2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumRachel obviously wants a woman president.....
Give her a break. I can understand it, but her bias is way over the top.
KMOD
(7,906 posts)better candidate means you are just choosing her because she's a woman.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)opposes $15 / Hour until 2016, or sell fracking and tax loops to the rest of the world. The better candidate would not vote and administrate to turn Iraq and Libya into terrorist hellholes. Nor would the better candidsate take money from big oil, for-profit prisons, payday-lending predators, and $650,000 for one speach to Goldman Sachs (which was so full of "cut it out" that it has not been released for 60 days, in spite of Clinton's promise).
ChairmanAgnostic
(28,017 posts)And for quite a while, it was informative, interesting, even something to look forward to.
Not for some time, of late.
You have to wonder about a 12 point spread, when she kept pushing the meme that Hill will WI n.
oldandhappy
(6,719 posts)I am holding out for honest and ethical.
quantumjunkie
(244 posts)Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)dchill
(42,660 posts)Can't do it. Can't give ANY media clone a break.
Dustlawyer
(10,540 posts)Hey MSNBC, it's not working! All you have done is make Rachel dead to us!
questionseverything
(11,967 posts)again
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)2banon
(7,321 posts)She can go down memory lane pining for the good old days when a Woman proved they're just as good at running an Imperialist Empire as any guy.
Cuz, that's sooooo important for all Women to aspire to.
artislife
(9,497 posts)Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)Her bias is far beyond anything that simply supporting Hillary can explain.
For example, she did a whole segment on how JEB's net favorable rating was negative 1% and she called that "a fatal disease for any politician". Yet Hillary's net negative ~15% is never mentioned.
If negative 1% is a fatal disease, then just exactly WTF is this......

jillan
(39,451 posts)I was in total disbelief!
And then she had on Amy Klobuchar and asked her to run for Scotus! I really like Amy but she doesn't seem like the Scotus type.
mythology
(9,527 posts)One can't run for the Supreme Court. Given that it's a central premise to why you think Maddow is in the tank for other women candidates, it's kind of important that you missed such a major detail.
But Amy Klobuchar was mentioned as a potential Supreme Court nominee by Jeffrey Tobin of the New Yorker back in 2014 and by NBC News back in 2010. So you may not think of her as the Supreme Court type, but other people do and have done so long before the piece on the Rachel Maddow show after Scalia died.
It gets kind of annoying that Sanders supporters feel the need to call anybody who doesn't fawn over Sanders a hack or doesn't know what they are talking about.
jillan
(39,451 posts)Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)Odin2005
(53,521 posts)She is a shameless sellout propagandist.
snowy owl
(2,145 posts)But I still watch when Bernie's on - I think he hates her show as much as we do. He is just never energized when facing her. Probably dreads it. I've learned to change channels right after the interview to avoid the upcoming Bernie-bashing.
uponit7771
(93,532 posts)
Kick in to the DU tip jar?
This week we're running a special pop-up mini fund drive. From Monday through Friday we're going ad-free for all registered members, and we're asking you to kick in to the DU tip jar to support the site and keep us financially healthy.
As a bonus, making a contribution will allow you to leave kudos for another DU member, and at the end of the week we'll recognize the DUers who you think make this community great.