Re-posted here, because it's kinda cool (The Grey Havens - 1/3/2008 11:42:43 PM)
Ever since JFK v. Nixon, the media has led presidential politics. Tonight, the Iowa caucuses have delivered the press a story that they want to write.
At this moment, with 1679 of 1781 precincts reporting, here are the results:
Senator Barack Obama : 37.28%
Senator John Edwards : 29.96%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 29.53%
Here's the story that the press wants to write:
* After being the "front runner", the presumptive nominee, the "inevitable" nominee, and despite all of her institutional contacts and the hearts and minds of the Democratic base, Hillary's loss is massive, debilitating, and humiliating.
more below the jump...
* She lost by 7 points to Obama, despite his supposed "inexperience".
* She lost to Edwards who is not even viable anywhere else in the country, because he's opted for public financing.
* She didn't even break 30%.
The important thing here is that this is the spin that the Press WANTS to believe. This is the story they WANT to write. The only candidate that the press likes less than John Edwards, Mitt Romney, and Rudy is Hillary Clinton, and this is is going to turn into a feeding frenzy.
Moreover, there is a great story here in terms of the greatness of the American electorate. Arianna has it here.
At this moment in time in New Hampshire, Hillary leads Obama by 7 Points in RCP rolling tracking. The question now is whether this story line will dominate the media landscape for 5 solid media cycles and allow Obama to close that gap.
A New Hampshire win will clinch South Carolina for Obama, and that will take Obama into Florida and then Tsunami Tuesday in a position to compete across the country.
This may be an authentic turning point in which fresh face of real change can lead America back from our darkest days. And of course, that's the story that the press really wants to write.
You can take a really nice photo and make it look bad, quite easily.
Hillary has in her camp arguably the greatest politician to ever live in her camp. I wouldn't underestimate her. And I wouldn't make a sweeping prediction based on Iowa or New Hampshire.
I don't see how New Hampshire will clinch South Carolina for anyone. What do the two states have in common? McCain won New Hampshire and didn't clinch South Carolina nor did Bill Bradley.
Of course, the media will latch on this win because that is what they love. They fall in love with a candidate, build them up, get tired of them, tear them down, and then rinse and repeat. They will use the same argument for Obama that they used for Clinton: momentum equals certainty.
If the good word keeps up through NH and he can close the 7 point gap with Clinton, he'll get an even bigger bump.
In South Carolina O & HRC are essentially tied. Therefore, a NH win on the heels of this showing in Iowa, should mean a win for Obama in SC.
The important factor here is the Media, and the point is that the Media wants to write this Obama brushfire story. They don't like Hillary, they don't like Edwards, they like Obama, but he has to prove himself viable. Viability requires victories, and that's espeically true for a movement candidate Like Obama.
My bet is that the Media will ride the glowing Obama story through Tsunami Tuesday if he keeps winning.
He can still lose the nomination, even if he wins all three of the very early primaries (ia, nh, and sc), so there's really nothing to stop the press writing about the brushfire and making HRC fight for super tuesday. The real competition and horse-race story, after all is what garners viewers and readers for media outlets. Indeed, look at all of the great press O got leading up to IA. If Hillary'd won tonight, there'd be no story on the Dem side until the convention. Now people are psyched and the media has a fun story to tell.