Krugman reads Bubba?
Krugman and Bubba both predict that, well, I’ll let Krugman explain:
Let’s face it: Whatever happens in Thursday’s debate, cable news will proclaim President Bush the winner. This will reflect the political bias so evident during the party conventions. It will also reflect the undoubted fact that Bush does a pretty good Clint Eastwood imitation.
Let’s face it, guys, Kerry is not a charismatic man (even less so than the almost robotic Al Gore). He also doesn’t have a single noteworthy thing that I can think of attributed to him in his decades in the Senate. Kerry will probably lose because Kerry is Kerry.
Methinks Krugman and Bubba are taking the safe bet. Predicting Kerry will lose so that later they can tell people I told you so.
September 29th, 2004 at 8:38 pm
[…] ;
by
Xrlq
@
1:37 pm
Uncle observes that both Paul Krugman and SK Bubba have predicted that the MSM […]
September 29th, 2004 at 12:10 pm
I’m not predicting he will lose. I’m predicting the media will declare Bush the winner. Big difference. Well, maybe not.
September 29th, 2004 at 1:54 pm
Nah. The media tilts heavily toward Kerry, so if Bush beats him by a a modest margin they’ll spin it as a draw (which would still be a loss for Kerry since he’s behind in the polls). The only way I could see the MSM actually coming out and saying that Bush “won” the debate was if Kerry got his ass handed to him. We’ll see.
September 29th, 2004 at 4:24 pm
Yeah, because heaven knows bringing down a terrorist funding bank, or exposing an illegal scheme in which weaapons were sold to a known state sponsor of terror to finance an illegal war, are not noteworthy things.
Keep on repeating those talking points.
September 29th, 2004 at 4:39 pm
Coattail Kerry
Either John Kerry clobbers George Bush in tomorrow’s debate, or he’s finished.
September 29th, 2004 at 4:54 pm
Yeah, because heaven knows bringing down a terrorist funding bank, or exposing an illegal scheme in which weaapons were sold to a known state sponsor of terror to finance an illegal war, are not noteworthy things.
I said that I know of. I didn’t know he did those things.
September 29th, 2004 at 5:00 pm
Kerry will do very well in the debate. He is a much better debater than Bush. I don’t think it will be enough to put him back in the hunt, however.
September 29th, 2004 at 7:03 pm
Kerry is only an excellent debater if the audience is mainlining No-Doze. And given his tendency to use incredibly complicated explanations full of nuance instead of simple, soncise answers, he’s toast if the candidates are time-limited in their responses.
What I find really funny is that folks like Krugman think the media is tilted toward Bush.
September 30th, 2004 at 12:51 pm
I think it’s less that the media is tilted toward Bush, and more that there’s a deference to power there. That, and the fact that the media hasn’t called either candidate on much of what they’ve said. Since Bush’s camp makes more misleading statements than Kerry’s camp, it gives the appearance that Bush is getting an easier time, when both are essentially getting off easy. It’s just that Bush takes a lot more advantage of that situation. 😉
Uncle:
Did you bother to try to find out? We’ve mentioned them both prominently on our blog, which I know you read. Of course, the “anti-Bush, pro-Kerry” media can’t be bothered to point that out. They simply parrot what people say — in easy to digest sound-bite form — rather than bothering themselves with silly “facts.”
September 30th, 2004 at 1:03 pm
Yes, i went out and googled “what has Kerry done” and got nothing. No, I kid. The point is that I, someone who actually follows politics unlike your average American, did not know off the top of my head a single thing Kerry has done in his decades long service in the Senate. That seriously doesn’t bode well for Kerry.
I don’t recall them but that doesn’t mean I’ve not read them. Besides, what did he do in those situations? Vote yes, or something?