Serious questions for those who are convinced that Obama, Clinton, and Gore are not liberals.

[quaker bill]

231. Not exactly

Some are in fact "non-viable" because they do not possess political skills in sufficient quantity. Interestingly, one measure of political skills is perception or image management, in short having some control over how people perceive them. Successful politicians broadcast an air of competence and confidence, losers don't.

It is not all the media or us, sometimes they just aren't up to the job. Now the media, no doubt, will misquote and create false narratives, and do enjoy bringing a political figure down. There is a large flock of wannabe Woodward and Bernsteins out there. We on the other hand are complicit by being swayed through shoddy journalism and 90 second hit pieces.

The point remains, some candidates are non-vaible because they are non-viable and always were. Some are so non-viable that the media does not even bother to do a hit piece on them.