How is it that an election that should be a slam dunk in the Democrat's favor could possibly be going the way the polls claim it is? It's true that with each Bush fuckup the media tends to get quickly bored, even after an initial flurry of attention (is anyone even talking about Abu Ghraib anymore?). But Kerry / Edwards should be picking up each and every one of these stories and hammering them home. I mean, this stuff is gold! A stolen election, a superstitious and inept commander-in-chief, a war based on lies, a rising casualty list, a perversion of language that would shock even Orwell, etc., ad nauseum.
Siva Vaidhyanathan recently suggested that the Killian memos (assuming they turn out to be forgeries) could actually have been planted by the Bush campaign. I'll take that suspicion to a ridiculous extreme and wonder aloud if Bush isn't somehow getting Kerry to take a dive in this election. That's a completely outlandish idea, I admit, but at the moment it's no more outlandish to me than the idea that Bush could actually be ahead.
Of course, there's also the question of how reliable the polls actually are.
No comments:
Post a Comment