Bias: Hillary Clinton must have some good friends in high media places. Or so it would seem, given the two big helping hands the press just gave her.
First, The Associated Press decided on its own that Hillary Clinton had clinched the nomination, coming to this conclusion by what they said was a survey of Democratic “superdelegates,” many of whom have announced their support for Hillary but aren’t pledged to vote for her. The rest of the media jumped on the AP story and declared the race was over.
Clinton could not have hoped for better timing. She faced the possibility of an embarrassing loss in California to Bernie Sanders, and the likelihood that, should Sanders win, it would give him fresh momentum going into the convention.
By deciding the race is over, AP has effectively rendered the California primary, as well as those being held on Tuesday in Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico and the Dakotas, a moot point.
Keep in mind that just a month ago there were multiple stories about how Sanders could at least force a contested convention, given that he was close to Hillary in pledged delegates, if he could get some superdelegates to switch sides.
Here’s what the Washington Post’s Philip Bump wrote on May 2: “Unless you have about an 18 percentage-point lead among delegates by the time the voting wraps up, you'll need some superdelegates to put you over the top. This makes the difference between a close race and a blowout a little murky -- which can be advantageous to the underdog.”
In the primaries held after that story ran -- and before AP called the race -- Sanders netted two more pledged delegates than Clinton.
Sanders rightly notes that AP is wrongly “lumping pledged delegates, i.e., real delegates, with superdelegates, who may or may not change their mind, but who do not vote until July 25th.”
Even if Hillary does have a commanding lead in superdelegates, they can change their minds, which is what happened in 2008, when Clinton also had an overwhelming lead in superdelegates. After Obama won several primaries in a row, however, some of them defected from Clinton to Obama.
This isn’t to suggest that Sanders has a realistic chance of getting the nomination. Still, why the rush by the mainstream press to declare the race over before Democrats in California and five other states cast their votes on Tuesday? It’s hard to see any other reason than to offer Clinton some well-timed help.
That same day, the media further debased itself when Clinton deigned to answer reporters’ questions for the first time in more than a month. There was plenty to ask her about, not least of which was the devastating inspector general's report, which exposed as flat-out lies several of her claims about her private email setup while secretary of state.
Instead, the reporters posed questions that appeared to be scripted by Hillary’s own campaign. Here’s a nauseating sampling:
“You’re on the cusp of being the first female nominee of a major party. What does that mean to you and how are you reflecting on that?”
“People just come up to you and they get tears in their eyes. Do you feel … do you feel the weight of what this means to people?”
“Is it setting in that you might be making serious history tomorrow?”
Both the AP story and the reporters’ sycophantic display are two more examples of why the public rightly holds the news media in such low regard.
Follow IBD Editorials on Twitter: @IBD_Editorials.
