The US media and 2016 presidential election

I followed the 2012 US presidential election for most of the time from the United States returning to Bangladesh just before the election. It was morning in Dhaka, around 10 or 10:30 am when the votes in Ohio were being announced on the day of the election. The situation was if Ohio fell for Mitt Romney, President Obama would have become history. I was watching CNN's live coverage and saw the Ohio map almost all in red, meaning that the state was about to fall for Mitt Romney.
The CNN news analyst explaining the Ohio map had said that the viewers should not draw any hasty conclusion that the state was going Republican by the predominance of red colour (the colour of the Republicans) on Ohio map because these were results of the centres around the big cities. Columbus, Cincinnati and Cleveland that constituted the bulk of Ohio voters were still waiting to be counted. True to his word, as soon as the votes of the three cities were counted, the state of Ohio fell to the Democrats and within a matter of minutes as Ohio turned blue, Mitt Romney conceded defeat with the votes of the big state of Florida still not taken into account.
Until Ohio fell and President Obama won his second term, those like us who had not much in-depth knowledge of the US political system, and had to depend on the media giants such as CNN for understanding the dynamics of US politics were more or less sure that President Obama was most unlikely to win a second term. Yet in the end, despite the pessimistic assessment of the US mainstream media, President Obama won his second term overwhelmingly. He won 332 electoral votes where 272 were needed to win against Mitt Romney's 206. On popular votes that are of no substantive importance in US presidential election, President Obama also defeated his opponent by over 3.5 million votes.
This time also, the mainstream US media dominated by the conservatives is misleading people with its assessment. It failed initially in reading the potentials of Donald Trump and dismissed him as one who would bring some fun and frolic to the Republican race and eventually fade out. Then when he started to dominate polls because, within the Republican Party, there were a large number of racially and religiously motivated backers who were thrilled with his litany of lies and abuses aimed at racial, religious and immigrant groups, the media went into denial over the rabid nature of his campaign and credited him with the courage to question Washington's "political correctness" instead. The media also gave him a lot of credit for bringing the frustrations of the people at the grassroots about a federal government that was totally insensitive to their needs, their hopes, and their aspirations.
The US media largely and unbelievably thus failed to underline that Donald Trump's candidature apart from its blatantly racial and religiously bigoted nature was also in many instances in fundamental contradiction with US values as enshrined in its Constitution.  In fact, as it is that anything is possible in politics and if Donald Trump were to become the next US President and were to implement the agenda he laid out for the Americans as a candidate, then for sure the US Constitution would have to be re-written in many places.
While letting Donald Trump off the hook, the mainstream US media has gone after Hillary Clinton in a way like it had a score to settle with her.
The 2016 US presidential election thus far has been exceptional in many respects. The Republican Party should be in line to win the White House in 2016 as two full terms by a president from one party has been followed by two terms of the other party in presidential elections since the Second World War. By that trend, after two terms of the Democratic President, the 2016 election should be the one that the Republicans should win.
Unfortunately, the Republicans started with a pack of 15 and more seeking the Party's  ticket. Except for Senators Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, the pack did not really have any politician who was known nationally. The two Senators were rookie Senators and from the Tea Party faction. The few governors were also without any national following. By any yardstick, Hillary Clinton thus stands head and shoulders over all of them. Few politicians have sought the highest political office with the credentials with which Hillary Clinton is pursuing her goal. A lawyer of the highest capability, she is a former First Lady, a Senator from New York and one of the highest-profile US Secretary of State ever in US history. And to top it all, she is the first woman seeking nomination from any mainstream party to become the US president in the country's history of nearly 250 years.
Her credentials, however, have become the eyesore of a large part of the mainstream US media. It tried to destroy her candidature based on "email gate" and her alleged failure to provide security to the US Embassy in Benghazi, Libya. Now the media is supporting the Republicans' new accusation against her, that she is untrustworthy to become the President, an allegation based on "email gate" and the Benghazi affair that have been largely discarded by the US public.
One had expected that after the 11-hour haranguing in Congress that she had withstood successfully last October; the media would ensure that the Republican Party's single-minded hounding of the former Secretary of State would end. As readers would be aware, on the use of a private server, Hillary Clinton did not violate any law and many politicians in her position have done the same. As for security lapse in Benghazi, it has been established following a number of investigations by the Republicans in Congress that Hillary Clinton followed the security drill that was laid out at that time and that Ambassador Stevens himself did not seek any extra security for his mission.
Just as the media had tried in President Obama's re-election in 2012 to spread the perception that his return to the White House was doubtful, it is doing the same this time with Hillary Clinton. Even if there are reasons to believe that voters could be persuaded against Hillary on the issue of trust, the mainstream US media has thus far gone into denial over Donald Trump who is now most likely to oppose Hillary Clinton, the assured Democratic candidate, for the right to win the White House. Why on earth would the same voters look at Donald Trump who has been consistently doing far worse than being untrustworthy? He has been lying like a bald-faced liar and getting caught time and again without remorse or regret.
However, mainstream media has not just been in denial over the lack of credibility of Hillary Clinton's opponents while repeatedly stressing her lack of credibility on the issue of trust, it has also been largely in denial over other facts that would underline that Hillary Clinton is miles ahead in the race for the White House. In six elections since 1992, voters in 18 states with a total of 242 electoral votes have repeatedly voted for the Democratic Party as opposed to 13 states with a total of 102 electoral votes that have voted for the Republicans. To win, a candidate must get 270 electoral votes.
Furthermore, the Latinos, who are fast becoming an electoral powerhouse though not yet in a position to swing a presidential election on their own, voted 71/27 in favour of President Obama in 2012. The Republicans in a post-2012 election analysis had concluded unless the Party would succeed in lowering the equation, its chances of winning the White House in future elections would be extremely difficult. Thanks to Donald Trump and his mindless abuse of the Latinos/Hispanics, according to Pew Research Centre 9 out of 10 Hispanics will vote for Democrats in the 2016 election.
With the African Americans, the Muslims, the other immigrants, etc., now pushed into the corner by Donald Trump's promise to turn the USA into a country with them as second-class citizens, one has to scratch one's head to understand how a good part of the US media thinks that if Donald Trump were to become the Republican candidate against Hillary Clinton, there would be a contest at all for the 2016 US presidential election.
The writer is a retired Ambassador.
 [email protected]