Clinton's “Downturn:” Conventional Wisdom?

| | Comments (4)

Over the past month, and despite some ups and downs, the prediction market Intrade.com is showing the following:

  • Clinton, up (and still the overall market leader)
  • Edwards, down (a nickel stock)
  • Obama, down
  • Giuliani, up (still the Republican market leader)
  • Romney, up
  • Thompson, down (crashing into nickel stock territory)
  • McCain, up (another nickel stock)

If you're wondering how Clinton's "debate stumble" and/or the others holding her feet to the fire is affecting her numbers, well, the results are mixed. While many of the polls show a decline in her support, a nearly-equal number of polls show nothing of the sort. Regardless, her lead is still in the double digits.

Chris Bowers has a round up and offers an excellent analysis as well:

I imagine most people reading this blog are either happy that Clinton is somewhat down, or at least not disappointed. However, they should be careful what they wish for.

In this case, what appears to be a Clinton drop in the polls was largely fueled by the same media machine that, most of the time, happily reinforces Republican narratives as conventional wisdom. The lesson here, I think, is to remember that the corporate, established media is still very good at creating national convention wisdom as they see fit.

While in this case that conventional wisdom might make many people in the netroots happy, most of the time it won't. It is still a powerful institution that Republicans and conservatives are better able to control than Democrats and progressives, and we shouldn't forget that.

After the fact re-branding of debates remains of the biggest reasons George Bush is President instead of Al Gore, for example. Their after the fact coverage of Howard Dean's concession speech in Iowa, or General Petraeus's rosy portrayal of Iraq are even more gratuitous examples.

Most of the time, it feels as though the conventional wisdom machine works against us, and even in instances where we might enjoy the conventional wisdom that is being created (and I admit that I enjoy it simply because a blowout campaign is a boring campaign), we shouldn't forget that.

4 Comments

shep Author Profile Page said:

Meet the Press. Same as the old press

Ara Rubyan Author Profile Page said:
Matthews citing [Hillary's] “bizarre behavior” is like a chimp saying you live in the trees.

But in the past few weeks, Hardball has entered full propaganda mode, trashing Clinton at every turn and begging its viewers to see the greatness of the alternates, Obama and Edwards.

Of course, this is precisely what he did in 1999, when he tried to keep Gore from the Dem nomination, before going on to trash him savagely all through the general campaign. ... We’ve sat through this movie before.

Right on.

shep Author Profile Page said:

The barometer for how screwed we are is Bob Somberby writes a somewhat known blog and Howard Kurtz is a major media critic (and a major putz).

Ara Rubyan Author Profile Page said:

Joan Walsh:

[O]ne thing the media doesn't seem to understand: Much of the Democratic base is still angry about the media's role in impeachment, and in giving George W. Bush a relatively free ride to his first term while savaging Al Gore.

The Democratic base distrusts Clinton for her Iraq and Iran vote, but it also knows she's a fighter with a team that has taken on the "vast right-wing conspiracy" -- and come out on top. I don't think Republicans, pundits or other Democrats should underestimate the base's yearning for someone who will fight tough.

That could be Clinton's best asset in the months to come, but I don't expect many in the media to be able to see it.

Leave a comment

Archives

Two ways to browse:

OR