Ace Pundits Blow Debate Analysis (Yet Again)

The funniest, and most revealing, moment in Howard Kurtz's lengthy debate wrap-up at The Washington Post today comes about halfway through it. After hailing Palin's performance and quoting numerous mainstream pundits attesting to same, all to suggest that she succeeded in stopping the bleeding, Kurtz dryly posts the following without comment:

CNN's insta-poll: Biden, 51 to 36.

CBS survey of uncommitted: Biden, 46 to 21.

Of course, he could have gone on, cited many other polls, and dove into the numbers that showed little if any movement for Palin in the key measure of, by the way, is she actually ready to be president?

I posted here last week on the same phenomenon after the McCain-Obama debate, which the vast majority of pundits declared "even" -- but polls showed an easy win for Obama. And I posted several times earlier about McCain's poll numbers dropping only partly because of the economy, but largely due to the Palin Effect wearing thin.

It's not just conservatives like Bill Kristol, Peggy Noonan and David Brooks (see his column today) who have lowered the bar so far that even a grasshopper could not limbo under it: See mainstream comments by Adam Nagourney in the Times and Dan Balz in the Post and David Broder.

Yet the mainstream outlets wonder why so many have lost respect for their judgment. The voters are apparently not buying "aw shucks, wink, you betcha" as enough of a qualification for the presidency. Yet for many in the punditocracy that's just enough. Peggy Noonan, for example, writes today: "There were moments when she seemed to be doing an infomercial pitch for charm in politics. But it was an effective infomercial."

Chris Cillizza of "The Fix" blog at The Washington Post helpfully provides what he calls the "rapidly congealing conventional wisdom": the Alaska governor "did enough to make herself a non-issue (or at least less of an issue) in the final month of the campaign." Perhaps he does not know about the Troopergate report coming next week.

His Post colleague, David Broder, meanwhile, writes that Palin did 'fine on her own" and might very well "help" McCain in the polls. Just as that appeared, his paper noted that Palin's standing with voters was actually slipping.

Of course, the Fox pundits were most certain of a Palin win. Today Fox released its poll numbers. Whoops: Biden 61%, Palin 39 %.

Another oft-heard pundit claim: Palin's "steady" performance dooms Tiny Fey. How can she make fun of her now? Well, just watch on Saturday (wink, wink, you betcha, Jo and Joe Sixpack, doggone it).

David Brooks asks in his embarrassing column that hails Palin, "Where was this woman during her interview with Katie Couric?" Where? Apparently average Americans, but not average pundits, know the difference between scripted, and genuine, answers.

And, David: They expect more from a president than those feel-good qualities, after eight years of the man you trumpeted for the White House in 2000 over someone maybe a little more "elite," and a little smarter.

Greg Mitchell is editor of Editor & Publisher. His new book on Iraq and the media is "So Wrong for So Long."

Comments

[Dunelm]

I am fed up with the sorry state of journalism in this country. Pseudo-news today is all about profit. Most journalists want to keep the race close and want to promote conflict. Most journalists do not do their own research and rely on the spin from partisans.

If journalists were doing their job, we would not have gone to Iraq, and they would have warned us of the economic distaster. They are more interested in tabloid stories than in the real stories that affect our country. So, just who is putting country first? Not most journalists.

[Nonamnesiac]

Palin lost the debate massively. The American people never thought she was stupid. They think she's ignorant (not fatal to the American electorate, but a problem) and crazy. She came out appearing ignorant, crazy and outrageously ambitious for acceptng the nomination. The portions of the American elecotrate McCain hopes to win over -- the old Reagan Democrat -- blue collar union members in PA, MI, Ohio and Indiana who voted for George Wallace in 1968 and 1972, who fought in Vietnam and who voted for Nixon and for Reagan and Bush 1 and some for Bush 2, were not happy with the Republicans or McCain in the first place. They may have voted for him, as they are deeply racist and do not want to vote for a Black candidate. But they are not stupid Dixiecrats and are strongly anti-war because they realize they were suckered into fighting in Vietnam and don't want other American kids (mainly theirs) fighting and dying and being maimed in useless, greedy, expensive conflicts like Iraq. These people see Crazy "End-of-Days" Sarah for what she is -- an ignorant, warmongering, crazy nut and understand that McCain will almost certainly die early in his first term, given that his dad and grandad died earlier than his current age and he won't simply provide his medical records. And they really don't want to risk a Palin Presidency.

The pundits have no idea of how Sarah Palin did, because they don't understand how the American people think.

[jbgnyc]

I'm a huge news junkie, someone totally hooked to talking heads, yet, after the VP debate ended,for the FIRST time EVER, I went happily off to bed. I KNEW Biden had been brilliant, and, frankly, like Scarlett, I just didn't give a damn what any of the TV pundits had to say about "Wink, wink, kiss, kiss."
Wow. It was liberating. I may never listen to paid viewpoints ever and just think for myself. What a concept.

[angstall]

Conservatives look like fools trying to justify Sarah Palin as the VP candidate.

[jbgnyc]

I don't think Palin's strategy is to win over women. She's losing us by the thousands. Her strategy is to keep men voting Red. Who do you think all those "wink, winks" are for? Women I know are outraged at her stooping to behave, as one recently wrote, "like a cocktail waitress trying to get a larger tip from the guys at the bar." Yet the male pundits think she's woowing someone. Hello. It's not women.

[lisakaz2]

You nailed it! How can SP "tie" or even "win" when she refused the assignment -- to answer questions given her, i.e., to debate Biden? She was entirely off-task. On occasion I get student papers like this. They may write nice essays but they don't get A's for not answering (or even addressing) the assignment. If I ask for a student to address the radical implications of Voltaire in "Candide" and I get a bio of Voltaire (probably copied from the internet), a little style might give 'em a 70 but they might get a 50 -- as in a "half -ssed grade for a half -ssed paper." At most she's a C- in my book and likely that's a generous grade. Biden answered and answered well. That's at least a B, if not B+ or A- or A. Bottom line: he won by default. It's NO CONTEST if she refuses to compete.

[rose3030]

You sound like a great teacher. It's truly sad that in politics, this country prefers the C students over the A students. We've seen what C student Bush has accomplished in the past seven years. I don't think McCain's finishing near the very bottom of his class even qualifies as being a C student--it's close to flunking. I want an A student as president. Yes, one of those elitists that aspires for greatness.

[lisakaz2]

You nailed it. How can SP "tie" or even "win" when by default she refused the assignment -- to answer questions given her, i.e., to debate Biden. She was entirely off-task. On occasion I get student papers like this. They may write nice essays but they don't get A's for not answering (or even addressing) the assignment. If I ask for a student to address the radical implications of Voltaire in "Candide" and I get a bio of Voltaire (probably copied from the internet), a little style might give 'em a 70 but they might get a 50 -- as in a "half -ssed grade for a half -ssed paper." At most she's a C- in my book and likely that's a generous grade. Biden answered and answered well. That's at least a B, if not B+ or A- or A. Bottom line: he won by default. It's NO CONTEST if she refuses to compete.

[kellygrrrl]

if and when the MSM finally realizes that they are NOT Guests at a Party --
maybe they'll actually get back to doing their job
and maybe they will regain some credibility

[lovethesinner]

Peggy Noonan's spewing pabulum was the most offensive. I always had an intellectual crush on her. Now, she's sounding like all the other tired and apologetic fools pushing parity like it was crack. The only one on the right who seems to be reasonable is George F. Will.

Oddly enough, it's the visual arts that seem to be offering the most truth, this cycle:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/10/5/8551/84342/775/620614

[kellygrrrl]

Choo-Choo!

[rain39]

Hillary was so careful to appear as a professional, not as a girly girl. Sarah is using all of her feminine artillery to so the boys can look up her skirt as she tries to break the glass ceiling. I didn't support Hillary Clinton but I respect her a lot more than Sarah Palin as able to run the country.

I think Sarah shames women as being not ready for prime time and makes us laughing stocks! John McCain doesn't have much respect for women and his choice demonstrated that. He didn't pick the best and the brightest, knowing that his risk for dying or disability was a bit higher than the usual president because of age and especially cancer diagnosis. What stage was your last melanoma, John?? He really does NOT care about this country and can't be counted on to make good choices.

[fuzzywuzzy6]

Rain, as I was reading your comment I flashed on the scene in Basic Instinct where Sharon Stone is letting the investigating detectives look up her skirt. As the film ends, it becomes clear that she is a seriously disturbed woman. The interrogation scene is notorious, as it was allegedly filmed without underpants for the European audiences.

That is a very interesting comparison, if you meant it that way. The rest of your comment is excellent.

[canuck4barack]

After spitting out my tea more than once during Palin's folksy routines, I couldn't wait to hear the liberal pundits nail her and hear what kind of spin the repugs would put on it. I was astounded when I heard only positive praise from both sides of the camp. At least two different pundits (1 left, 1 right) said that SNL would have a tough time coming up with a sketch this weekend. I thought "yeah, they'll have a tough time editing it down, there were so many moments!" Well SNL just proved me right and the pundits wrong! Thank you, once again SNL, for proving that we are not all mindless sponges.

[kellygrrrl]

my only complaint about the SNL skit was that it was only 10 minutes long.

[susie1776]

My favorite moment was an interview by Fox News in a coffeeshop in Ohio the other day. The reporter asked the customers at large.."How many of you are voting for "McCain?" One man began to raise his hand only to have it slapped down by his wife. "How many of you are voting for Obama?" Every hand in the room went up. Nuff said. The reporter then had the gall to turn to the camera and say, "Well, the vote appears to be split." ?????????????

[Durango]

In what other profession could you be as consistently wrong and still keep your job?

Even Wall Street CEO's would be fired if they showed the incompetence shown by Americas Media Pundits.

Everyone of those fools who thought that Colin Powells presentation to the UN was "compelling" and "overwhelming" should have been fired outright.

But they have continued to be wrong on EVERY major issue of our times. They have absolutely NO CREDIBILITY!

Why are they still employed?

[rw97]

One think that can be guaranteed is that Pat Buchanan will always say that the Republican candidate won the debate.

[Evinsmom]

The one thing that Bush has done very well the past 8 years is divide Americans, politically, religiously, ethnically, and socio-economically through the use of fear.. Neoconservatives will blindly support the cause at any price. Thankfully most Americans are waking up from this stupor and realizing the 'us against them" approach isn't working for them. Palin's desperate appraoch to embed herself in with the average Joe is backfiring because America's been there and done that and it didn't work.

[ssb752]

Well stated. I just wish I had more trust in most Americans smelling the coffee. The most revealing insight to come out of Scott McClellan's book on Bush was the "Permanent Campaign Mode" mentality of the Republicans. This mindset explains everything they do before and after any election. Country first my a$$.