First let me say this: I will be happy if we have a democratic president from this list next year: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John Edwards, Chris Dodd. I strongly favor Obama at present. I think the others are way too flawed to be considered.
But I am really, really bothered when the paper of record puts forward what seems to be clearly an effort to favor one candidate (Hillary) above all the others. Especially when the headline is
For Democrats, Primary Field Gives Confidence
Does that not sound optimistic? Does that not sound like there are several great candidates? NOT SO FAST, DEAR READER!
More below the fold.
UPDATE: error about JFK pointed out in comments is corrected.
As a Somerby-esqe reminder, ANag has some notoriety in the political arena-he is distinctively hackish as evidenced by these recent postshere, here,here, here, here ... on DKos.
For an encyclopedic roster of complaints against ANags from Daily Howler, look here.
Now onto today's offense. First, the pictures caught my eye-lead photo, in the paper and on the web page has this caption:
“Our country is in a real tough time right now, and she’s the one that can pull it together.” RON MIRSKY, hair stylist from Exeter, N.H., who backs Hillary Rodham Clinton
By itself, not too bad. A Hillary fan. Cool. Then, there is a picture of someone commenting on Obama:
“He’s a one-term senator. How much time has he really had to prove himself ?” MELINDA FOUNTAIN, bureaucrat from La Porte, Ind., on Barack Obama
The ``experience meme''! I seem to recall that John Edwards has served one full term, that Hillary has served one full term (the sum of Obama's elected experience is similar to Hillary's!). This is the hammer that ANag's and other media hacks will bludgeon Obama with. I am afraid it is working and the Obama camp has not effectively blunted the impact of this campaign. I would not doubt that this was focus group tested prior to the debate where Hillary unleashed it on Obama and it is sticking. This said, is it not possible that ANag's could find someone with VERY positive sentiment on Obama to match that of Hillary? Or someone who is nervous about Hillary's electability commenting on her?
John Edwards is a fine candidate I will support if he gets the nod, and he has consistently won the DKos straw polls for sometime (and obviously enjoys much support on this site).
What do the photos tell us about Edwards?
“He is too much of the same old thing: It is time for something different.” EMILY VANCE, writer from Jacksonville, Fla., on John Edwards
Ouch! And obviously Hillary is somehow different despite her years of DC experience, and Obama must be ... too fresh? But save your exasperation-it gets worse in the article.
Now, the first few paragraphs seem pretty good--there is some balance.
There is for example, this:
“I think Hillary is pretty strong,” said Lesley Cain, a dentist, as she sat out in the afternoon sun on Market Square in Portsmouth, N.H., waiting for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and former President Bill Clinton to arrive for a Labor Day rally. “But I think Obama is good, too. It’s a flip at this point.”
Carol Brackett, 51, a retired dental technician from Portland, Me., said: “I love the field of Democrats. This is going to be hard.”
and this:
...Democratic voters said that they were pleased to be able to select among Mrs. Clinton, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois, former Senator John Edwards of North Carolina and the rest of the party’s candidates, but that they also continued to have questions about them.
Now, let's get to the business at hand. First out of the gate, smack down the junior senator from Illinois:
Again and again, voters — often unprompted [emphasis mine] — said they were concerned that Mr. Obama did not have enough experience.
Often unprompted. Well, Mr. Nagourney, what were the stats on that? Was it ten unprompted for every one hundred prompted? Was the person in the photo questioning Barack's experience unprompted?
For Edwards supporters, there is this:
And Mr. Edwards, who campaigned across New Hampshire last week, was rarely named by voters when they were asked who they were considering, suggesting the difficulty he continues to face in his second bid for the presidency against two better-known candidates running for the first time.
I am sure, of course, that Mr. Nagourney used the latest unbiased sampling procedures to generate this insight.
Fairly, he does offer this paragraph:
Still, this is a confident party this fall. In one sign of this, voters said they believed either Mrs. Clinton or Mr. Obama could win the presidency back from the Republicans.
although, again, where is Mr. Edwards? Presumably in Mr. Nagourney's universe he is off getting a nice haircut.
Here is the core support for Hillary:
Although several Democrats said they were concerned that the presence of Mr. Clinton during the campaign could prove a negative for Mrs. Clinton in a general election, he was often the reason cited by Democrats who said they thought Mrs. Clinton would be a strong president during a difficult time.
“Her husband was a very good diplomat for the United States, and he is well respected,” said Jan Archambault, 49, a psychiatric nurse from Rollinsford, N.H. “So it’s getting two for the price of one.”
The interviews suggest that Mrs. Clinton has made progress in her effort to present herself as the most qualified of the candidates. “Of all the fish swimming around in that pond, I think she has the most gray matter between the ears,” said Mark Schwartz, 53, of Hampton, N.H., who builds resource recovery plants.
Ron Mirsky, a hair stylist from Exeter, N.H., who said he voted for Mr. Edwards in 2004, said he was likely to support Mrs. Clinton now because of the threat of terrorism and the war in Iraq. “Our country is in a real tough time right now, and she’s the one that can pull it together, because she has the experience,” Mr. Mirsky said. “She’ll make the most balanced decisions.”
Some voters expressed concern that that might cut both ways and hurt Mrs. Clinton in a general election. “I hope she’s able to win more people over,” said Mrs. Brackett, the retired dental technician from Maine. “She’s not really warm and fuzzy, so some people are put off by that and threatened by her brilliance.”
But Reema Zoumut, an art teacher in Corona, Calif., said: “She went through some trials and tribulations. She, to me, looks good.”
Now, he does go on to say some nice things about Obama (but he
appears not to have erased the concern — fanned by Mrs. Clinton’s campaign with its emphasis on experience — that he might not be ready to be president. A number of voters said they wished Mr. Obama had waited to run and suggested he would be a much stronger candidate in four or eight years.
) and Edwards (but he
``...has way too much on his plate to deal with the pressures that are confronting our country now.”
--this from a voter concerned about Elizabeth Edwards' cancer).
Now I could be wrong, but I see this article as pushing the democrats to select Hillary. It does express concerns, but the bulk of the prose is directed towards Hillary. This may be fair--she is the front runner at present--but the selection of photos, and the repetition of the ``experience'' meme lead me to read this as an article with an agenda.
Why specifically a push for Hillary? It is a New York paper. Hillary is a far more palatable establishment candidate than Obama or Edwards. As to ANags role here? I am afraid the history of his writing (along with other NYT reporters like Carl Hulse, Elizabeth Bumiller, Jeff Zeleny) skew to the R side. It is one thing when you get an isolated incident. It is another altogether when it is repeated systematically over time with subtle and not so subtle biases. There is the idea that Hillary is the candidate the republicans would most like to run against, because they feel that they have the most slime to throw at her. This is one of the explanations offered for Rove's attacks on her a week or two back (although part of that is protecting his life's work, the GWB legacy). This is only speculation on my part.
But I do find the article's subtext to be this: by and large, dems support Hillary and you should too.