In the Arena

On Boycotts

First, congratulations to Barack Obama for dropping out of the Congressional Black Caucus Institute-Fox News debate. With John Edwards already out, that means this sordid event is over…Back in 2004, I remember raising an eyebrow or two when it was announced that Fox would sponsor a debate in partnership with the CBC, of all groups. Roger Ailes’ strategy seemed classic: For the dimwitted, Fox would seem high-minded and civil rights oriented…for everyone else, Fox would provide a high-profile podium for Democrats to pander to one of the party’s most myopic interest groups.

Actually, I’m opposed to all these special interest group debates–and while it was a good move by Howard Dean to limit the Dems to one officially sanctioned debate per month, it would have been a better move to tell groups like the CBC and Naral and AARP that Democratic candidates would not appear at their forums this year.

And finally, it is said that the new generation of liberal activists are more skeptical about the Democrats’ special interest freight train than we Baby Boomers have been. I hope that’s true, especially when it comes to “identity” interest groups, like the Black Caucus. A few years ago, I suggested that the CBC should disband itself and reform as the “Poor People’s” caucus, inviting in any white or Hispanic member who had significant numbers of poor people in his or her district. Still think that’s a good idea.

As for that other boycott: I’m not a big Imus fan. I’m usually reading the papers when his show is on–and so I’ve been mystified why this has become such a popular spouting place for politicians. The few times I’ve listened to or appeared on Imus, he didn’t seem all that devastatingly hilarious. And what he said about the Rutgers women’s basketball team was deeply unfunny. But he has apologized–and I have a rule about these sorts of things: Any story that gives Al Sharpton airtime–I’m staring at him right now on CNN–has probably gone on too long. There is one very effective way to boycott Imus: don’t turn him on.
And while we’re talking about who should and should not be on the air, I’ve got lots more time for Imus than, say, Glenn Beck–who Time Warner, my corporate parent, puts on the air for the edification of civilization. Imus has proven over the years that he can and will read books. Not so sure about Beck.

Related Topics: Uncategorized
  • Latest on Swampland

    Why Romney Is Dodging the Press

    Joe, the Romney campaign’s control-freakery makes for bad democracy, but I suspect it’s a smart strategy. Consider the way Mitt’s personal approval rating has bounced back over the past several weeks. As the GOP primaries wrapped up, Romney was roughly as unpopular as late-era George W. Bush. Now he’s about even with Barack Obama.

    Since becoming the presumptive Republican nominee, Romney’s favorable-unfavorable rating has jumped to 50%-41%, his best ever and in the same neighborhood as Obama’s 52%-46% standing.

    What changed? Well, for one thing, other Republican rivals are no longer attacking Romney. That helps. But it’s not like he’s had a free ride: the Obama camp has picked up where Rick and Newt left off. An alternate explanation would be that Americans are simply seeing less of Romney, and that makes them like him better.

    For Obama, gay marriage stance born of a long evolutionHuffPost Politics

    Crossroads, Super PACs and the Incumbent Advertising Gap

    In a recent piece about the Obama-Romney ad wars, Michael Scherer made the smart point that this election is different from past ones in that the incumbent no longer gets a free hit on his rival during the period immediately following the primary. The reason: super PACs have the cash to cover that gap while the challenger collects enough general election funds to keep pace.

blog comments powered by Disqus