Chelsea Clinton has a Variety article. [I refuse to link and reward these guttersnipes.] The media–Politico, The Hill, the New York Times–wants you to know that Chelsea Clinton is wonderful, award-worthy, even. Michelle Malkin has more to say about that.

Why are these publications doing this? Yes, Chelsea has a great P.R. team but unless they’re giving out Rolls Royces as inducements, the various media outlets are pushing this pap of their own free will.

Here’s my theory: The editors and reporters who are still steamed that Hillary lost are angry for more reasons than policy and politics. These folks saw their power diminish greatly. They put every ounce of reportorial and message energy behind Hillary Clinton. Like Barack Obama, they staked their personal success on her election.

Hillary lost. They lost.

Like the fallen U.S.S.R., the tastemakers seek to regain what they’ve lost. Americans will comply with their views or be beaten with Chelsea Clinton until they surrender the narrative.

The media has a will to power. They thought that they could force Hillary Clinton on the American populace. It worked with Barack Obama. Their unabashed cheerleading was an attempt to make people feel stupid, sexist, racist, other for not wanting her as president.

Their relentless browbeating pushed otherwise sympathetic voters into the Trump camp.

For some reason, they believe that their aggression will win Chelsea Clinton favor. It won’t. It will, however, make normal people loathe the media even more, if it’s even possible.