No female candidates in Sunday Shows

[Exotiki]

Link to tweet

[comradebillyboy]

1. The media just don't think the women are entertaining enough.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

58. Hmmm. That's interesting. Think some boring and some men just as boring.

[dlk]

2. It's Part of the Backlash Against Change

The patriarchy is attempting to reassert it’s stranglehold on power. As demographics and power dynamics shift, expect to see much more.

[delisen]

6. Agree.

[ariadne0614]

26. +1 n/t

[dalton99a]

3. Good point

[Honeycombe8]

34. Don't take the bait.

This can't be a serious post.

I suspect some are looking for anything to post something negative about, to continue in-fighting.

There is nothing unusual about having just younger white candidates on one week, and older or non-white or female ones the next. It's the way things pan out in scheduling.

Castro was on Real Time w/Maher Friday. No older or non-Hispanic candidates were on, or females, or tall candidates, for that matter. Just him. Klobuchar has been on CNN where she was the only candidate on that show.

Nothing unusual goin' on here.

[Demsrule86]

4. Tim Ryan could win Ohio.

[Me.]

5. Anywhere Else?

Besides, he also has plans to run against DeWine in 2022, so what's his deal?

[Demsrule86]

7. Yes. If we all vote for the nominee period. Anyone here can tell you I dislike Sanders

But I would crawl across broken glass to vote for him in the general.we have three candidates that can stop Trump's electoral win in PA,MI And WI...Biden,Ryan and Maybe Beto. If we don't pick a candidate who can carry the rustbelt, we lose.

[bitterross]

11. 2016 Proved you are correct.

Had we taken the rust belt we'd have had the GOP doing Hillary investigations for the last two years. Those would have not resulted in the number of indictments and pleas we've seen with Trump.

[question everything]

18. Had the Sanders supporters not found Trump campaigning on similar issues

the "forgotten" middle class, and, perhaps, chose to vote for the second best instead of the "despised" Hillary, we would have won.

[Demsrule86]

43. And we might not have new Scotus but the Gop wouldn't either.

[Demsrule86]

49. It will be the same this year. It is Trump's only play

[elleng]

12. And spend TIME there.

[Demsrule86]

50. Agree completely.

[question everything]

19. Add Klobuchar and Buttigieg

Klobuchar is the only one who carried Minnesota districts won by Trump.

[Demsrule86]

45. I don't think any woman can win this year. As a woman, this breaks my heart. Can

A woman be put on a ticket as a VP? What do you guys think. Klobuchar might work.

[question everything]

74. I think that this is the common widom. A woman as the VP nominee

Biden Klobuchar can carry PA, WI, MI and yes, CA and many independents who dislike Trump but are wary about the "socialism" talk.

[Demsrule86]

77. I like that combination.

[Demsrule86]

46. I like mayor Pete. He is from Indiana. Is America ready for a gay president? I hope so as my

daughter is gay. But can we take the risk this year. I don't know. Truly scared of losing.

[marylandblue]

55. My view is that no candidate is risk free.

Look at what just happened to Biden. Suddenly his hands became front page news. What else will they dig up and obsess over? It's not really his fault, he just doesn't know how to deal with the modern media environment.

My view is that most people don't care but our crazed media and twitterverse can't help themselves. Trump knows this and uses it to his advantage. A lot of DUers don't realize how he manipulates even us by yanking our chains.

That's basically why I'm behind Buttigieg. He is the most media-savvy candidate we have. On paper, he's a weak candidate, really beneath our attention. But he got a huge amount of attention because he made the media want to talk to him.

He gets his digs in at Pence and Trump, but mostly he talks about policy in clear, practical terms. He can beat Trump at the media game, and that's what we really need. If people like what he has to say, they won't care if he's gay.

[Demsrule86]

64. Some candidates are more risky than others.

My son lives in Indiana. He never heard of the mayor and told me that area is blue not red. Also Mayor Pete is not progressive, I am much confused by this candidate. No doubt he is smart but Tim Ryan or Biden are to the left of Mayor Pete and have a better chance of winning a general. Even Beto might give us Texas...but we won't even get Indiana here.

[marylandblue]

66. Buttigieg is trying to redefine the Democratic coalition

Last edited Mon Apr 8, 2019, 08:17 AM - Edit history (1)

The way FDR did. So Pete takes non-standard positions that don't fit neatly in any box.

I don't expect him to carry Indiana, and his candidacy is not at all based on name recognition. It's all about him communicating his new vision. We all agree we need something new, the question is, is anyone buying? Some are already.

My thinking on candidate risk has changed since 2016. The only way we can we can win is with a candidate who can fight back against whatever they through at him on twitter and TV. Nothing against Biden, but he seems too old school to do it.

O'Rourke is media savvy, but he'll need to go negative sometimes and he seems too determined not to do that, even in self defense. Some other possibilities are Harris, Sanders, Klobuchar.

But I think Buttigieg does it best. On paper he's a big risk, but read watch him on TV and read twitter feed and you'll see he's not going to fall into the traps they make with their assumptions. They assume a mayor can't win. He explains exactly what a mayor does that makes him qualified. They assume being gay is liability. He talks about the beauty of his marriage in religious terms. They have no answers for these things. They've never heard anything like it. He's changing the assumptions.

[Honeycombe8]

35. We also need OH and/or FL.

Republicans can't win w/o either OH or FL. They can win w/o PA, MI, & WI, though. It'd be hard, but can be done. But Repubs have never won the Presidency w/o either OH or FL, and usu. both.

[Demsrule86]

41. If we take MI,PA and WI we win.

We have to nominate someone who can take the rustbelt.

[Demsrule86]

8. He decided to enter the presidential race...so?

[Me.]

9. Why?

He's not all that popular outside of Ohio, there's talk he's going to be running for Gov. in 2022, he tried twice to bring Nancy P. down, once by running against her and then by trying to deny her votes which didn't endear him to other Dems and he has, at one point described himself as a corporatist. Seems like a waste especially if what he really wants right now is to be gov.

[Demsrule86]

47. He would rather be president. Also, we need to win the rustbelt to deny Trump another term.

[Me.]

52. But He Won't Be Able To Deliver It

and once the competition starts on him it will be Bob's Your Uncle. The backlash he rec'd from his corporatist announcement should be a warning to him.

[Demsrule86]

54. Time to stop with corporatist crap. Ryan is a big union guy.

Your run someone who can't win the rustbelt ,we lose. That should scare the shit out of all of us.

[Me.]

56. Excuse Me?

You may not like it but I did not put the words in his mouth or give the interviews he did in 2017. So your umbrage is misplaced and you should take it up with him.

“Democratic Rep. Tim Ryan (Ohio) is going against party leaders and calling for a business friendly agenda ahead of the 2018-midterm elections.

“To be competitive globally, we have to reduce the corporate tax rate,” Ryan told The Hill in an interview from his Youngstown, Ohio, district office. “We’re just not competitive globally because of that."

Ryan, a fast-rising Democrat from industrial Ohio, is challenging Democrats to take a different approach to big business and work with corporate America to create jobs.

"We can’t just be the party of redistribution of wealth; we need to be the party of the creation of wealth in communities all over the country, not to just Silicon Valley, not just Wall Street, but all over."

https://thehill.com/video/lawmaker-interviews/348776-rising-dem-star-tim-ryan-splits-with-party-endorses-corporate-tax

[Cha]

57. I don't like this, either.. trying to erase President Obama's

legacy in one fell swoop..

https://timryanforamerica.com/

Like so many in America’s heartland, I come from a long line of factory workers who helped build our nation into a powerhouse of innovation. But over the last 20 years, failed leadership and broken promises have destroyed the middle-class, forcing our economy into crisis and pushing the American Dream out of reach.

Ryan stood no chance..

Link to tweet

[Demsrule86]

63. Well, what Ryan says is true. The midwest has had little help in 20 years. The recovery under Obama

didnt really happen here with more jobs gone. So we ignore what he says at our own peril. If we don't rebuild the blue wall, we have no path to victory in the electoral college. We are years away from taking the south other Texas and the more we lose, the less likely that it happens.

[Me.]

71. Over The Weekend

Several billionaires have come forth saying the approach we have, tax cuts, corporate welfare is going to be a huge problem if there isn't a course correction and nothing I've seen in an interview with Ryan gives me confidence that he has any real idea of what to do. People's memories seem to have forgotten that when PBO came into office our economy was one step from being destroyed. He worked hard to bring us back from the brink and it is now on its way to being ruined again by these corporate nannies who want to give the wealthiest even more breaks.

[Cha]

75. Exactly, Me.. they do conveniently

forget how the Obama Admin got us out of the bush-cheney abyss.

Now it's worse because they voted for trump but it's all Obama's fault.

[Me.]

76. ...

[Cha]

79. ..

Link to tweet

[Me.]

80. Belies The Imagination

[Demsrule86]

62. Business friendly is not corporate. There is a little thing called jobs.

Kind of important to voters. If Democrats destroy candidates who can win with purity tests Trump wins. 2018 showed we need moderates who won the midterms on healthcare and jobs...makes me sick to see our 2020 chances destroyed by those who simply can't accept the reality of how we can beat Trump...the only way we can beat Trump.

[Me.]

70. As I Say...You May Not Like It

But when he and Krystal Ball were going around promoting their People's Project (which by the way went nowhere though she picked up some pretty nice cash) he described himself as I have. This is no purity test but a statement of fact and the last thing we need is someone who wants to cut taxes. That is a failed strategy as even the wealthiest among us are beginning to recognize.

[Demsrule86]

78. I am talking about winning the presidency. Only a handful of candidates can do it.,,

And Trump is dangerous.

[aeromanKC]

28. That is exactly his deal

Great way for Ryan to get extra exposure and a viability boost his 2022 run.

[bitterross]

10. At least Pete is interesting. But, otherwise WTF?

Really! WTF major news "media?" There are awesome candidates out there. I'd think Harris has a hell of a lot better chance than any of the three men who were on.

[question everything]

20. Yang was interesting (the only one that I watched)

I don't believe in income for everyone, but it is getting attention. Perhaps here, too.

His explanation that this has been done in conservative Alaska is a bit disingenuous. Works when oil revenues flow, but some years back they had to cut these annual checks, when revenues fell.

[bitterross]

23. I'm in favor of a minimum income.

If we think about it, the concept of a minimum income for everyone is not about money. It's not about getting a salary. It's really about ensuring everyone has the basic human necessities and rights most of us believe humans should have.

It's not about paying someone a certain amount. It's about ensuring all humans have food, water, shelter, clothing, security of person.

In that context, I feel the minimum income is very sensible.

Sure, the concept is not without problems associated with implementation. I get that. If, as I propose, it's about providing the basic needs then there will have to be rules about how the basic income is spent. We do that already with SNAP and WIC. So those obstacles are not insurmountable.

[namahage]

24. Yang said specifically that there are no limitations on how his "Freedom Dividend" can be spent.

He added also that to help pay for it, certain social services would need to be "streamlined"--aka, cut. If you currently get aid you will be entitled to take the aid or the dividend, not both.

[bitterross]

25. I admit I didn't see the interview. I disagre with him on that point.

I obviously, given my statements, disagree with Yang about how the money can be spent.

I have no problem with a portion of it being completely discretionary and with there being enough of it to have some discretionary funds. AFTER the costs of food, water, shelter are met. There's nothing wrong with having the money to go to the movies or being able to save up for a vacation.

I also believe everyone, and I mean everyone, should be taught about budgeting in school. Along with civics.

[namahage]

27. So we're going to be giving the 1% some play money, courtesy of the taxpayers?

Also a feature of the dividend: everyone gets it, regardless of need. This is a feature, not a bug.

Finally, the dividend is also supposed to be funded by a VAT, which like sales taxes, tends to impact lower-income people proportionately more.

By the way, I didn't see the interview either. I simply referred to his website.

[bitterross]

29. What a stupid idea. Of course not.

No plan to ensure a minimum, sustainable life would ever give money to the people who do not need it. I'm for providing a way to limit homelessness. Not enrich mansion owners.

If Yang is proposing a VAT then he's an idiot and I'm vehemently against that. Just as you suggest, those unfairly impact the poor.

[Demsrule86]

48. She won't win the rustbelt.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

59. Nope. But it's more important to run a woman than to win and remove the devil incarnate.

[Demsrule86]

61. The irony is another win will set women back for a generation.

No birth control and no choice. I thought we were done with the losing is winning crap...6/3 courtl. I don't care who the candidate is as long as they win.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

67. Very astute point!!! Ironic for sure.

[Demsrule86]

68. And sickening.

[DURHAM D]

13. The political press is years behind the

country when it comes to female candidates. They just don't know how to deal with them.

[bernie59]

14. I've always wondered how it works with guests on these shows.

Would a candidate always accept an invitation, every week if they could get it? Or do the show's producers sometimes have to beg and take who they can get? Maybe it is like the prom and candidates will turn down one show hoping from an invite on another. Or maybe the shows' producers work out a schedule and work with the candidates in advance.

[marylandblue]

39. I was actually thinking of making an OP about this.

Someone I know well works in PR. The people you see most on TV, generally do the following:
- aggressively court the media. That is, they, look for media contacts, constantly talk to them, make themselves available and explain why they should be on the show on a particular day.
-Consistently meet deadlines.
-Have a good media presence -they either naturally know what to say on camera, or get coaching.
-Are friendly with the producers and crew. Particularly the producers, who have make sure they have a good show every day.
-Are easy to work with. They show up on time, don't make a fuss about anything, and don't need a lot of help getting ready.
-Are often willing to fill in an empty slot at the last minute.
- Say things that are interesting or different.

The candidates who are getting a lot of coverage are probably doing most of these things.

[Byronic]

15. Tulsi Gabbard is on National Guard duty this weekend.

It might help if the Tweeter could get Kirsten Gillibrand's name right, too, but that might just be a typo, I guess. Happens to the best of us.

[Exotiki]

16. The other three aren't in National Guard duty

And no, misspellings have nothing to do with media bias.

[hlthe2b]

65. Good for her.. That said, she does not represent me in her politics--at all.

She'll find many opportunities to run to Fox.

[question everything]

17. Because they are new names

Most Americans have heard of Warren, and Harris and others.

Buttigieg is relatively new, Ryan certainly just joined and I found Yang interesting. Not my choice, but an opportunity to get to know him.

No need to inject "identity politics" into everything.

[Exotiki]

22. John McCain used to be a guest all the time

With near 100% recognition.
Your excuse doesn't fly.
Plus I don't know how many people know Gillibrand and Klobuchar.

[thesquanderer]

37. Right, it's not like Warren, Harris etc. are never on these shows.

I'm sure the producers of these shows on the different networks are not conspiring to keep women off in a given week.

About 2/3 of the Dem candidates are male. So even if all are considered equally "newsworthy," there would be more male than female appearances.

[UniteFightBack]

21. There are 17 fucking candidates for fucks sake. I do tire of this. nt

[George II]

38. Yeah, every network has to have at least five candidates on each week, and at least...

....one female.

There are only two black candidates, someone is going to draw the short straw each week. And only one gay candidate. Uh oh, who gets to have him on their shows?

I guess we need a presidential candidate lottery. Sheesh, like there aren't more important things to worry about.

[customerserviceguy]

30. That's a little surprising

especially when it comes to Sen. Harris. I think she's the only one with a possible shot at the nomination.

[Blue_Adept]

31. Blame it on the campaign managers that don't market their availability for them

It's often really that simple.

[marylandblue]

40. Yes, that's a big deal and not appreciated by most viewers.

If you call all the shows regularly and cultivate contacts, you'll get on a lot.

[Honeycombe8]

32. No over-50 candidates r potential candidates. No Hispanic candidates. No black candidates.

No really tall candidates.

Castro was on Real Time w/Bill Maher Friday. But there weren't any female candidates on, or black candidates, or white male candidates.

The female candidates have been on shows where there no other female candidates on, and no male candidates.

Scheduling is sheduling.

[left-of-center2012]

33. The panel on ABC's "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" said, ...

The panel on ABC's “This Week with George Stephanopoulos” said,
Pete Buttigieg is getting more favorable attention than all the Senators who are running for president, combined !

Even Hugh Hewitt, the conservative on the panel, called Buttigieg “a rocket” who is catching the attention of America.

They were all quite impressed with "Mayor Pete".

[Renew Deal]

44. Pete is doing what Trump did

He’s showing on any show that will take him

[jaceaf]

72. And pandering to white people

[Renew Deal]

73. How so?

Who should he be pandering to?

[George II]

36. So? There are about 15 candidates, three networks. Are they each supposed to interview five....

....candidates each and every week? Get real.

[Renew Deal]

42. Did they make themselves available?

[madville]

53. There's no time to ask logical questions

You are supposed to be outraged and throw logic out the window.

[quickesst]

60. It always makes me smile....

.......when someone gets it. 😊👍

[brooklynite]

51. Nothing wrong with Tim Ryan being invited...

He just announced.