Long Hot Summer Mess - Media trends and the general election

Rasmussen Reports finds that voters overwhelming feel that the media coverage of the '08 presidential campaign is skewed - in favor of Obama. "Fifty-four percent (54%) say Obama has gotten the best coverage so far. Twenty-two percent (22%) say McCain has received the most favorable coverage while 14% say that Hillary got the best treatment." That figure by the way includes 27% of self declared Dems who believe reporters will try to help Obama win. When was the last time we saw that kind of comfort level among democrats with the slant of the media coverage? Not since before the embattled days of the Clinton presleazydency, I don't think.

Following the Lewinsky scandal and the self righteousness of that coverage we saw the naked, chest - thumping patriotism of the first Bush term that portrayed dem Dems as a bunch of apostate, commie, terrorism enablers. The Fox News aping partisan slide of the media slowed down after Bush's re-election when the lies and obfuscations that comprised the war sales job became public. As the failure of post invasion strategy became apparent and the tide turned in the favour of the Iraqi insurgency the media became more and more restive. The last two years have seen a definite slant against the Bush administration in terms of press.

Scott McClellan's decision to publish 'What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington's Culture of Deception' neatly bookends the end of an era. Make no mistake about it, he was and is a cowardly apologist for his former employers. He waited for the media climate to change and become safe for him to put out the book, and, even with the advantage of favourable press, refuses to admit to willful deception on Bush's part or on his own. I would be willing to accept a 'product of my environment' defense from a guy on the street busted for a robbery to survive poverty but not from the guy in charge of creating and controlling the environment. He makes it seem as if he wasn't even in the press conferences he gave and his press corp zombie incarnation took his place when he was spreading the administration's folderol. However that is a different story and I am getting carried away. The point I was trying to make is that the media tide has turned so much that it has now become profitable for former Bush cronies to come out and voice dissident opinions. The press is now going to ride the progress and change bandwagon in the opposite direction for the foreseeable future.

I am not one of those people who sees the press as being slanted permanently in one direction or the other. Except for the worst partisan hacks like Billo, most just bend with the wind as it blows. It is not as profitable to defend Bush when he has 30% approval ratings. What happens is that with their extensive sources and statistical data the press is the first to see the ball roll down the hill and they start to take defensive positions behind the most recent swing of the political pendulum. In doing so they help increase the momentum of the swing and inevitably with their bumbling enthusiasm they exaggerate the virtues of the currently favoured position. It happened to an unreasonable extent with the war and it is now happening with more justification for Obama and the democrats(My slant visible enough for you my readers!).

According to Rasmussen, all sides of the political divide seem to agree that the media has an inordinate influence on the election process - "Eighty-seven percent (87%) of Republicans believe the media has too much influence along with 80% of unaffiliated voters and 65% of Democrats. " Maybe so, but I also believe that they are only reflecting a national trend in a more liberal direction and in doing so help reinforce that trend. The media are followers, not leaders. They are like the kids who always tried too hard to fit in, in high school - imitating and repeating watered down versions of the witty kid's put downs. So, to conclude, this is good news all around for Democrat supporters. Just two days after Hillary endorsed Obama his lead has increased 48% - 50%. They give him a 94.9% chance at winning.

Still, there is a long, hot, sticky summer ahead where meltdowns abound. Obama needs to learn from Hillary's hard tumble from 'inevitable candidate' to the victim of strategic blunders, overspending and overconfidence. He needs to keep the pressure on McCain up until his cool facade starts cracking - something that has happened several times already when he faced minor provocations such as during the debate on the GI bill. Obama has made a good first move by rejecting interest group money and forcing McCain into a position where he must follow suit in order to keep up his image of being a reformer and a man of integrity. With his vastly superior campaign war chest Obama can afford to refuse Washington money while McCain's lackluster showing on the fundraising trail makes him more reliant on shady money sourced through Bush contacts. This means more stories on the McCain - lobbyist connection which the dems need to keep plugging at. It will make McCain look like a hypocrite while weakening his fundraising ability and organisational strength. Already this scandal has forced him to completely overhaul his campaign's top faces and it will cost him more money to replace those people in the long run.

McCain's tactic of asking Obama to agree along with him to use public funding seems to have hit a wall for now. Considering the extent to which small donations helped build up the democratic war chest I believe Obama can easily make the argument that it is OK for him to use that money instead of going the public funding route and still look morally superior. Meanwhile the McCain campaign seems to be asserting itself like a street brawler - by repeatedly challenging Obama to one on one events where McCain has an advantage, like the idea for a joint visit to Iraq and the joint town hall meetings tour. So far Obama has not risen to the bait and needs to continue to counter intelligently to these one sided demands.

That is not enough however and he needs to ramp up his own political attacks on McCain's weak economic plank and ties to Bush and his support for the war- his two weakest flanks. The key to winning is putting McCain on the defensive and showing voters the prickly side of his suave aviator persona. The angry McCain is an ugly sight and it does not make him seem more interesting like he seems to believe it does. Straight talk is one thing but naked bellicosity and defensive posturing is best left to the wrestling ring. The media has noticed this and has commented about it in the past. With them on Obama's side it will be easier for him to show us this side of McCain and he must take advantage of it in the future. As someone with a short fuse I know that sooner or later that kind of personality must show itself in all it's irrational belligerence. McCain's strong desire to speak the truth, the way he sees it, means that at some point he is going to put his foot in his mouth and it will get press play. The next time he says or does something like sing - "Bomb Bomb, Bomb Iran" the media must not allow him to get away with it without some clarification. In light of the short sightedness and failed intelligence that caused the war in Iraq that kind of impulsive aggression needs to be thoroughly scrutinised.

Also Obama needs to put forward a clear economic policy to counter McCain's and to address the number one issue on the public's mind at this point. He needs to make the case that decisive action is necessary to reverse the economic downturn and that his solutions are the best ones for them. I know that economic policy minutiae is not his strong suit but he needs to do his homework now and come across like the smarter guy during the fall debates. This is one aspect of his campaign that needs attention now; he has a good 3 months before the real muckraking starts and since Hillary has spared him the embarrassment and slow bleed of a prolonged campaign, he needs to use his time wisely and not simply expediently. The only way to counter the substance in a formidable opponent like McCain is with better material of your own, not just tall speeches. Considering that independent groups, especially libertarians, are going to be a key swing vote group in November, economic policy is going to matter. Also the best way to win over all the Hillary support is to understand and address their economic and health care needs. He can win those women and blue collar workers by emphasising the positive effects that his policy will have on their strained lives.

Besides, winning this election is just the first step. Given the hard conditions America is facing right now Obama faces an uphill task once in the white house. He has to start pulling things around very quickly in order to avoid the fallout of this worsening mess. Failure is not an option for him and I know he has the potential to be a two term monster like Bill Clinton given the right conditions and the right preparation.