What Dylan Byers said: Friend, do you think it would be OK to have a President Walker?
If not, you need to start wondering, right this minute, about the attitudes toward Hillary Clinton within the national press.
Four cycles back, the liberal world just sat there and took it when the press corps staged a twenty-month war against Candidate Gore which sent George Bush to the White House. Are we liberals really prepared to roll over and take it again?
We’ll be discussing that question all week. For today, you might want to consider what Dylan Byers said.
Byers writes about the media for Politico. Last Thursday, he expressed the view we highlight below:
BYERS (5/7/15): Let's be honest with ourselves for a second: This is Hillary Clinton's election to lose.Byers goes on from there. The obvious nugget was this:
On Nov. 8, 2016, Clinton will start—start—with a minimum 247 of the 270 electoral votes she needs to win. If you give her Colorado and Virginia—which many political strategists would, given the Hispanic population in one and the rising influence of the northern-centered population in the other—she'll start with 269. That means Clinton doesn't need Ohio or Florida. She just needs one small state like Iowa, Nevada or New Hampshire to put her over the edge.
The conventional wisdom among Clinton's supporters is that Clinton is invincible, because she has already weathered all the storms of media scrutiny. She has been in the public eye for 25 years and endured countless controversies, from Whitewater to Lewinsky to Benghazi. The book has been thrown at her, and the book lost.
This argument overlooks two important factors: First, the national media have never been more primed to take down Hillary Clinton (and, by the same token, elevate a Republican candidate). Even before she announced her presidential bid, The New York Times alone had published more than 40 articles related to her private email account, spurring other stories across the national print, digital and television media. Since announcing her bid, the national media have spent the bulk of their time investigating potential lines of influence between Clinton Foundation donations/speaking fees and Clinton's actions as secretary of state. The Times, The Washington Post and others even struck deals for early access to anti-Clinton research.
“The national media have never been more primed to take down Hillary Clinton (and, by the same token, elevate a Republican candidate).”
Byers didn’t attempt to explain the stance he attributes to the press corps. Today, we’re simply suggesting that you need to consider the possibility that his perception is accurate.
It happened during Campaign 2000. The liberal world just sat and stared.
Byers says it could happen again. All week long, we’ll be discussing the lack of liberal pushback.
Trust us! Unless you force them to act, your favorite liberals are going to sit there and take it all over again. You’ll have to make these people fight, a point we’ll discuss all week.
We don’t want to see a President Walker. How do you feel about that?
One more perspective: For Boehlert on Byers, click here.