Don't you just love the 'liberal media'? In a surprise (not a shocker) Chris Cilliza of the WaPo offers up some unsolicited advice to the unlikely candidate for NV-Sen, Sharrrrrron Angle.
Maybe in a Murdoch or Mellon-Scaife rag I'd expect this, but the WaPo? Just another slide to the right.
Category headings:
- It's the economy, stupid:
"and with a Democrat in the White House -- Reid hasn't been able to improve the job picture in the Silver State."
- (Re)Fire up the base:
"Remind them of the stakes -- that they may not agree with Angle all of the time but they agree with her far more often than they agree with Reid."
- A Reid overplay:
"it's worth remembering that Reid is not a well-liked presence in the state -- 39 percent favorable, 52 percent unfavorable in the latest Mason-Dixon poll"
- Independents, Independents, Independents
"given the onslaught that Angle has endured, she is leading among independents 41 percent to 36"
- Get (slightly) better as a candidate:
"Most (GOP strategists) underestimated just how much work she needed, however, and how resistant she would be to changing."
Maybe he'd like to go on Countdown, or TRMS and explain this new role of the press. I'd like to know why this piece was posted as well.
Of course, my comment on the blog:
"Umm, exactly why is the press offering campaign suggestions? Is that the role of the press now? Well, except for FOX. The WaPo has been constantly sliding right, but this is really beyond anything I ever expected. Hello Corporatacracy. Hope you tea partiers revel in your new master's milieu. Especially when they come for your SS, Medicare, and have you glad to have a $5/hr job."
Never made it past the moderator.
Let's ask WaPo ombudsman, Andrew Alexander (ombudsman@washpost.com), why they thought it appropriate to run such a column. Are conservatives still whining about Dave Weigel? You know, when liberals couldn't get attention in the media during the Bush years, the answer was "well they are in power." What's the answer now?