March 20, 2007 1:41
Memo to Myself
In this very accelerated political season with its very large field of candidates, the media seem to be getting ahead of the voters. What's the hurry, 10 months before the first caucus, to winnow the field to a few candidates deemed viable--say, three at most from each party? With fewer moving parts, this very big story can assume a shape and a narrative that begins to look familiar and understandable. But in the process of writing that story, are we missing the real one?
Political reporters (including me) from virtually every big news outfit were on hand last night to cover a forum at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government that featured handlers for Democrats Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards. Most of us had also been there two weeks before, for a similar exercise with operatives from the most talked-about Republicans, John McCain, Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney.
As a conventional political story, it did not disappoint. There were pyrotechnics between Clinton strategist Mark Penn and his Obama campaign counterpart David Axelrod. Which made for pretty good copy, as it suggested, more clearly than we had seen before, that Clinton's troops are trying to make sure that Obama does not plant himself too far to her left on the war.
But there I go again about tactics. Meanwhile, what passed unnoted was the fact that, on that very same evening and in that very same city, another candidate--Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd, the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee--was raking in a very respectable $250,000. Normally, a guy who could haul in that much at one event would pretty much automatically qualify for what is conventionally assumed to be the top tier of candidates. But I haven't heard anyone in the punditocracy giving Dodd much of a chance. And consider the qualifications of two other Democrats who are getting all but ignored by the national media in this race: the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Joe Biden and Bill Richardson, who has been the very successful Hispanic Governor of New Mexico. These are hardly fringe candidates.
Meanwhile, what seems to define the leading contenders in the media narrative, at least at this point, is celebrity. They lead the polls and the fundraising largely because of name recognition, and despite some obvious handicaps. Public opinion of Hilary Clinton registers well above 40% unfavorable, Barack Obama's record in federal office adds up to a whopping two years and John Edwards wasn't even able to carry his own state the last time he was on the ballot.
Still largely unaddressed, by the way, are any substantive differences that these candidates might have on actual issues--another fact that was underscored at the Kennedy School on Monday night. Each of the three campaigns that were represented there presented themselves largely along thematic lines: Clinton was experienced; Obama, fresh; Edwards, compassionate. In their questions, however, the students pressed for answers on very big issues, from global poverty to health care. Do you think maybe they know something about the voters that the rest of us haven't figured out yet?
About Swampland
Ana Marie Cox is the founding editor of Wonkette and the author of the novel Dog Days. Read more
Joe Klein is TIME's political columnist and author of six books, most recently Politics Lost. Read more
Karen Tumulty is TIME's National Political Correspondent and has also covered the White House and Congress. Read more
Jay Carney is TIME's Washington bureau chief. He has covered the Clinton and Bush 43 White Houses as well as Congress. Read more
Jay Newton-Small has covered the Bush 43 White House and Congress since the DeLay era. Read more
Michael Scherer is a TIME Washington bureau correspondent covering the 2008 presidential campaign. Read more
RSS Feed
 |
Daily Email
CNN Politics
Get U.S. and global politics 24-7. Politics at CNN has campaign coverage, latest headlines and video, candidates' positions on the issues, fundraising totals, states to watch, delegate counts, election results, news and analysis
CNN Politics
The Page
Mark Halperin and the TIME political team covering the 2008 campaign bring you all the latest breaking news, videos, and best stories from every
source, all in one place, expertly culled and edited, 24/7.
The Page
White House Photo Blog
Get an intimate look at the Bush administration and race for 2008 through the eyes of TIME's White House photographers.
White House Photo Blog
Ana Marie Cox on the trail
Keep up with Cox as she posts pictures and tidbits from the campaign trail.
Flickr
Twittr
Reader Comments (14)
"Public opinion of Hilary Clinton registers well above 40% unfavorable...."
I feel certain that however this happened, you and your fellow gang of hacks like Palooka Joe had nothing to do with it.
Hey, by the way, shoot Palooka Joe an e-mail and remind him to write something describing how "calculating" and "consultant controlled" Hillary is. He's about a day over schedule, and we're starting to worry about him out here in extremist liberal land.
Posted by Hoplite | March 20, 2007 3:18 PM
Gee, it would be nice if Rip woke up. Maybe the horseman could get his head back and somebody could find the wanting nail. We can hope.
Posted by linda | March 20, 2007 3:24 PM
"Still largely unaddressed, by the way, are any substantive differences that these candidates might have on actual issues"
Good point. Why don't you pick an issue a week, easy peasy, and compare and contrast the different (Democratic AND GOP!) strategies that candidates have to solve them. Global Warming. Healthcare. The Deficit. The War in Iraq.
Healthcare....this is Giuliani's plan, this is McCain's plan (do they have plans), this is Hillary's plan, etc. Examine them, analyze them, would it work? Would it be better for the average American?
Your hands aren't tied on this. All of the commenters here, that's our red meat. YOU GUYS are the ones who are too bored to get into the, you know, actual stuff that matters.
Posted by Jake Gittes | March 20, 2007 3:45 PM
10% a year (compounded) spot tv rate hikes add up during the fours years between presidential primaries. Which is why $250,000 in one night isn't respectable anymore.
Posted by nony | March 20, 2007 3:46 PM
Anyone want to give me odds that Bill Richardson will be in the top tier soon and that Mitt Romney will be out?
Posted by not the senator | March 20, 2007 4:42 PM
Karen, Just watching Wolf and Candy. OMG are they stuck in the muck of brainless bantering. Hope you are serious and willing to stick to your resolution.
Posted by linda | March 20, 2007 4:51 PM
>In this very accelerated political season with its very large field of candidates, the media seem to be getting ahead of the voters.
Ms. Tumulty,
I believe the media is being close to being lapped by the public (remember who the current Time Person of the Year is), so it just looks like the media is ahead.
>But in the process of writing that story, are we missing the real one?
Yes. The real story is Iraq.
Posted by bartkid | March 20, 2007 5:04 PM
Great blog post, Karen. Yes! we want to hear more about issues! Fewer vague platitudes using words "moderates", "liberals", "The Left" which mean so many different things to different people.
Posted by Vaughan | March 20, 2007 5:40 PM
STFU Hoplite. (I need to just put that on auto-loop, lol)
Good points, Ms. Tumulty. I am particularly interested in Chris Dodd since I learned that he sponsored the original Family and Medical Leave Act, and is now trying to push a bill to make the leave paid. Some will consider this a radical move, but consider the following:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2005-07-26-maternity-leave_x.htm
"With little public debate, the United States has chosen a radically different approach to maternity leave than the rest of the developed world....out of 168 nations in a Harvard University study last year, 163 had some form of paid maternity leave, leaving the United States in the company of Lesotho, Papua New Guinea and Swaziland."
That's just embarrassing (not to mention harmful to families, the economy, and society generally), and the fact that Dodd is trying to change itmakes him a top tier candidate worth listening to in my book.
Posted by SlackerInc | March 20, 2007 5:44 PM
Good points Karen. Yes I think we are missing out on things here.
One thing that I wonder about is this: Why isn't Bill Richardson's candidacy a bigger deal? Great resume, good diversity appeal, good electoral math. And yet I get the vague feeling the party has concerns about his electability.
What am I missing? Is there something holding him back that's not apparent from this side of the Pond? To steal a line from Aaron Sorkin, do the Republicans have pictures of him playing golf with Satan?
Posted by Robert Beswick | March 20, 2007 7:11 PM
RB: Google Bill Richardson, Energy Secretary for starters.
Also, so what 'deals' he really closed with his 'global' politicing. Also, he claimed to have been offered a Major League BB contract--Not. Admitted he made a mistake about that when questioned.
Dodd is really the over looked Man.
Posted by linda | March 20, 2007 7:37 PM
"the students pressed for answers on very big issues, from global poverty to health care. Do you think maybe they know something about the voters that the rest of us haven't figured out yet?"
Us?
Posted by Anonymous | March 20, 2007 7:51 PM
You're right Karen. What do you propose to do about it?
Posted by Zippy | March 21, 2007 1:46 PM
Well, who was the best speaker? Who did you think about really leading the country? Lots of guys with cash around, but how about some real charisma!
Posted by Richard Martin | April 19, 2007 11:54 AM