Pundits and influencing accepted wisdom

[jpgray]

Accepted wisdom is that Kerry is throwing this election away. How is that arrived at? Take the horse race analysis of the pundits:

Kerry is ahead in the electoral college based on the most recent polls. Bush's bounce has all but evaporated. Now, are the media pundits saying the Bush campaign is faltering? Are they asking why Bush is failing to connect with voters? Are they asking what Bush could have done different to win this election? Because they seem to be asking those things about Kerry when he is ahead, behind, tied, ascending, descending or standing still. These questions are all loaded to cast doubt--when was the last time you heard a pundit connect a Bush fall in the polls with inevitable disaster in November? When was the last time you heard a pundit say that Bush's approval rating is historically a loser? When was the last time you heard a pundit say Bush needs to outline a detailed plan on an issue?

What is Bush's plan on Iraq? Did you know Kerry plans NO permanent presence while Bush's plan calls for fourteen permanent bases? If you watch cable news, you do not know that--they claim their Iraq plans are exactly the same. Yet time and again they clamor for a clear Kerry plan on Iraq while Bush has not laid out one, and the one he does have is carefully hidden from view.

There is a double standard. Kerry is AHEAD at this very moment in a very difficult race--so are the pundits arguing he should be farther ahead? And why is a Kerry change in the polls always an opening for doubt and dismay while his opponent is never viewed in such a light?

Do you think the actual state of the campaign is influencing your thinking, or do you recognize a lot of the pundits' questions in your own posts? Kerry is by no means running a perfect campaign, but objectively he is in a good position at this stage based on polls and pst elections. I'm convinced some of this doom and gloom is influenced by the media double standard. There are many grievances to be had with the Kerry campaign, however, and just because the media have targeted him doesn't mean no criticism can be valid.

[John Q. Citizen]

1. You are making some great

points. Another thing I notice is the pundits ignor the size of turn-out for both campaigns rallys, and in this i think Kerry is killing Bush.

[Armstead]

2. And another thing....

Didja ever notice that any rise Kerry got in the polls after the convention weas called a "post convention bounce" but when Bush's poll numbers go up he's got "momentum going his way."

[jpgray]

4. This is why I'm dismayed by some of the 'let's copy the Republicans' posts

Those tactics work in part because they are allied with the elite, and yet market their pro-elite stances in joe-sixpack-friendly clothing. Tort reform, clear skies act, Medicare drug 'benefit' (no negotiation), etc. These all cut costs for corporations, and the argument is that once costs are cut, corporations will say 'Oh, now we have enough money, and it is time to build our communities and shower jobs on the poor people.' All of these initiatives assume rich people need more money, and once they have it they will distribute it to poor people. Which is nonsense, since CEO to worker pay has gone from 40 to 1 to 541 to 1 in the past twenty years.

So this alliance with the elite, the foundation-funded think tanks and policy groups, AND the media bias come together in a unique way to allow for the kind of tactics Republicans use. They won't WORK for us, they will work for them.

We need out own tactics, playing to our own strengths--our strength is in the lower classes. Otherwise we may as well just become Republicans, because we will never be able to challenge them in grabbing the elite unless we give up what made us liberals in the first place.

[JI7]

5. kick

[AndyTiedye]

3. The Hopelessly Biased Media is Why I'm So Worried

They have almost got this propaganda thing down to the point where they can
fool a plurality of the people all of the time, and that would be the end of democracy.