CNN’s “Undecided Voters” Were Actually Democratic Shills
Just how “undecided” were they?
A Democratic Party bigwig
An antiwar activist
A Union official
An Islamic leader
A Harry Reid staffer
A radical Chicano separatist
One could argue, of course, that while all of them were liberals or leftists, at least they might be undecided as between the (entirely left-leaning) Democratic candidates.
But this is implausible. People this politicized have preferences, even this early, and even among rival Democrats.
And if they believed that Hillary is the favorite to win the nomination (a widely held idea) they have a huge incentive to throw her softball questions. The last thing they would want is a tough question leading to something that would hurt her in the General Election.
After mentioning that the debate was sponsored by the national party — something likely understood by most viewers as a mere formality — he described them as “ordinary people, undecided voters.” Note: not even “undecided Democrats.” Just undecided.Look for this in the General Election too -- if the networks get to choose the questioners.
Or if a network recruits a group of “undecided” or “middle of the road” or “representative” citizens to comment on the debate. Such a group will (to about a 99% certainty) think the Democrat did better.