New Hampshire Primary Breakdown: Could the Press Coverage Be Any Worse?

TONIGHT'S COVERAGE OF THE New Hampshire Primaries reinforced what has been evident for some time--the press has done a phenomenally bad job covering the 2008 presidential elections.

We are used to a certain amount of palaver by now, but tonight's over-the top characterization of Hillary Clinton's victory as a "comeback" or in the words of Chris Matthews, one of the greatest upsets in the history of American politics, pinpointed the gap between how seriously Americans take the media and how seriously the media takes themselves.

Before the Iowa Caucuses, pundits claimed Barak Obama would be out of the race if he didn't win Iowa. On Friday, after Obama's impressive showing there, it was suddenly putative knowledge that if Clinton did not snatch New Hampshire, she would be done for. All of this with over 99% of the country yet to vote.

The need to overdramatize the present has hindered broadcast news since the arrival of channels like CNN and in particular since the ubiquity and immediacy of the Web. None of these are new observations, but rarely has so much been heralded to ride on so little.

Self-selected voters in two small, White states cannot determine the presidential candidate in this unprecedented year. For the first time ever, an African American and a woman have won a caucus and a primary. Those kinds of accomplishments can, of course, lead to over-rhetoricized discourse, but they are also the kinds of epoch-defining events that undermine the dialogue of the over-hyped and under-analyzed. Of all the moments in American political history, this is one of those times when we need a press that is insightful, restrained, useful, and trustworthy. In one of the great ironies of American public discourse, the politicians are more on point, more in touch, more . . . enjoyable . . .than the press.

How painful was it to have Anderson Cooper's "best political team on TV" turn out to be Bill Bennett and Ralph Reid? The only difference between the two is that one is 30 years younger and 30 pounds lighter. Otherwise, they drink from the same Right Wing Republican straw.
These are the voices, though, that are supposed to pilot us through the murky waters of exit polls, tide riding, momentum, and the pulse of the voter. If these are our captains, we shall drown.

Similarly, Chris Matthews was utterly unable to describe Clinton's victory as anything less than a Hummer full of bombs that launched Satan's own grenades exploding into machetes of fire.
Even the New York Times Website described the New Hampshire result as an "upset." We should remember that Ms. Clinton was the de facto candidate (not just the favorite but the candidate) until a few days ago. For some reason, the mainstream press believed a demographic of voters who claimed to be wavering between McCain and Obama. That is to say, they took at face value the answers of people who have allegiance to no political system, no party, no poll.

The mantra the press keeps coda-ing is how independent and unpredictable New Hampshire voters are. And yet, things have gotten to such a point that they don't even believe themselves. The speeches of Clinton and Obama tonight told us more about what voters want and why issues matter than any of the bodies behind the desks.

Iowa Caucus Analysis: A Special Mid-Week Dispatch

N AN ODD NIGHT, two of the oddest moments involved watching not the candidates themselves address the nation but the famous personalities on the dais near them.

In the case of Mike Huckabee, it was Chuck Norris. The plaid-shirted, red-bearded Norris captured as much of the camera's gaze as Huckabee himself. In Norris' countenance, one got a glimpse of the self-possessed smugness that comes with certainty--the certainty of right and wrongness, white and blackness, god and godlessness, gay and straightness. It was strange to see Walker, Texas Ranger asking to be taken seriously as a visual icon of the political process. For a little over a year now, Norris has been writing a pro-Republican, pro-Jesus column for WorldNetDaily, but Huckabee's decision to place him front and center during his Iowa victory speech says a great deal about both men, their values, and how each is asking to be read: Huckabee as badass and Hollywood cool; Norris as validated, anointed, chosen.

Similarly, during Hilary Clinton's subdued, seemingly rehearsed concession speech that conceded nothing, the real magnetism in the room was to her left--her husband, Bill. Clinton's third place finish was, clearly, a blow to her and her followers, but no one looked more devastated than Bill Clinton. It was difficult to know if his overt discomfort was caused by her address (more an argument as to why her experience and deep pockets qualify her for the presidency than an appeal to the heart and soul of the electorate) or by the stunning outcome of the caucus. Perhaps it was my own projection influencing my perspective, but he looked to be holding back the urge to grab the microphone and say everything that was not being said at his wife's presentation and all that would be coverd at Obama's. One also senses that the heaviness in President Clinton's features portends the potential crush awaiting his as he hits the campaign trail. If he pulls out all the stops stumping for his wife, he (and others) may see this as a statement, even a referendum, on his presidency. How painful this reality must be for him.

Watching both Norris and President Clinton drives home the fact that so much about the campaigns and elections are about more than the candidates. They are about what the candidates see when they look into the two-way mirror that is the American electorate.

Tonight's results confirmed what we all knew, know, and shall not forget: America is a divided country. Had McCain and Edwards both won, there would be compelling evidence that America's left and right wings might actually be able to fly the same bird. But, Huckabee's strong showing among Republicans merely reinforces the putative anxiety among the right wing about conservative values like anti-gay measures, hatred of Roe v. Wade, and skepticism of illegal immigration. Romney's second place finish and McCain's surprisingly distant third place showing indicate an urgency among conservatives, at least in Iowa.

Obama, on the other hand, is a model of progressive liberal values. To my knowledge, Iowa has never elected an African American to any position of note; and yet, this young, "inexperienced" junior senator ran away with the democratic votes despite pre-caucus polls showing a statistically even race among Clinton, Obama, and Edwards. One of the more anti-establishment, anti-run-of-the-mill-solution candidates in recent memory, Obama appeared to appeal only to the young, the naive, and the disenfranchised. And yet, in one of the Whiter states in the country, Obama defeated, soundly, two exceedingly White front runners in Clinton and Edwards. It is hard to overstate how remarkable his accomplishment is. His speech, unlike Ms. Clinton's, was transcendent, emotional, and, most important, unifying.

Oddly enough, Obama's endorsement by Iowans expands the Democratic party, whereas Huckabee's victory shrinks the Republican crew. Huckabee is a divisive figure. Iowa Republicans who are not Christian or Evangelical avoided him. Mainstream Republican voters in other states will likely not find what they seek in president in Mr. Huckabee. On the other hand, Obama is likely to parlay his surprising victory in the White, conservative, Bible-belted Iowa into an incredible bounce for the New Hampshire primary only five days away. McCain will likely win New Hampshire, which could, in fact, bifurcate Republicans; while the Democrats may just rally around an Obama win in Iowa and New Hampshire en route to South Carolina.

Lastly, Republican and Democratic turnout in Iowa may be a bellwether for the fall elections. So many more Democrats caucused than Republicans (and with such enthusiasm), the politics of xenophobia, restriction, and exclusion that have dominated American discourse for the last eight years, may just be giving way to a dialogue of engagement, integration, and collaboration.

When viewed through this lens, the values of Chuck Norris, despite their owner's martial arts proficiency, were scissor-kicked tonight by those of Bill Clinton's intellectual successor, Senator Obama.