I wouldn't yet get comfortable with the thought of President Bush. Two weeks are a long time.
We're already seeing what some here had predicted last spring: the "news" media, in a panic that Gore's going down in flames, is desperately working hard for Democrats.
I don't know how many stories I've read in just a few days wondering when Gore is going to "enlist Clinton's help". This is maybe a half-step from just coming out and writing, "Clinton, help us!", but we should make no mistake that the intentions are the same.
I don't actually think it's so clear that this is a winning strategy for the Democrats, despite the enthusiasm for Clinton's reappearance from the desperate left. There is a sizeable group of people who hate Clinton. I mean they have a deep, unchangeable, almost irrational hatred of the guy. Obviously these people aren't undecided, but Clinton's prominence will surely intensify their support of Bush. This means even more conservatives voting, and more activity drumming out less excited voters, and more money. It also means that Gore will have to worry about the character issues he has invested so much in distancing himself from. It's a gamble for Gore.
The significance of these media suggestions is not primarily that it's a great idea in and of itself that should worry Bush's supporters. It's that it's the clearest sign yet that the media has decided its role is going to be cheering desperately for Gore to win. It could hardly be clearer. Look, every time ABC, CNN, LaTimes, or whoever runs a long story asking this question, or just an editorial demanding that Clinton start campaigning, it's a straight out admission that Gore's campaign is failing. They are saying, "Gore will lose now without Clinton's help". These are the same sources, bear in mind, who spoke confidently only a few weeks ago about Gore's "success" distancing himself from Clinton. They said, if you'll remember, that the "character issue" was just not going to help Republicans, and they repeated over and over and over in every story how voters agreed with Gore on the "issues", and that this was a "hurdle" for Bush to overcome. And now what? This is all forgotten. And there are no stories running about how some people actually _agree_ with what Bush is saying, and that the suspicion of more federal control of our economy is hurting Gore. You would think that would be a story, given that the media has been saying the opposite all along. Instead, we get nothing but all of this editorial wishing for Clinton's return.
Not only that, but have a look at this bit from a story on CNN about the LATEST POLLS, for God's sake:
[quotation] The poll -- conducted from interviews with 718 likely voters between October 18 and 20, 2000 -- only shows what the outcome might be if the election were held today.
If Democrats can boost interest in the election and enthusiasm for voting among the party faithful between now and Election Day, the outcome on November 7 could look very different than Saturday's tracking poll results. [end quotation]
Read it for yourselves:
http://www.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/10/21/tracking.poll/index.html
This is just a story on the polling!! I have _never_ seen any disclaimers like this in a story yet. NEVER! But of course, we wouldn't want to take an 11 pt lead as any reason to think that Democrats should be discouraged, would we?
They should just say, "Don't be discouraged, fellow Democrats! We can still win!"
I don't even need to ask, can you even conceive of paragraphs like these appearing if it were _Bush_ behind right now??!!
If there is _anyone_ here who thinks that "campaign finance reform" is called for, when the large operating budgets of organizations like CNN, ABC, the NY Times, etc., _all_ go to aid Democrats unequivocally, that person is either a bomb throwing leftist, naive, or just insane.
CNN should just start including the phone numbers of local Democratic organizers in their d*mn stories from now on!!
The point I'm making, albeit in a roundabout fashion, is that it's clear the media are going to cheerlead and out and out manipulate news reporting from here on in. That's what I'm saying. And that's hard to overcome. Now that Bush isn't going to be back on T.V. in front of debate audiences it's going to be harder for him to overcome this problem.
Every day on CNN now I read about Gore's latest "attacks on Bush's programs". Bush is always "defending himself". Gore's statements are just repeated in headlines, e.g., Gore attacks Bush's plan on Social Security, but Bush's are always carefully phrased to express skepticism. Bush's criticisms are usually put in scare quotes, e.g., Bush charges Gore trying to "scare" seniors.
This is no small advantage. The machinery of nearly all of the national media working on behalf of the Democratic party.
No one here should be comfortable yet.
