Chicago Reader

Tuesday, May 13, 2008

When the tribe decides you're dead . . .

Posted by Michael Miner on Tue, May 13, 2008 at 10:31 AM

. . . your own opinion doesn't count for much. A couple of weeks ago Barack Obama whomped Hillary Clinton in North Carolina and lost to her narrowly in Indiana, outcomes that were generally expected. Overnight, the media (and apparently the Democratic Party) decided that was that -- Obama had wrapped up the nomination. The tone of the coverage underwent a sea change. Clinton was now an object of affection and indulgence:

My column on Wednesday argued for Clinton to gracefully exit the stage now that it looks like there are no more rabbits to pull out of her electoral hat. But readers -- not all of them women -- pushed back. Let her quit when she's good and ready, many argued. She's earned that right. Carol Marin, Sun-Times.

She wasn't denied the nomination. She wasn't cheated. She simply competed fiercely and did not win. That doesn't mean her candidacy was not a triumph. Michael Tackett, Tribune.

revisionist gratitude:

Does Senator Barack Obama come out a bloody mess, or a battle-tested warrior? . . . Could competing against Mrs. Clinton have improved Mr. Obama as a candidate in the same way that competing against Larry Bird and Magic Johnson in the 1980s made Isiah Thomas and Michael Jordan champions in the 1990s? Mark Leibovich, New York Times.

and avuncular wisdom:

Yes, Hillary, America is worth fighting for. But the best way to fight for America now is to give up the fight. Sun-Times editorial.

But then there's today's primary in West Virginia, where polls show Clinton leading Obama better than two-to-one. Which means that the media's next assignment will be to sound less than absurd dismissing Obama's crushing defeat. It's not easy being a pundit. This will test the best of them.

Tags: ,

Comments (4) RSS

Showing 1-4 of 4

Add a comment

Generic user icon

Amen, Mike. It wasn't until two years after retiring from the newspaper world that the manifold flaws of American journalism really became apparent to me. Your blogpost today cements that feeling.

Posted by Henry Kisor on May 13, 2008 at 11:33 AM | Report this comment
Generic user icon

I was thinking about this bitter comment that people are still hammering Obama on....why is it that when Senator Clinton made those comments to ABC about hard-working Americans, white Americans, and wrote those off as a poor choice of words it was accepted as such. However, when Senator Obama used "bitter" instead of "angry/frustrated" and "cling" instead of "rely on", Senator Clinton pounced on them and labeled him as an elitist. Senator Obama's poor choice of words no more make him an elitist who looks down on small-town people than Senator Clinton's make her a racist who looks down on African Americans?? Both their RECORDS indicate clearly the opposite of elite (Obama) and racist (Clinton) right?

Posted by SMS on May 13, 2008 at 11:37 AM | Report this comment
Generic user icon

I'm actually really surprised by your comments. I am as cognizant of the flaws in our journalism system as most people. However, I think the media showed admirable restraint in waiting until it was nearly mathematically impossible for Clinton to get the nomination. Yes, Clinton is polling as being up 37 points on average in WV (where there are a whopping 28 delegates up for grabs, 13% of the remaining delegates). But the issue is that Hillary would have to win more than 66% of the rest of the delegates and superdelegates to PREVENT Obama having the 2025 delegates to get the nomination. In order to beat Obama in delegates, she needs 69% of the remaining delegates. In order to actually secure the 2025 for herself, she needs 71% of the remaining delegates. That's ridiculous. There is simply no way. Especially with Obama up in Oregon and now beating her in superdelegates (though I understand that they can change their mind/support, of course). I would also point out that the Clinton campaign was expecting a much stronger defeat in NC than she actually won. The woman is toast, and it continues to piss me off that she is fostering the same divisiveness in the Democratic party that kept them out of the White House in 2004. In short, I think the media have done exactly what was needed. They were honest about the way the numbers were stacking up and restrained in how quickly they responded to that fact.

Posted by Lynn on May 13, 2008 at 2:18 PM | Report this comment
Generic user icon

How about this scenario for Obama getting out of the race: Sen Obama announces he will appoint Todd Stroger as Secretary of the Treasury, Rod Blagojevich as Secretary of State, and Emil Jones as Secretary of Defense, Jan Schakowsky Secretary of Education...all candidates previously endorsed by Sen. Obama for their current roles in messing up Illinois. Bob Creamer (Jan's husband) can be in charge of NSA, as he is experienced with cloak and dagger stuff. Better yet, the press could just take note that Obama collaborates with some real doorknobs, and the superdelegates take notice that Sen. Obama may not be the reformer the media has made him out to be. JBP

Posted by John Powers on May 13, 2008 at 2:56 PM | Report this comment

Add a comment

Latest in The Blog

Author Archives

Recent Comments

©2010 Creative Loafing Media
All Rights Reserved.