×
- As we approach the final month before Election Day, I expect no shortage of analyses explaining Obama and the Democrats' downfall in terms of the electorate's attitude toward "liberal overreach." For instance, Clive Crook tells us about "where Obama went wrong," namely the president's abandonment of "centrist policies the country could accept." This does make a certain amount of intuitive sense; all those unemployed people had to pass the time somehow, so it stands to reason that they were engaged in a fair deal of chin-scratching over the ideological imperatives of their new president rather than the fact that their lives had recently been ruined by economic catastrophe.
- I know we're all supposed to be shocked by the president's "condescension" when he lectures us about a subject, but can I just say that his assessment of the history of the fourth estate is dead-accurate? "The golden age of an objective press was a pretty narrow span of time in our history. Before that, you had folks like Hearst who used their newspapers very intentionally to promote their viewpoints. I think Fox is part of that tradition -- it is part of the tradition that has a very clear, undeniable point of view." It should also be noted that while he disagrees with the Fox worldview, this is not the same as denouncing partisan (but fact-based!) media, something I've long believed we should embrace.
- Greg Sargent offers a helpful typology of "the left" for the White House to use when assessing liberal criticism of its policies: "There are three different strains of argument or sentiment on the left right now. The first is the Dem base's lack of enthusiasm. ... The second group on the left constitutes high-profile commentators, such as Rachel Maddow and Glenn Greenwald, who are mounting a detailed, substantive policy critique of the Obama administration on issues that are important to them. ... The third group constitutes operatives like Adam Green of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, Jane Hamsher of FireDogLake, some labor operatives, and groups like MoveOn. These folks are making a largely political argument."
- I've noted before that while midterm elections are fairly predictable, this one has a number of unusual circumstances that could affect the assumptions which go into voter forecast models. That being said, I predict that more of these "we'll know after Election Day" admissions of uncertainty will be aired over the course of the next month: "Either Quinnipiac is nailing what the general-election environment is looking like (which will be a historic day for the GOP), or its likely voter screen is too tight (and it's missing a lot of Democratic votes). We'll find out who's right exactly five weeks from today."
- Remainders: Considering the "myths" about the Kennedy-Nixon debate; Tom Jensen has some sobering numbers about economic performance and voter intentions; the public accurately deduces that Republicans lack a governing vision; "distinctive American culture" = fear of losing cultural dominance; and the banality of lesser conservative conspiracy theories.
--Mori Dinauer
