The Hack Gap Revisited
Republican operatives are plunging ahead with nonsense about how Romney was just fine in the two debates he lost, now tied to the idea that he will cruise to victory when he’s still clearly behind. I agree that this is what’s going on:
In recent days, the vibe emanating from Mitt Romney’s campaign has grown downright giddy. Despite a lack of any evident positive momentum over the last week — indeed, in the face of a slight decline from its post-Denver high — the Romney camp is suddenly bursting with talk that it will not only win but win handily. (“We’re going to win,” said one of the former Massachusetts governor’s closest advisers. “Seriously, 305 electoral votes.”)
This is a bluff. Romney is carefully attempting to project an atmosphere of momentum, in the hopes of winning positive media coverage and, thus, creating a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Over the last week, Romney’s campaign has orchestrated a series of high-profile gambits in order to feed its momentum narrative.
On one level, this makes sense; there does seem to be some evidence for a bandwagon effect. Mitigating this, however, is the possibility that Republicans may convince themselves of their own bullshit. My favorite recent example is Karl Rove’s decision to waste resources in New Jersey and California in the last weeks of the 2000 election, which could very well have squandered the gifts he was handed by Florida’s ludicrous electoral system and St. Ralph. Alas, as Chait points out Romney’s current gambits aren’t really sacrificing anything but are merely taking advantage of journalists who need to have “the race is tightening” stories.
I do not think that these are mutually exclusive options. Conservatives seem to be very good at convincing themselves of things that simply are not true.
Yes, you are correct, and lazy, beltway-immersed journalists have the same fucking problem.
Post-election predictions: the same journos now heavily pushing the “Romney’s gonna pull it off” narrative (MSM folks who were telling me last night that Romney won even though he lost) will all be saying, “Of course, Obama’s election was a given.”
And the righties who genuinely think Romney will win are going to shit a gargantuan brick, demand recounts in any state within 1 %, demand an end to early voting (and generally whine that those early votes shouldn’t count even if, no wait, especially if, the math shows Obama would have won without them).
Then, once they are all sobbed out like the shiny little red-faced toddlers they are, they will abruptly turn on Romney and declare he made a huge mistake by veering to the center.
The MO of the media for the past month has been to reinforce the narrative of the close race so their inane bullshit reporting means something other than inane bullshit. The first debate was the biggest massive landslide in the history of civilized society while the last two debates were “Eh Obama won I guess but who cares, they’re just debates”
Exactly. I also like how it’s out of bounds for the media to state that Romney is lying, but when Obama tries to point this out with humor (“Romnesia,” “horses and bayonets”), he’s somehow making a cheap shot or being trivial.
This was especially striking after the first debate when the media was all agog with exultation that The Game Was Exciting. The media gave a little attention to their own fact checkers pointing out that every word Mitt spoke was a lie or a flip-flop, but very little indeed.
I also like how the media keeps flogging the line “Obama has no 2nd term agenda”, when it’s entirely obvious their real objection is Obama’s refusal to endorse Simpson-Bowles.
If he’s not Very Serious, it doesn’t count
Except even the Simpson-Bowles commission didn’t endorse Simpson-Bowles.
Post-election predictions: the same journos now heavily pushing the “Romney’s gonna pull it off” narrative (MSM folks who were telling me last night that Romney won even though he lost) will all be saying, “Of course, Obama’s election was a given.”
That’s always the way. During the election, the tiniest occurrence is described as game-changing. Afterwards, it was all inevitable due to grand forces.
We’ll have all the swing states called on Faux News for Romney at around midnight. They’ll try to solidify the coup before breakfast. Florida 2000 all over the nation, with the Dems caught flat footed eating their coffee and muffins.
This implies that the Conservatives are vulnerable to a head fake.
Projection, they’re soaking in it.
That said, Obama should get a big campaign rally in Salt Lake City, just to get the Rmoney crew to wet themselves.
They should replace “In God We Trust” on currency with “Fake It ‘Till You Make It.” That’s clearly a more appropriate motto these days.
Or perhaps “Fear is the mind-killer.”
Or, when they steal the election it won’t look so obvious because they told us they were going to win.
bingo
+1
Exactly this.
Yep.
How’s that supposed to work? Every candidate’s team says they’re going to win. That doesn’t make it any more less plausible if they do win.
I agree. Every candidate has to express optimism about their chances. It’s not about setting up legitimacy for a win, it’s about keeping your supporters and their money on board. If the Romney campaign came out and said “Gonna be honest, we don’t see how we can win this,” then everyone would give up on the campaign. A big part of the pre-October strategy was keeping the national party interested in the Presidential race.
The real problem with the hack gap is that conservative media members understand the importance of always projecting optimism, and thus tend not to rip their guy, once he’s been confirmed. As long as it’s somewhat close they are going to boost for him and forget all of their advice about advocating conservative positions. For the liberal media, they’re far more likely to display actual honesty with their candidates, which is admirable in a sense, but also makes it more likely that a death-spiral occurs.
Well said.
You’re inviting an argument with the “St. Ralph” stuff. You could have blamed Judge Scalia instead, or the Brooks Brothers mob, or the butterfly ballot, etc.
He did mention Florida’s ludicrous electoral system. In fact, he mentioned it first.
A stranger here, are you?
No, and hence the comment. Thought it was funny that he took a cheap shot at the nader supporters in a post which had nothing to do with nader.
It would be a cheap shot if it wasn’t true. But since it is, it’s perfectly fair.
Seconded….and their lack of admission is galling
It’s Scott, he won’t blame the Republicans or centrist Dems who had 50x the effect of Nader, so he’s got to go with the hippie punching and Nader bashing. As they say, ya gotta dance with who brung ya and Scott has always sailed on the wings of centrism
Republicans or centrist Dems who had 50x the effect of Nader
Again, it’s incredibly stupid to “blame” Republicans or conservative southern Democrats for voting for Bush, given that doing so rationally advanced their policy preferences. Nader throwing the election to Bush, conversely, was inconsistent with his stated policy preferences. See the difference?
I cannot see the difference because my eyes are so clouded up by the tears of laughter caused by someone calling you a centrist
If Scott is a centrist, I guess I am too. And do you really think I am a centrist?
Well, the important thing to remember is that one’s purity as a leftist is determined above all by refusing to criticize even the most transparently counterproductive tactics of nominal leftists. Preferably using the phrase “hippie punching,” which eliminates the need to make an actual argument, just like “politically correct.”
Criticism of the term “hippie punching” is itself hippie punching.
Well, it is when you do it, you fucking self-hating hippie you.
Listen, I lived at the corner of Haight and Ashbury and went to numerous Grateful Dead concerts in the park on acid. Don’t you dare equate us hippies with Ralph Nader, who is an out of control narcissist and egomaniac whose whole political platform in 2000 consisted of hating the Democratic party for not proclaiming him their Pope, and who was materially responsible for the state our Country is in today.
I just want to know if ads around here are by the unique visitor page load, or if I need to actually click the Mitt Romney ads I get served to get money sent from Romney’s campaign chest to the proprietors of this fine establishment.
The servers around here don’t pay for themselves you know.
as a left-winger who voted several days ago, I must say it’s awesome to know that Mitt still cares about me.
People believe what they believe, and I doubt many will argue about it, whatever side they were on (or are on, to the extent we even think about it, anymore.)
I learned that swing states matter, and one has to be VEEEERRRRY careful who one chooses to vote for if they live in one. But I leaned that by 2002… Truth, but old truth, by now…
I read down through this thread specifically to see how long it would take for the “St. Ralph” throwaway line to draw out a seething spittle-emitting Nader apologist. Looks like it took about ten minutes. Surprisingly restrained, there.
The GOP is aided in these efforts by liberals’ addiction to defeatism and gloom. Any statements from the Romney camp about a last minute surge & etc will be breathlessly circulated throughout the progressive blogosphere as evidence that we’re DOOOOOOOMMMEEEDD!!!!!
Well, yeah. Liberals don’t really like to be giddy and breathlessly optimistic. Doom and gloom aside (which is a true and infuriating character flaw among dems), it creeps me out a little bit to see people blindly swallowing the cult if personality and forgetting what we’re hiring a man or woman hopefully soon to actually do. When it becomes an evangelistic fervor, things have gone awry in the most creepy way.
A familiar most creepy way. Now that Billy Graham has run full-page newspaper ads basically saying “Vote Romey for the sake of Jesus,” it really doesn’t seem like much of a stretch for the GOP to start handing out “God is with us” belt buckles.
Correction: Graham’s son (aka Grima Wormtongue) has run full-page ads abusing the name of his half-dead father.
Zathras; the eternal liberal.
Very sad life. Probably have very sad death. But, at least there is symmetry.
I quite enjoyed Sean Hannity explaining that the few horses we made use of in Afghanistan prove that Obama lost the debate and doesn’t understand the military.
Enjoyable, yes. Especially with that look of sincere earnestness on his douchy mug. Conservatives do eat their own poop.
The horse gap gravely jeopardizes our national security.
“President Obama thinks that we don’t need horses anymore. He wants to cut our horseback programs. Well, Mr. President, to that I SAY NEIGH!”
You’re inviting an argument with the “St. Ralph” stuff.
The Daily Tucker tried that shit too.
I think you pasted the wrong copy.
Whoops. Disregard the italicized bit…
For reasons unknown I’ve been getting a “Morning Jolt” email from National Review in my work inbox every day. It’s sort of a combination Taegan Goddard/538 type of thing for the epistemic closure crowd.
Today’s has a whopping 1/3 devoted to why Barack Obama is “desperate” and “bonkers” because of the bayonet thing.
The Daily Tucker and Haanity are in a ace to see who can be the bigger grifter. My money is on Hannity
But, War Horse was so touching!
Of course, given that President Obama explicitly said “fewer horses and bayonets,” I’m willing to entertain the possibility that he knows perfectly well that horses have still occasionally been useful. And if not, Joe Biden can always explain it to him from the same Biden Book of Afghanistan Facts that he beat that puling little dumbshit Ryan over the head with.
Yes, I believe the fix is in. Congrats to all those suppressing democracy. How do you sleep at night?
On a bed of vote fraudsters bused in from the big city.
Mine keep running away. Oh those fleet footed, t-bone steak fed urbans!
I tried sleeping on a pile of money, but it turns out that $658.22 isn’t a very thick pile. Converting it to pesos doesn’t even help.
“… you’re entitled to your math. I’m entitled to ‘the’ math.”
That was Karl Rove, six years ago tomorrow, attempting to convince Robert Siegel that Republicans would hold both Houses in spite of all available polling evidence.
I remember well their predictions about the House in 2006. Not only would the GOP keep the House, it would gain seats. Remember Rove’s “math”?
Jinx.
Hey, you must have posted while I was still writing mine. Great minds, etc.
He must have meant “meth”. Then it all becomes clear.
Scott, there’s also the facet of voter enthusiasm to contend with.
Republicans were never tied to Romney the way they were to Bush. Even McCain had more support coming out of the primaries, I suspect (particularly after he selected Palin).
The debate performances after Denver, including Ryan’s, have to be disheartening to the Republican voters (maybe not the base but you can’t account for insanity.)
By spinning a narrative of “They won three of four, but we won the debate arc on the whole” (I swear I heard Krauthammer say that Romney exceeded expectations, even last night!) they’re telling the base its ok to still believe.
Next they’ll be telling their base not to worry about what Romney says now, and point to his primary debates for his ‘real’ foreign policy, rather than the current incarnation that tracks more with obama’s than bush jr’s. Just a ruse, people, no need to worry about what he says so close to the election when he’s trying to convince mothers that their sons won’t have to serve multiple 16 month deployments in the parts of Iran that we hold.
bear in mind your comment about not being able to account for insanity.
dr. krauthammer lives in a world far removed from our petty, fact-filled one. in short, he’s barking mad, and has been for years.
Obama/Biden need a story, an issue, an ad, something, that punches Romney/Ryan in the gut.
Although they managed to rebound a bit from the first debate plus the hysterical overreaction, they haven’t really landed a hard punch that would put Romney/Ryan on the defensive.
This is remarkable given that there are several really big targets. Romney’s taxes, abandoned. Medicare vouchers, does anyone know this? Romney’s impossible tax & budget proposals, it’s all too hard to think about.
I don’t know why there isn’t a TV ad using graphs that show there the economy was when Obama took office and where it is now. Show the DOW, show jobs added, show unemployment, show housing starts. The lines all move in the same direction.
And everyone seems to have forgotten where the economy was in November 2008. Why didn’t anyone at Obama/Biden or the DNC remind them?
The Massachusetts Romney is so proud of didn’t like him enough to want him back. That might be worth mentioning.
I don’t think the Great American Heartland Voters care what those Massachusetts Commies think. They are more likely to consider their rejecting Romney as a positive.
It’s got to be something more “kitchen table” than that.
Not sure why I think it’s necessary, but while all this bitching about the Right Wing Noise Machine doesn’t mean that we’re losing, it does mean that we feel like we’re losing.
Why should that be so?
speak for yourself:
as far as i’m concerned, this has been a done deal since the republican clown car primaries, when they presented herman caine and newt gingrich as honest to god, actual presidential candidates. that gave the game away right there.
I’m not speaking for myself, I’m just making an observation. Neither Obama’s supporters nor his campaign are exactly radiating confidence in victory right now.
True, the confidence of the Romney team is that of a desperate salesman with a tell-tale tightening at the edges of his smile.
But there is no “This is out time!” or “We got this” feel to the campaign at this point.
We could use a touchdown.
It’s been suggested (Chait?) that Romney’s trying to suggest momentum and confidence to fire up the base (at the thought that they have a real shot at beating Obama) while Obama’s trying to suggest the possibility of losing to fire up the base (at the though that Mitt has a real chance).
This is remarkable given that there are several really big targets. Romney’s taxes, abandoned. Medicare vouchers, does anyone know this? Romney’s impossible tax & budget proposals, it’s all too hard to think about.
Not that remarkable when you consider that a very healthy chunk of the DC press corps strongly favors ravaging MedicareMedicaidSocialSecurity, “broadening the base” (i.e. raising taxes on the poor and middle class), and raking Obama over the coals for not adopting the sacred tablets brought to him by St. Erskine and St. Alan. Doing all this in order to show the parasitic Lucky Duckies that their luck’s just run out is a feature not a bug.
The silent and/or moral majority playbook will ever abide.
I started noticing this pattern in 2008:
1. Republicans make up something to say, because it is momentarily convenient for their passing political interest.
2. Every conservative in the country says that thing at exactly the same time.
3. The conservatives then turn around and believe the thing they just made up, because hey, it’s been confirmed by three or four sources they consider very credible (that is, the people who all started saying that thing at exactly the same time).
4. Conservative political figures begin basing their political strategy around the thing they just made up.
You left out
2a. Everyone in the corporate press/media repeats what conservatives are saying as if it were true or merely allows them to repeat it unchallenged on their shows.
I agree Romney is not ahead, and there is no evidence he has had any momentum since the second debate. But he is not “clearly behind”. The race surely is tight. The national polls are close eough that pretty much anything could happen. Maybe the electoral college math means Obama pulls it out even if Romney is ahead in the national popular vote, but maybe state polls are just lagging indicators.
The truth is no one really knows what will happen.
Since I was home sick today, I got to watch a bunch of the post-debate fervor. The right wingers they interviewed on MSNBC were frantically trying to sew together the shreds of their Apology Tour bullshit right in front of the cameras. It makes me laugh and also makes me really sad that they would cling for dear life to a lie that all but the true believers have dismissed. It was a fantastic little symbol of the entirety of romney’s political career.
I had the same reaction to the right-wing spinners, but I wonder why poor performances by Romney, two debates in a row, haven’t had a discernible impact on his standing in the polls.