The Associated Press (6/6/16) has unilaterally declared Hillary Clinton to be “the Democratic Party’s presumptive nominee for president,” based on the news agency’s own polling of unelected superdelegates.
Superdelegates—who have a role in the Democratic nominating process based on their institutional positions rather than being chosen by voters—do not vote until the Democratic National Convention, to be held on July 25. They can declare their intention to vote for one candidate or another, just as voters can tell pollsters who they intend to vote for before Election Day, but like voters they can (and do) change their mind at any time before the actual voting. Media do not generally call elections weeks before the actual voting based on voters’ intentions.
The timing of AP’s announcement–on the eve of primaries in California, New Jersey, New Mexico, Montana and South Dakota, and caucuses in North Dakota—raises concerns of voter suppression, intentional or not. The six states choose a total of 806 delegates on June 7, making it the second-biggest day in the Democratic primary calendar (after “Super Tuesday,” March 1, when 865 delegates were at stake).
News outlets generally withhold the results of exit polling until voters have finished voting, regardless of how far ahead the leading candidate is, because they don’t want to confuse poll-based speculation with the actual electoral results. AP, it seems, has no such qualms.
Compounding the damage done by AP’s premature call were other major news outlets that joined the rush to declare the nominating process over. NBC News (6/6/16) came out with “Clinton Hits ‘Magic Number’ of Delegates to Clinch Nomination.” “Hillary Clinton Clinches Democratic Presidential Nomination,” was CNN’s headline (6/6/16); an onscreen graphic reported that “Hillary Clinton Earns Enough Delegates to Win Democratic Nomination,” an odd choice of verb to describe the inclinations of unelected delegates.
At least NBC and CNN claimed to be making its own independent count of superdelegates; USA Today (6/6/16) had the headline “Hillary Clinton Clinches Nomination: Here’s How She Did It,” as if the AP call were an objective fact that needed no attribution.
ACTION: Please tell AP not to preempt the democratic process by telling voters their votes don’t matter.
To: AP political editor David Scott
email: info@ap.org
Twitter: @AP
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/APNews
Please remember that respectful communication is the most effective. Feel free to leave copies of your messages to AP in comments.
Check out ABC News’ headline, “Hillary Clinton Becomes First Woman Nominated as Presidential Candidate”
http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/video/hillary-clinton-woman-nominated-presidential-candidate-39659697
Did i miss ABC inventing a time machine?
Dear Mr. Scott:
After having watched hundreds and hundreds of media, individuals, and corporate spokepersons lay the yellow brick road for their darling, while making sure Sanders was drowned endlessly, it makes even more sad that AP has jumped on Clinton’s very entitled installment as U.S. President, so I have a question.
Why not just start calling her President Clinton now? Christmas is barely over ½ a year away, so sprinkle something nice on the poor girl. It won’t, however, change her voting record for every bomb, bullet, war, death and civilian murder she could muster then, and oh shame, we don’t think she’s a gonna do any chameleon job on that, so seat-belt up.
Not a liar, no. Clinton is one of the biggest, most consistent, negatively impacting liars ever to follow Billy, who is brilliant enough to never know the difference between sex and sex, at least when under “oath”, whatever that (may have used to) meant.
So on with the show. I don’t and won’t follow AP, I wet my finger and learn more about blowing wind than AP would ever tell.
Congratulations to AP and yourself, Mr. Scott.
Sincerely,
Hal B. Anthony
Rogue Valley, Oregon
Here is what I just sent to AP’s email:
I am disappointed in AP’s announcement that Hillary Clinton clinched the Democratic nomination last night. The only reason it looks like she is over the required amount is the fact that your numbers are including superdelegates. While many superdelegates have indicated their preferences, they do not vote until July 25th, and may choose to back Bernie Sanders if he wins the majority of the pledged delegates.
By making this announcement and sending the message that the outcome of the primary is already set, you are discouraging millions of voters in today’s primaries from making their voices heard, regardless of whether that is your intention or not.
I wrote to AP:
The superdelegates will not vote until July. Announcing the delegate count prematurely, especially on the eve of several important primaries, serves to discourage voter turnout and interferes with a political process that the AP should be reporting on, not meddling in. I am extremely disappointed.
Sanders supporters are not counting beans. They are sending a strong message that they want a profound change in the political and economic life of this country. Is the AP interested in reporting on this movement, or in sidelining it?
AP’s announcement of yesterday that the nomination is “clinched” looks like an attempt to suppress the vote in today’s primary elections. We probably shouldn’t have expected any better from an organization that evaded coverage of issues of national policy in favor of nonstop coverage of who’s ahead in the polls. Shameful
abuse of constitutional privilege.
Jim- According to the Bern Report, the AP has now backpedaled on this announcement, switching from the term ‘clinching’ to ‘presumptive.’ Still, most networks are saying she has clinched it (except for MSNBC). See http://thebernreport.com/ap-strangely-backpedals-on-clinton-nominee-announcement/
@AP Thank you for saving us the time it takes to be engaged citizens. Your fortune telling and wishful thinking is helpful. #FeelTheBern
Mind readers?
For primary voters
More like mind fuckers
Dear Mr. Scott,
Whatever your and your organization’s motive was to publish such a manipulative piece as yesterday’s black box conclusion about the Democratic primary race, there are many of us who see it clearly for what it was – propaganda. We’re working around you Mr. Scott. We’re working around the rigged systems that you clearly seem to support. We probably won’t have an impact quickly enough to stave off the worst outcomes of the misguided decisions of the 1% and their leaders, but we can see the game for what it is. Enjoy the hollow victory. In the long run, it will serve you as well as a diet of donuts and Coke.
Right on. But it continues a history of manipulation by Clinton of democratic and Democratic institutions (DNC, mainstream media, superdelegates, government, etc.) Read more at: http://www.fairobserver.com/region/north_america/a-presidential-candidate-exploits-americas-democratic-institutions-23304/
Here’s what I wrote in my email to AP:
Dear AP Editors:
Your blatant attempt to influence the remaining primaries by publishing an objectively false headline and story demonstrates your utter lack of journalistic integrity. I am a high-school teacher, and when I teach Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four I will use this incident as “Exhibit A” in our discussion of the corrupting power of the mainstream media today. I’ll make sure they understand that AP (as well as those other “news” organizations who picked up and recirculated your story) is NOT a source to be trusted.
It was an anonymous survey.
The Associated Press conducted a secret survey of super-delegates, in which they promised to protect their identities, and determined that just enough of them said they intended to vote for Hillary Clinton 50 days from now during the Democratic Convention. For the AP, that was enough to go ahead and call the race for her.
They simply reported a fact.
It shouldn’t matter. VOTE ANYWAY!!!!!
By making this premature announcement, we will never know the true outcome of all of the primaries today. Of course it goes without saying that in any of these primaries where Sanders receives fewer votes than Clinton, it will be the result of more “rigging” and voter suppression. In the primaries where he receives more votes than Clinton, he will whole-heartedly claim them as valid. No one mentions the Hillary voters that may stay home today because they believe she has already clinched the nomination. AP has made a major screw-up for ALL candidates.
Here’s what I said, under the subject line “Breaking news: the superdelegates haven’t voted yet.”
Dear AP:
I used to think you were a “news outlet” but now I see that you’re mostly a propaganda outlet for Hillary Clinton’s campaign.
Perhaps you missed this breaking news: Democratic Party superdelegates have not yet voted. Here’s another news flash: there’s lots of precedent for superdelegates who had endorsed a candidate to change sides and vote for another candidate at the convention.
There is absolutely no excuse for your blatant attempt to suppress the vote on the election day for which the second-highest number of delegates are at stake. When did AP sink to disseminating propaganda instead of reporting facts?
Wonderfully well said. Many thanks.
Comment on AP’s Facebook page:
AP’s premature announcement of Hillary Clinton’s Big Win has suggested to voters in six states–North Dakota, South Dakota, California, Montana, New Jersey, and New Mexico–that their votes don’t really matter. “The most trusted source of independent news and information in the world”? Not anymore.
This will backfire on the corporate power structure, as Hillary supporters will hear the news, then think “Why bother voting — it’s all over.”
Bernie supporters will still show up, and Bernie will win the remaining states.
Yeah, how did that go?
I just found my Green Party buttons from the last election.
Absolutely moronic statement. If the situation were reversed and the AP called it for Bernie, we’d see none of this ”outrage.” The media calls elections all the time based on their own analyses and projections. It’s not voter suppression and suggesting it is just makes you look silly. It’s funny how we didn’t hear any of this outrage 8 years ago when Sanders himself said Obama was the presumptive nominee before the convention, based on a count of pledged and super delegates. http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/08-sanders-endorsed-obama-clinton-formally-exited-race-n586556
Presumptive is a word exactly this situation. When most people are almost sure that something is going to happen, but it hasn’t been finalized.
But they didn’t say “presumptive” this time, they said “clinched”.
This is not moronic, it isn’t silly–and whether or not Bernie did the right thing last time does not change whether or not this is the right thing now. It isn’t.
“The Associated Press (6/6/16) has unilaterally declared Hillary Clinton to be “the Democratic Party’s presumptive nominee for president,” based on the news agency’s own polling of unelected superdelegates.”
Am I missing something?
You are missing the absolute nature of things, for the corporate rich own most politicians body and soul, own all of mainstream media including Associated Press and orchestrated to perfection is:
(1) Bernie Sanders and socialism, as always, is being kept marginalized to perfection.
(2) The illusion that our make believe government is something more then a rich man’s paradise, as always perpetuated to perfection.
Spoken like a true Bernie supporter: presented with facts, responds with vagaries. This is why it’s impossible to have a real conversation about these issues, you’re too obtuse.
For the purpose of locking the public in mental darkness, surely this is why the corporate rich own all of mainstream media.
They pissed me off enough to write “Hypocrisy & Fear of the Establishment’s Ventriloquists” that mulls over a simple question, why do they fear Donald Trump so much?
https://medium.com/@romanlatkovic/hypocrisy-fear-of-the-establishments-ventriloquists-2a5788f1baa1#.abutv9o9u
My message to David Scott:
Dear Mr Scott,
I was under the impression that AP was in the business of reporting the news. Apparently your organization decided to make news, which was then dutifully reported as fact by other news organizations, by declaring that Hillary Clinton had clinched the nomination for the Democratic party’s candidate for president, despite the fact that declarations by superdelegates of their intentions to vote one way or another at the Democratic convention are not in fact votes, and despite the fact that the DNC itself urged news organizations to not report superdelegates’ intentions as votes. As a result, I have lost faith in your organization’s impartiality.
On top of the above, I happened upon this article: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/30/associated-press-cooperation-nazis-revealed-germany-harriet-scharnberg .
Sir, your organization’s crediblity is as badly damaged as the damage that it did to the democratic process yesterday.
This isn’t the main dish, or even the dessert. It’s the cherry on top.
June 6, 2016: The day modern corporate media officially stopped pretending to care about democracy. When 92% of the expected voters in Puerto Rico was blatantly suppressed, they suppressed the verifiable facts of the matter and uncritically repeated the claim from the people who organized the farce that the victim was actually the one to blame. http://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2016/06/puerto-rico-democratic-party-reduced.html
June 7, 2016: The day modern corporate media declared an end to any pretense of fairness to the candidate who had become the strong favorite (despite most of a year of them ignoring, belittling, smearing, and badgering him to quit from day 1).
June 8, 2016: The day trust in the corporate media dropped from 6% to 0. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trust-in-media_us_57148543e4b06f35cb6fec58
http://theralphretort.com/busted-ap-clinton-caught-colluding-secret-win-0607016/
I posted this on the APNews FB page, beneath the story post:
“Lo and behold the despicable disenfranchisement of millions of citizens by the corporate media on behalf of the pro-corporate candidate. The AP’s pseudo-journalists have hereby voluntarily surrendered their profession’s hard-won status as the 4th Estate, deliberately undermining our democracy instead of upholding it as is they’re *supposed* to do. Good journalists have died defending democracy, but the AP & the rest of the corporate media could clearly care less about facts and fairness and their professional obligation to show no bias.
My Master Editor Publisher-father is spinning in his grave like a top at these manipulative hacks’ brazen power-mongering, coyly claiming they won’t divulge the names of which “Super Delegates” have pledged their vote for Hillary (hundreds of them doing so before Sanders was even on the scene) … that they are affording them anonymity, as if these “Super Delegates” are on the same level as whistle blowers, instead of the conniving kingmakers they were designed to be. (Look it up, it’s no secret!)
Hillary & her cronies are behind this. They know there is a chance HRC will lose more in CA than anyone expected, thanks to Sanders’s immense and still-growing popularity. So the pro-Clinton machine is actively trying to make California & its many delegates meaningless in case Sanders pulls it off. The media does the same thing when they show us Clinton rallies attended by hundreds, but impose black-outs on Sanders rallies attended by thousands, in state after state. CNN = Clinton News Network? Not far off, actually.
Heaven forfend We the People be allowed to decide who the MAJORITY of us want, hey, AP?! You can’t possibly wait for the voters to state their opinions, in case We don’t choose who YOU want.
That would be just like, like … DEMOCRACY!
Wouldn’t it?! Just imagine.
O the humanity….
Clinton’s pro-1% media machine is clearly hoping that if her media cronies proclaim her as the “Presumptive Nominee”, Sanders supporters may not bother to show up to vote. That is a well-known phenomenon, where the typically hot-to-trot media calls a particular race long before the polls in all states have closed — just ask the voters in AK & HI …
IMO, clever queen-makers have been plotting their autocratic little coronation to shut out the better candidate for the People (& for beating Trump) for a long time, completely forgetting (deliberately ignoring) how troubled their chosen favorite is.
IF Clinton does actually win the nom fairly — sadly now a fantasy, thanks to her conniving cronies and an alerted public –- she had damn well better have the brains to grovel before Sanders, begging him to save her & the United States by being her VP. “
My two cents worth to the AP:
Shame on the Associated Press for prematurely rushing to select your preferred nominee. Without even indicating who the new endorsers are of Clinton, you come out and declare her the nominee on the eve of an important primary election day. This blatant act of voter suppression confirms the suspicions of so many that the media has been actively in on the rigging of this election for Clinton. No more will I trust your biased service pretending to be a news organization. What a sad state for our fourth estate to have reached. No wonder so many are calling for major reforms across the board in our society. Shame, shame, shame!
I was traveling in New Jersey last night, Monday June 6 when NPR reported Hillary Clinton had got enough delegates to clinch the Democratic nomination.
Can you explain why this information was released the day before the 2nd largest voting day for the Democratic Party? There were no new results yesterday and I would hate to think something as obvious as attempted voter suppression would be something the Associated Press would be involved in.
I hope there will be some reckoning and accountability for this grave mistake (or intentional deception). If not I fear the 5th estate will continue on its path towards illegitimacy.
Regards,
Rev. Phil Sano
Here’s what i sent, under a subject line of “Clinton is already President”:
Well why not? If you feel free to announce speculative results the day before a major multi-state primary, why not go ahead and decide who’s going to win the general election, based on polls and the preferences of the owners of the mass media? Maybe we don’t need to spend all that money on elections at all, since the voters have become so marginal to the process. But of course, that would cost the media corporations billions in ad money, wouldn’t it?
There is no legitimate reason to jump so far ahead of events with this announcement; it looks instead like an attempt to influence the results, and as such, stinks like week old fish in a hot place.
Mary Wildfire
The AP was wrong to do it, but unlike say the NY Times, the AP at least admits they didn’t survey all 700+ super delegates within the last 72 hours. The AP took an old list of declared for Hillary names and added some new ones to it, thereby inventing the nomination of Hillary.
So it’s NBC and the Times that look like egregious shills for Hillary here.
This was stupid for the AP to do. You are disenfranchising millions of voters with your greed, and corruption. The fall of the Democratic Party is going to be on your hands, as well as the announcement in November of Trump as President.
The days of the Media you admire AP are about to come to an end, and it is the greedy ones like you that will be to blame. What a shame that you couldn’t be a honest reporter of news.
R.I.P. AP, and all the other Media stations.
I am so very disappointed and disgusted at your blatant disregard of ethics and integrity! It is bad enough that you have neglected to give equal coverage to Senator Bernie Sanders political events in this very important race! But now, misrepresenting facts that can change the outcome of the primaries? Unconscionable!!. Shame on you!!!
I’ve had the impression that AP was a respected source of news reporting. That changed overnight with its’ very premature report of Hillary Clinton becoming the presumptive Democratic nominee. Smacks of a poorly disguised bias.
My email:
Dear Mr. Scott,
I was genuinely shocked to learned of AP’s descent into tabloid journalist regarding your irresponsible false creation of news about the results of the Democratic Primary.
I read at Fair.com that “News outlets generally withhold the results of exit polling until voters have finished voting, regardless of how far ahead the leading candidate is, because they don’t want to confuse poll-based speculation with the actual electoral results. AP, it seems, has no such qualms.”
Dictionary.com: “tabloid” = “luridly or vulgarly sensational.”
Don’t the U.S. citizens deserve better news outlets than those that promote lurid, vulgar sensationalism?
I am very sad to see your pathetic descent,
[my full name]
I left the following message:
It is an understatement to say your premature “news” report of Clinton clinching the nomination the night before the June 7 primary and caucus contests was disappointing. It was an abomination. Where is your journalistic integrity?
Because of the obvious biased “reporting” and suppression of critical information voters needed to make informed decisions during this charade of a primary season, I have canceled my subscription to the NYTs. Rest assured that I will do my best, as often as I can, to make sure everyone knows your organization, as well as any other publication using your articles, have been biased and unfair regarding information you have disseminated to the public.
You have truly undermined democracy in favor of greed and power.
You have tarnished your reputation; it will be difficult to rectify that.
“concerns of voter suppression, intentional or not.”
Why would anyone think that this wasn’t intentional. It was coordinated w/ the Clinton campaign.
Chris Matthews spilled the beans early on that they were going to announce Clinton as the presumptive nominee when they figured she had enough pledged delegates w/ enough precincts reporting while people were still in line. (And, of course, still using the bogus inclusion of the unpledged superdelegates).
But then, apparently, the plan got advanced (or maybe the Matthews plan was ‘V1’, but what happened was ‘V2’).
As an astute Twitter user has noted, Clinton sent out a fundraising email just after the AP’s announcement that referred to the AP’s announcement but had a graphic created two days earlier. https://twitter.com/Cold_Stare/status/740025607166164992
So, the AP colluded w/ the Clinton campaign. There is no doubt.
Voter suppression intended and achieved.
I just voted in California yesterday. I am very confused about how they counted my vote in under 1 hour and seemingly every other late voter… It seems I just got home after voting that she is our new presidential nominee and won C.A. Am I hallucinating? Can Someone please explain.
Dear Mr. Scott
I am a Danish citizen who has been eagerly watching US politics for a long time.
I have heard and read about a lot of political scandals and journalistic malpractice, but the AP’s untruthful and biased calling of the Democratic race for Hillary Clinton takes the cake.
This is a complete and utter disgrace.
For the sake of democracy and objective journalism, with all due respect: Please clean up your organization.
That’s how bad it is. I am not even a US citizen and I’m writing you because I am appalled.
Kind regards
Emil Elias
Denmark
Dick move, AP. Dick move. Thom Hartmann covered this quite well and said it was purely to make money, because media now only makes money from sensationalism. It’s the same flawed structure we currently have in our healthcare system, which prioritizes profit over doing a service for the community. We need to take money out of the equation in so many sectors. Let’s hope one of the first of those spheres is politics, followed rapidly by healthcare and media. We deserve the ability to make up our own minds, and AP, you’re injecting an awful lot of bias into the process.
Everyone fed up with this kind of media BS should consider some alt or new media news outlets. I like TYT and Political Revolution TV. They’re both on YouTube. For written word I like Vox and AlterNet.
Hi Alice
Can you provide a link to the Thom Hartmann video you referenced?
Thank you.
You are dealing with Machines. Huge one’s. Everything is manipulated and no one really cares what we think. They do as they do and the papers are controlled by the lobbies.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/debbie-wasserman-schultz-payday-lenders-220527
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/06/08/why-clinton-has-already-lost-wisconsin/
The interesting thing about WI is that the American Legislative Exchange Council is very much at home there, along with AZ and many other states. There is a presence in all. If you see nothing getting done, and laws being changed, rights being taken away, ALEC is no doubt in the back drop. Center for Media and Democracy has been covering it for a long time. I spoke to them when I came out of AZ, after a court case that was trumped up. If you don’t know anything about ALEC, American Legislative Exchange Council, you can Wikipedia it. Good primer. Both parties are involved. It is really hard to see where there is a separation in any of the parties anymore.
http://www.prwatch.org/news/2011/10/11057/we-are-99-1-buy-elections-reports-show.
The Portland Tribune just had an article about the Lobbies and Transparency. This rigging has been going on for a long time.
http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/wooing-hillary-clinton-pardons-mind-new-square-rabbi-article-1.902840
Writing the New York Times is like petitioning your congressman to do much of anything, let alone get the money out of politics, to be honest, to help the people. The whole system everywhere, world wide is rigged. I say, good luck with that one.
This is what I wrote to the AP
I am distressed that you called the nomination early
Super-delegates do not vote until the Democratic convention, and things can change in the interim.
As a one-time journalism major, I find it unethical that you released the story about super-delegates (who still can change their decisions) making the case that Clinton clinched the nomination the day before several significant primaries.
Has it come to a place where media overrules the voting public? Not good!
I am deeply disappointed in the AP.
AP SUBVERTING democracy is a better way of putting it!
Here’s what I wrote to the AP:
Mr. Scott,
I have been equally disappointed and outraged at the biased coverage that the major news outlets have been offering as “news” about the Democratic presidential primary. Fortunately for me and millions of others like me who possess a small measure of critical thinking ability, there are alternative sources for news. This primary season has truly and finally turned me completely against the mainstream media. The final straw for me was the batch of headlines from AP, and repeated in the Washington Post, New York Times, NBC, and others which I read on the morning of the June 7 batch of state primaries that said in effect: “Hillary Clinton clinches the Democratic nomination.”
I understand that AP’s conclusive story entitled “AP count: Clinton has delegates to win Democratic nomination” came out the evening before on June 6. This headline would seem to be a bit of a gamble, given that six states (including the very large population of California) would only start primary voting on the next day. Can you possibly imagine that such faux-news would not have an influence on voting? Let’s break it down:
• The headline and story in AP was based on information obtained from superdelegates, who had not actually voted yet. Superdelegates won’t vote until the Democratic Convention. The certainty in the story and its headline belied that fact.
• A significant number of citizens of this country had not actually voted yet. The certainty in the story and headline showed contempt and disrespect for the opinions and voices of these people.
• Voters who are polled before they vote have been known to change their minds and vote differently when they actually cast their vote. The certainty in the story and headline ignored that reality.
Why cast such speculation as truth when the facts don’t support it? Was this an intentional effort to suppress the vote for Clinton’s opponent?
The irresponsibility and contempt that mainstream media outlets have demonstrated during this primary season has utterly undermined my trust in the so-called “fourth estate” as a reliable source of unbiased information.
For shame.
The E-Mail address you provided for David Scott is bogus. What a waste of your readers’ time.
I am still in shock that Hillary Clinton had the gall to declare herself “the winner of the Presidential contest” , on Monday, June 13, BEFORE the California vote, and the other primaries/caucuses to take place on the following day (Tuesday, June 14). As the Bernie Sanders campaign has revealed, Hillary Clinton doesn’t yet have the necessary tally of pledged delegates to qualify for such a claim.
A soft coup, à la Dilma Rousseff, type has just taken place here.
We are in new unconstitutional territory here.
My email to AP:
Hello,
I must join the many engaged citizens in voicing my concern over premature, manipulative, and frankly incorrect announcement that a Democratic nominee has been chosen. No one can say definitively to whom any superdelegate may give their vote until the votes are counted -one month from now- and such an important and far-reaching organization as the Associated Press should not be in the business of producing speculative news that only benefit one candidate. I would that AP alter their practices and be a news outlet to place our trust in. The integrity of the democratic process depends on it.
Thank you for listening to your potential readership.
Evan Charles Parker
Dear Political Editor David Scott,
I was terribly disappointed with you and the AP on Monday when you declared HIllary Clinton the winner of the Democratic Nomination in no uncertain terms. In your haste to scoop the competition, you even went so far as to avoid phrases like “AP projects…” and went with the declarative. And then, predictably, other media outlets followed suit.
This announcement came on the even of a host of primaries. What do voters do in those states when such a thing is announced? Well, many of them stay home — and there is no data to clarify if this helps or hurts her competition. However, it certainly reduces voter turnout and changes the calculus of a presidential election. I am not against Hillary Cllinton for President, but I am against unconscionable moves by news organizations that change the news. And that news was that she had enough delegates if all the delegates voted in the way your polls show; this should have been your story, with big fat caveats in the lede and headline. Becuase this was the truth. And you did not report the truth.
This is the sort of thing we should be able to leave to Fox News.
You should really be ashamed of yourselves and I hope you will not only make a statement of apology, but institute policies that will prevent this nonsense from happening in the future.
Sincerely,
-Adam Sxxxxxxxx-
Mr, Scott,
Years ago, the press regulated itself with a certain standard of ethics. Important events were reported with a degree of (at least perceived) impartiality and factual presentation.The AP’s recent announcement of Hillary Clinton as the presumptive Democratic nominee has crossed the line of news reporting and abandoning all journalistic integrity, now enters the realm of news in the making.
The Democratic National Committee has officially and repeatedly stated that super delegates should NOT be included in the total count prior to the convention. Their tallies are pledges, not votes and could change.
AP has conducted its own private polling. Disregarding the DNC instructions, it sounds the bell: (“In a burst of last minute support”) the prerequisite number of super delegates has been reached.
The story breaks (Striding into history, Hillary Clinton will become the first woman…”) and reverberates throughout the media on the second biggest day of the Democratic primary calendar, when a total of 806 delegates are at stake.
Such timing, (“the victory arrived nearly eight years to the day”) does so much more than create headlines. It constructs history by misrepresenting the truth and suppressing the vote. Inquiring minds trust your words less and less, subscribers dwindle and a death knoll sounds. Do not ask for whom the bell tolls…
Great article! Thanks for demonstrating the independent professionalism and dedication to TRUTH that all news reporters and agencies should–and are supposed to–uphold!
I live in California, and I can say without hesitation that Bernie Sanders won my state’s primary election by an overwhelming landslide … just as he did so many before ours.
Hillary Clinton STOLE the primary with the aid of political-criminal cohort Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Edison Research, which supplied vote-switching machines for the dual purposes of voting AND calculating exit polls! And all the major “news” networks were Gung ho to announce the primary LOSER “winner” THREE FULL HOURS BEFORE CA & OTHER WESTERN STATES’ POLLS EVEN CLOSED–BASED ON THE FRAUDULENT RESULTS OF EDISON RESEARCH’S NATIONWIDE SCAM!
Hillary Clinton MUST BE indicted, prosecuted AND imprisoned for these and a lifetime’s worth of other unconscionable crimes against humanity, America, the global environment and economy, her part in Wall Street’s carefully orchestrated and executed INTENTIONAL mortgage meltdown (to line their own–and her–pockets at the expense of not just the U.S., but ALL global economies, perjury, abuse of the office of Secretary of State, election-law violations, charity- AND campaign-finance FRAUD . . .genocide. And the list goes on and On and ON!