,
5 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
Joe Walsh is not a serious challenge. So, I'm not sure what legit reason big media would have to cover it as such.
Obama's got ZERO media attention despite his total percentage of the national popular primary vote being the lowest of any incumbent since a contested race in 1992.
Obama's got ZERO media attention despite his total percentage of the national popular primary vote being the lowest of any incumbent since a contested race in 1992.
Despite earning the lowest total percentage of a national popular primary vote since Pat Buchanan challenged George H.W. Bush in the contested primary in 1992, Barack Obama still went on to clobber Mitt Romney.
And his challenger(s) got ZERO coverage.
Let's get real. Grow up.
And his challenger(s) got ZERO coverage.
Let's get real. Grow up.
By the way, it's worth noting that Barack Obama had the entire machine working "for" him to keep challengers off the ballot and to play electoral gimmicks.
Donald Trump has it working "against" him to keep him off ballots and easy to mount challenges.
Yet...
Donald Trump has it working "against" him to keep him off ballots and easy to mount challenges.
Yet...
Barack Obama still lost 426,336 votes and 72 delegates to "Uncommitted" or "No Preference", 117,033 votes to John Wolfe, Jr., another 109,764 votes to Darcy Richardson, and > 100k more votes to other challengers who were kept off the ballot by the machine/system.
Point being...
Point being...
This is not a serious challenge. Neither were those. And the difference in the coverage is not justified.
It's ideological. Plainly so.
It's ideological. Plainly so.
