Pundit speculations concerning who benefits from Warner's withdrawal

[Mass]

from the 08 race.

It will be Edwards. No it will be Bayh. No it will be Obama. It will be Gore. It will be Richarson. It will be Clinton... (sorry, I do not have all the reference, but I have seen all these different speculations since yesterday in different columns - Obama comes from the Hotline).

:crazy:

One constant. According to pundits, Kerry is not the one who will benefit from it.

:shrug:

Given the incredible record from these pundits who yesterday were still considering Warner as a very serious candidate with a serious chance to win the nomination, only one conclusion:

This is good for Kerry.

[sandnsea]

1. They ALL avoid mentioning Kerry

The proverbial elephant in the living room, except not that kind of elephant. Kerry's the one to beat and they all know it.

[MBS]

8. EXACTLY right n/t

[karynnj]

2. Strange also that they think someone will gain

in DC he had a large chunk of the pundits' votes. He never polled above 5% that I know of - so where does he have support that will go elsewhere. It looked here like the air came out of the small balloon months ago, after people ignored the initial hype.

[fedupinBushcountry]

3. Don't you love it

how pundits include Obama. I mean please, I like him, but he is not ready for the presidency. Also you know I'm tired of all the Edwards talk, you would never think that he also was on the same ticket as Kerry who they say over and over again lost. I'm sick of pundits and polls off with their heads. :sarcasm: I say we take the pundits and pollsters down. Kerry '08.

[karynnj]

4. I wonder if pundits will have less and less impact on Democrats

because so many people think most of them aren't on our side. Of those identified with us, the vast majority have a link to the previous administration - which makes them obviously biased with Hillary running.

Now, Olberman is the most trusted - clearly Kerry could get along with a guy who used to be a sports person and who is an independent thinker - he may be the pundit to get.

[fedupinBushcountry]

5. My brother is in the media in N.Y.

and a few days after the '04 election he told me outright that the media was going to push Hillary, he was right. He covered Hillary during her first Senate run and was on the campaign trail with her reporting he did not like her at all.

[karynnj]

6. I'm not surprised, Clinton was trashing Kerry within a week

But, remember the media wasn't able to sell Lieberman, Clark or Edwards - all of whom they tried. Kerry got good coverage only as he won primaries. Even then, they fought giving him credit - in fact it was obvious he was going to win on the first multi-state day.

[beachmom]

9. He only got good coverage because they had no choice

When Rasmussen showed up in Iowa and gave that incredible story and Kerry was emotional, it was just the moment of the primaries. Joe Klein in his book said it was "suspicious" that Rasmussen showed up when he did. That's the pundits for you -- nothing is real and genuine -- it HAD to be staged.

After that they pushed the phony meme -- total B.S. -- and the rest is history.

[fedupinBushcountry]

10. One little correction

his name is Rassman, at first I thought you were talking about the polling people. Klein is an ass. I watched that happen and nothing was staged. They use to have the video at C-Span but it is gone now.

[beachmom]

11. Thanks. I knew I wasn't spelling it right, but hoped you guys

knew who I was talking about.

[karynnj]

12. If it was staged Kerry deserves on Oscar

He was very clearly emotionally touched by the reunion. It was a made for TV moment. If Kerry were a media favorite, how often in the last week of the campaign would they have included it in some summary.

[politicasista]

7. I agree

I have been hearing that it could be Clark and/or Edwards. (DUH! Have to remember that the blogsphere isn't the real world:crazy: ).


I agree, Kerry is still a threat and they are afraid of him.