Thursday, October 6, 2016
Uggghhhh.... Writing Insightful, Accurate Election Analysis Is SO HARD
Presidential polls are currently showing Hillary Clinton with a moderate but durable lead over Donald Drumpf, so what's a pundit to do? If you're Joe Scarborough, you flail around — trying to reconcile Clinton's advantage with the assumption that after eight years of Barack Obama, 2016 is a "change" election.
Sure, it's a change election for the angry white male teabag mobs who want to "take their country back." But what if, for the rest of us, it's a "more-of-the-same-thank-you-very-much" election?
After all, why wouldn't it be? Obama saved the nation from the worst economic meltdown since the Great Depression, gave more than 20 million Americans access to affordable healthcare coverage, rescued the auto industry, drove the unemployment rate back below 5 percent, stopped Iran from getting nukes, opened up Myanmar and Cuba, wiped out "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and presided over the establishment of marriage equality as law of the land. Just a few reasons why America doesn't need to be great again.
Nobody in Pundit World is saying this, of course — which may help explain why the false notion of Clinton and Drumpf as equally horrible so stubbornly persists. Although some journalists are onto this idiotic narrative and have written thoughtfully about it, overall, we cats must blame the press for its lazy stenography — and we HISS.