A Donald Trump nomination will be an "unforced error for the GOP," according to our friends at Vox. The reason is logical enough:

Hillary Clinton is intensely disliked by a larger share of Americans than anyone who's ever received a major party presidential nomination in the past. But Trump is even more widely disliked, and since elections are zero sum, this means a huge advantage for a candidate who seems kind of weak by historical standards.

Which begs the question: If Clinton is the second-most disliked presidential candidate in recent American history, why doesn't the media portray her "inevitable" nomination as an "unforced error for the DNC"? When you're neck-and-neck with (allegedly) America's most disliked presidential candidate, shouldn't that be a major indicator that maybe the Democratic Party is betting on the wrong horse?

It should be, but the media has been too busy licking Clinton's blood-stained Ugg boots to point out that the same arguments used to dismiss Trump's viability are equally applicable to Hillary Clinton.

Yes, long before a single voter registration was deleted - or entire precinct caucus results were "lost" - Hillary Clinton was declared the inevitable, presumptive Democratic nominee for president.

The fine folks at Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) wrote back in March that the media has created an "artificial consensus" in which Clinton's nomination was presented from the very beginning as a forgone conclusion:



Whoever the news media say is important early on typically becomes the most important. This leads to a feedback loop that anoints the "frontrunner" in the "invisible primary," where success is measured by name recognition, money raised, party insider support and a host of "serious" accomplishments, all before the most essential of feedback has been provided: actual voting.

Essentially, Sanders hasn't just been fighting the Democratic political establishment - which would love nothing more than to see him drop out and grovel at the feet of Hillary Clinton - but also a media which has worked around the clock to embed Hillary's inevitability in the mind of each and every American voter.



Thanks in part to the bittersweet "Internet Age", the media is having a hard time hiding its open disdain for Bernie Sanders. As we've seen throughout the Democratic primaries, "all the news that's fit to print" is a soothing euphemism for "we can't say anything nice about Bernie Sanders."

And with Trump now as the uncontested GOP nominee, the media can now do what it does best: Ignore the fact that Hillary Clinton is the second-most disliked presidential hopeful in recent American history, and focus on why the other guy is unelectable.

Isn't democracy fun?