The DNC Debates, the MSM and Tulsi

Renee Parsons

Image source

As some of the last minute Democratic presidential candidates scramble to qualify for the DNC’s upcoming June 26/27 primary debate, the latest poll results become more than nominally important given their elevated role in whether a candidate meets the requirements to participate.

In order to qualify, each announced candidate needs to have received either $65,000 from 200 donors in 20 states or to garner more than 1% support in any three of the DNC’s ‘favored’ polls – which includes those 2016 polls with either a flawed methodology or their thumb on the scale which missed the final election results in a big way, all of which proves that wishing does not make it so.

There is every reason to believe that the favored polls will provide the necessary % of support in order for all 21 candidates to qualify. Given any poll’s margin-of-error in statistical sampling, it would seem that measuring public support via a % is an arbitrary criteria that does not represent a true accurate basis with high precision results. Even if a candidate does not qualify for the June debates, they can still qualify for the July event. A house divided and all that…

The basic structure of the debates as announced by DNC Chair Tom Perez represents a presidential primary process that is “transparent, fair, inclusive” with ‘historic reforms’ and ‘increased trust’ which you may recall, the DNC process in 2016 did nothing to generate increased trust.

While Democratic officials have been meeting for months with media partners, there is yet no announcement who the moderator or participating panelists will be or how the questions are being formulated. The June round of debates will be broadcast on NBC, MSNBC and Telemundo with the July debates on CNN.

According to the DNC, the max number of candidates participating will be a total of twenty even if all 21 announced candidates qualify as it threatens to eliminate candidates who had already made the cut – so much for “transparent, fair and inclusive.” Ten will appear on June 26 with the next ten on June 27th and selection will be determined by drawing lots.

Conceivably, the Main Show of Bernie and Biden may occur on June 26th or they may be split, appearing on two different nights.

In any case, it may be difficult for the public to determine a clear ‘winner’ by virtue of candidate separation from the total field.

Leaving First Amendment concerns aside, Perez cited a New Yorker expose “Fox News has always been partisan. But has it become propaganda?” by Jane Mayer reporting on an ‘inappropriate’ relationship between the Trump Administration and Fox News. Perez, therefore, determined that Fox was “not in a position to host a fair and neutral debate” and would not be a participating media partner.

This is not about defending FoxNews or the Trump Administration but it is more than ironic when MSM outlets, like the New Yorker reveal their own unprofessional bias without applying the same propaganda standard to itself or to its MSM colleagues for its inappropriate camaraderie with the high level Obama Administration officials or current Democratic Presidential candidates.

As the MSM continues to pat itself on the back and win awards it did not deserve after perpetuating a deep constitutional crisis which has torn the country apart, the NYT and WaPo received $15,000 for its 2018 Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting for its flawed, erroneous reportage on Russiagate as CNN won $2500 for the 2018 White House Correspondents Merriman Smith Award which was based on leaks from former Obama officials John Brennan and James Clapper rather than the old-fashioned method of investigative reporting. Presumably, all recipients kept the prize money.

As the Dems deny FoxNews a place at the table, the logical response for Fox is to sponsor their own town halls as they did recently with Bernie which attracted 2.5 million viewers, more than either CNN or MSNBC rate on a good night. While the MSM has already committed to broadcast the twelve Democratic debates, Fox will potentially scoop up increased ratings as it provides individual candidates with an impressive demographic forum. True to form, President Trump responded that he would not participate in general election debates with the Democrat favorite MSM outlets as the DNC continues to create chaos out of order.

On the part of the DNC, the obvious idea is to winnow the field in such a way that it does not appear obvious if any one candidate is being deliberately shoved aside without an equal opportunity. LOL with that. Examination of a less than inspiring slate of candidates leaves considerable space for true excellence to surface. It is ironic that the party so enthralled with diversity and identity politics actually represents a gross lack of diversity in terms of public policy options.

With the new CNN poll showing Joe Biden representing the fossil wing of the Democratic party with a 39% favorable rating as Bernie drops to 15%, it is eerily reminiscent of overstated polls for HRC in 2016. Thanks to CNN, additional White House contenders have qualified for the debate via the % option including former Colorado Gov John Hickenlooper who might take the opportunity to inform the public why he attended the Bilderberg meeting in 2018.

Given her almost totally hostile reception by every MSM outlet who deigned to interview her, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard has experienced, as an opponent of regime change wars, more bad manners and outright personal antagonism than any other candidate. While Gabbard easily qualified for the debates via the $65,000 requirement and continues to attract SRO audiences in NH, Iowa, California and elsewhere, yet until the newest CNN poll, she failed to register any % of public support.

Something here does not compute given the ‘favored’ polls past history of favoritism. If the Dems continue to put a brick wall around her, Jill Stein has already opened the Green Party door as a more welcoming venue for a Tulsi candidacy. The Dems, who tend to be unprincipled and vindictive, better be careful what they wish for.

Renee Parsons has been a member of the ACLU’s Florida State Board of Directors and president of the ACLU Treasure Coast Chapter. She has been an elected public official in Colorado, an environmental lobbyist for Friends of the Earth and staff member of the US House of Representatives in Washington DC. She can be found on Twitter @reneedove31


If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.

For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of

oldest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
der einzige
der einzige
May 7, 2019 1:08 PM

comment image

United Christians for Israel, founded and led by pastor John Hagee, have millions of members and call themselves “the largest pro-Israel charity in the United States.” The organization was an important factor in the decision of US President Donald Trump in 2017 to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and to transfer the US embassy there.

Gabbard sponsored the resolution of the Congress criticizing Amnesty International for revealing Israeli atrocities against civilians in his blitzkrieg in Gaza in 2014. The resolution stated that Israel “focuses on terrorist targets” and “goes to extraordinary efforts to attack only terrorist actors”.

What it looked like “focusing on terrorist targets” according to Gabbard can be seen here

Zionism and Islamophobia Gabbard have gained recognition and support from all kinds of unpalatable characters – like right-wing billionaire and Zionist Sheldon Adelson, who loudly declared that “all Muslims are terrorists”.

In addition to Israel’s loyal defender, Gabbard has also proved to be a credible servant of Adelson’s business interests. Introduced regulations against online gambling to protect the casino’s empire from competition on the Internet. Adelson thanked her, giving her the Champion of Freedom award.

Her prejudices against Islam directly stem from her Hindu fundamentalism. Gabbard became one of the main American political supporters of Narendra Modi, the leader of the Hindu sectarian party Bharatiya Janata (BJP) and the current Prime Minister of India.

Being the main minister of the Indian state of Gujarat in 2002, Modi helped spark a pogrom against Muslims, in which they killed 2,000 people and displaced over 200,000 people in the ethnic cleansing campaign. Since his victory in the 2014 elections, Modi has been a decidedly pro-Israeli Indian politician and has strong relations with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

At the invitation of Modi, Gabbard traveled through India for three weeks during which various Hindu fundamentalists greeted her as their American master. In probably the worst part of the tour, the India Foundation, a formation tuned to the Hindu fascist group Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), hosted Gabbard to discuss the future of Indian-American relations. After the reactionary lovefest, the Indian newspaper Telegraph called it “the American Sangha mascot”

After returning to the USA, Gabbard defended Modi against any criticism. She was one of the few democrats who spoke against the federal government’s decision to refuse a Modi visa in 2014 because of his abolition of religious freedom

A year earlier, she carried out a successful campaign to abolish legislation calling on India to improve the treatment of religious minorities. Gabbard condemned the bill as an attempt to “influence the outcome of the national elections in India.”

Gabbard’s service for the most right-wing forces in Indian politics leaves no doubt about its Islamophobia.

Gabbard supported Donald Trump’s claim that Islam itself is the source of terrorist organizations such as Al-Qaeda and ISIS. She claimed that Obama “completely misunderstands the rational Islamic ideology that drives these people.”

As with other leading liberal democrats, Gabbard’s alleged progressive values ​​do not extend to the Palestinian struggle for freedom. While she may support the resistance of Indian Native at Standing Rock, she will not support the indigenous people of Palestine and her struggle for self-determination against Israeli colonialism.

johny conspiranoid
johny conspiranoid
May 7, 2019 8:05 AM

Tulsi Gabard is a member of the Council for Foreign Relations.
She’s a phoney redical

May 7, 2019 12:20 AM

Unfortunately, this is why Tulsi will never get elected…….. https://youtu.be/W-0azixYbx8

Dimly Glimpsed
Dimly Glimpsed
May 6, 2019 8:46 PM

The Democrat establishment hates Tulsi with a passion. There appear to be several factors: 1) she opposes all the neocon wars, and opposes intervention in Venezuela. 2) She refuses to kowtow to the bipartisan establish sacred cows (an apt metaphor for Tulsi), such as blind support for Saudi Arabia and Israel; 3) She gave the DNC and Hillary the back of her hand when she resigned as a vice-chair of the DNC in 2016, citing the reason as unethical bias by the DNC during the primaries. In other words, she resigned because the DNC was not neutral during the primaries, and colluded with Hillary to cheat Bernie; 4) Tulsi is very progressive, favoring single payer health care, student debt relief, the Green New Deal, etc.
For an establishment democrat, those policies are like garlic to a vampire.

Dimly Glimpsed
Dimly Glimpsed
May 6, 2019 8:38 PM

“$65,000 from 200 donors in 20 states”

As I recall, the requirement for a debate invitation is 65,000 individual contributors from 200 donors in each of 20 states.

May 5, 2019 11:48 PM

My money’s on Bilderberg rent boy Gov John Hooplicker

May 6, 2019 12:22 AM
Reply to  Mucho

Some great info on the fightback against 5G, a military weapons and surveillance system which is about to be rolled out across the Western world by its clearly deranged, evil owners who should all be in jail

May 5, 2019 10:40 PM

What a circus this will be——like watching an Italian firedrill.. There is only one candidate that has a moral compass that points true north.
Pete Buttiegeige
Let the games begin!!!

Simon Hodges
Simon Hodges
May 5, 2019 8:23 PM

Tulsi Gabbard. Whose side are people on these days: its getting so hard to tell. Very surprised to see Media Lens coming out against Cory Morningstar and the anti-capitalist movement. Where do they really stand and for whom?

May 5, 2019 7:03 PM

For those of us that long for peace in the world , even if we don’t live in the US , there is but one choice , and that is for Tulsi Gabbard .

May 5, 2019 10:47 PM
Reply to  summitflyer

There is zero chance of her winning, and even if she did, 5 minutes later she would be dancing to AIPAC’s tune. Even Dubya Bush, Obongo and the Orange Baboon spoke of the need to end the crazy foreign military adventures – and look what happened in all cases. What difference does it make if you have a half black or an orange stooge goy in the White House, or a female one like Pocahontas or Gabbard or a gay one like Buttplug. It’s still just a monkey rattling its little tin cup for the AIPAC organ grinder. Business as usual.

May 6, 2019 12:22 AM
Reply to  mark

sad but true

Dimly Glimpsed
Dimly Glimpsed
May 6, 2019 8:57 PM
Reply to  mark

All it takes for a candidate to win is for people to vote. An individual act of will. Persuading voters to give up and stay home is the goal of establishment propaganda, a good example of which are the publicizing of these early (and probably wrong) polls showing Joe Biden with a huge lead.
Tulsi resigned her vice-chair position as a DNC anointed up-and-coming star in the firmament of the Democratic Party. Conventional wisdom at the time was that she threw her career and even her re-election chances down the drain. The DNC and its proxies are now running a primary challenge against Tulsi to undermine her campaign for the presidency.
I’d say your rather emphatic conclusion that Tulsi will dance to APAC’s tune is a bit premature.

May 5, 2019 6:35 PM

(“Jill Stein has already opened the Green Party door as a more welcoming venue for a Tulsi candidacy. The Dems, who tend to be unprincipled and vindictive, better be careful what they wish for.”)

– along with “unprincipled and vindictive” – one can other “qualifiers” such as “amoral, “psychopathic/sociopathic/narcissistic,”
“lawless,” “war-mongering,” “empathy-free,” and “completely divorced from reality” – not that I want to split hairs or anything.

George Cornell
George Cornell
May 6, 2019 12:02 AM

Not that good.

Dimly Glimpsed
Dimly Glimpsed
May 6, 2019 8:49 PM
Reply to  George Cornell


May 10, 2019 12:17 AM

Moving to the Green party in the USA would be the kiss of death for what Tulsi is doing. Whether she gets elected or not she has dragged the debate clearly into sharp focus on an anti war message. Without her bold move, that message of demilitarisation would be absent from this 2020 campaign.

The United States will never recover its economic centre of gravity unless and until the distortion of its gross military expenditure is stopped.

Many social programs are dependent on the annihilation of the military industrial complex and a few of the candidates know this and speak of it. Tulsi has conveniently amplified all voices opposed to militarism and contrasted those sycophants advocating same.