS, yet somehow I'm drawn... I think of it as a somewhat healthier alternative to TV. It's like having a diet coke and a pizza. Yes, and I've wondered why I do it-- my thought process goes something like this:
Sometimes as I watch the Bullshit Tabloid Trainwreck that is our politics, journalism, and government, something will register between an 8 and a 10 on my Bullshitometer. I'm at the point where anything between 1-7 doesn't make a dent anymore. But, let's say a 9 registers, and I'm looking around, and all I see are a lot of blank stares. That's when I begin to question my sanity. Maybe I am wrong about it all... maybe my clothes aren't made by slaves... maybe cows aren't genetically engineered to live in a sea of their own shit... you know, come to think of it, how do I know JFK was even really assassinated... It's then that start reading the comments here, and take comfort that there are still others whose Bullshitometers are functioning, often at a level higher than my own.
March 25, 2008 9:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Both, obviously.
(chortle)
March 24, 2008 8:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Am I on the right site here? Where has all the eye jabbing gone? Or am I just not clicking the right places.
Not that I am complaining mind you. I personally can't wait till this nomination process is over so we can all start ripping on Mcain. I am seeing how much fun that will be.
March 25, 2008 12:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
CCSS, U @re teh baised!n Er, teh biased!
March 25, 2008 12:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
My next post will be titled: "Baised!!!"
March 25, 2008 6:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
This site has been heavily pro-Richard Milhouse Nixon from day one! Let it alone Josh... your prince in shining armour ain't coming back!
March 25, 2008 9:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
Anyone catch Mike Allen of Politico actually admit to the pro-Obama bias of the media this weekend?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4c47X5ASw8
March 25, 2008 9:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, Mike Allen is behind it ALL! The whole of "TEH MEDIA" is controlled by his filthy puppetmaster fingers!
Illegitimate! Illegitimate!
March 25, 2008 10:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
I interrupt this thread, cscs, to endorse a blog post by Deanie Mills, urging us to UNITY.
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/deanie_mills/
Regardless of where any one of us stands, she is calling for us to unite behind the Dem candidate.
Blame me if you will. But her post has slid off the cliff and at the moment the humor of who Josh is for, or not, only adds to the divisiveness, which is going to hurt us all.
Please check it out. And recommend if you feel so inclined. Then come back here and find humor.
Sanity and humor. We need them both.
March 25, 2008 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment