قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home / US / The Washington Post investigates Elizabeth Warren with a number of sources

The Washington Post investigates Elizabeth Warren with a number of sources



Just two weeks ago, our media coverage of Sen. Elizabeth Warren's presidential campaign found a fairly – if not exclusively – positive tenor, with stories often contrasting them positively with Sen. Bernie Sanders and her outspoken commitment to emphasized capitalism. With former heartbreaker Joe Biden of Donald Trump and Sanders recovering from a heart attack, the establishment Democrats and their big donors are suddenly looking at Warren's rising poll numbers as a sign that their candidacy has a very real potential – and very real is a threat their power.

The way in which centrist democratic sources are used also goes to the media.

  WaPo: Uncertainty assumes leadership in Democratic presidential contest.

Among the "Events of the Past Two Weeks" [that] For the candidates who dominated the Democratic nomination race, the Washington Post (06.10.1919) created a tremendous uncertainty. Under the heading "Uncertainty Adopts Leadership," the Washington Post cites "persistent doubts of some party leaders" to Elizabeth Warren

During the Democratic Presidential Contest, Michael Scherer and Matt Viser (06.10.1919) from the Washington Post reported that the youngest Events for the candidates who did this, created a tremendous uncertainty dominated the Democratic nomination race. "These recent events? For Sanders a heart attack; for Biden an unpleasant role in the impeachment investigation; and for Warren, the strangely uneventful "persistent doubts of some party leaders that they are too liberal to win the parliamentary elections."

The Democratic Party has many leaders from both the left and the right wing; for the post office, the adjective "some" serves to disguise the fact that the sources in which these doubts are expressed come almost exclusively from the right.

People like former North Dakota senator Heidi Heitkamp, ​​who lost her 2018 re-election (stressing how often she voted with Trump) by more than 10 percentage points – whom better to turn to To get opinion on how to win an election?

Or there is the advisor Donna Bojarsky, who donated to Sens. Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar and Cory Booker – all representatives of the corporate wing of the party. How about former Obama adviser David Plouffe, who raved about Uber after his Obama years and now runs the policy for Mark Zuckerberg's philanthropy companies? Then you yourself described Mitch Landrieu, the "radical centrist," who told the post:

[Warren] she could do all these things. There is one thing called political reality. Aspiration is wonderful, but you can not aspirate for lunch and send your children to college. This is a fundamental decision on which democratic primary voters must make a decision.

However, the best comes from anonymous donors who get cover to sow fear of a candidate whose policy proposals (such as a wealth tax and a lobbying tax) would directly affect their own finances and political influence: [19659011] Since Warren has been steadily moving up the polls, the fact that she could become a nominee has unsettled some of the party's most important donors to whom she could give the trump card. If it looks as though Warren will win the party's nomination, a long-time Democrat leader said, "There will be an effort to stop this." "

expressed concern that their presence would destroy the democratic opportunity to win the Senate if Warren were the candidate, as voters would consider a Republican majority" the only way to keep them at bay

To end the charts, Swiss Post reminds us that even if Biden falter, we still have a centrist election: we call Senator Michael Bennet and Deputy Tim Ryan, who are currently less than one in age Percent of interviewees are asking a lot of uncertainty at the moment to make some conclusive reflections, it's just that the Washington Post, which relies on their corporate, centrist character, can not testify honestly.


Source link