Did anyone notice this trend among mediocre journalists/analysts?

[ochazuke]

It goes like this:

                                First Debate   Second   Third
Immediately after the debate:    A draw      A draw     A draw
A few days after the debate:     Kerry adv.  Bush adv.  Kerry blunder
A week after the debate          Kerry win   Kerry win
Two weeks after the debate:      Kerry blowout

It looks like they want to play it ultra safe and call them a draw no matter what, then wait to see how the spin is going and pile on that. Then, (surprise) the truth starts to assert itself (not sure why) and a week or two later, the verdict that any good debate scorer would come to seeps into their statements.

What's galling is that they say "Kerry won the first two debates, but..." and never mention that such a statement was their first acknowledgment that that Kerry had done that.

[RobertSeattle]

1. And on 11/3 - I KNEW Kerry was going to win all along

[liberalmuse]

2. Well, if a guy is standing in front of Americans...

buck raving naked, it's hard to keep spinning that he has clothes on. Kerry did an excellent job and his mere presence and demeanor countered all of Roves lies about him in the previous months. He also didn't dispute any of Bush's colossal lies. He let them hang in the air and bided his time until the DNC and the news orgs could dig up contradictory tape and play it over and over again. Brilliant!

I also think places like DU, blogs like Daily Kos and Eschaton, and yes, the DNC have been a huge factor in countering the spin.

[Jade Fox]

3. Yes, so obviously playing it safe with the "draw" nonsense.