It is now painfully clear that the punditry - from Fox News to CNN, and passing through Politico and Slate, do not really get it. The reason is that the mainstream pundits are hacks, superficial little hacks, who lack intellectual inquisitiveness and depth for understanding social issues, politics, or even History. How else can you explain how they greatly underestimate this son of a black man from Kenya, and a white woman from Kansas?
This lack of touch between pundits and voters has been evident since the beginning. Witness how Fox News, conservative radio-talk shows, and other conservative bloggers provided constant reminders that McCain was not conservative enough, that he was a closeted liberal. Even Coulter said she would support Clinton if McCain was the nominee. The result? Giuliani and Romney - the darlings of the conservatives got thrashed by McCain. And Fox News et al. had to roll-over, flip-flop, and bow to their new Republican master. Isn't that right Sean and Bill?
And then came Wright-gate and Bitter-gate. Obama they said, was toast. No way, he would recover from that. But he managed to turn a negative into a positive, heads-on. This guy cannot be swift-boated, because he does not let the punditry define him. Elitist? How on earth can they pull this off? An African-American with a single-white mother who just paid his college loans recently?
The month of March was very revealing. We found out that Obama has a jaw of titanium, in fact, you swift-boat him, he will turn that into an opportunity. Clinton is a shameless liar. To me, her Bosnia lie (said at least three times!) is incredibly damaging - why do pundits keep on saying she just exaggerated? Isn't this plain fraud? And witness how Obama has not used this against her - and why? Because what Obama has been saying all along: that he will not use any attack that Republicans can use against her if she wins the nomination. I also love Richardson's story about how Obama helped him during the debate, when he was just one of several contenders against inevitable Clinton. You can see who has real character when the stakes are high.
Equally worrying is McCain, who was ridiculed by the foreign press for having no clue about Shiahs and Sunnis, and how they relate to Al Qaeda and Iran. How can people still say that McCain has any foreign policy experience? About now everyone should know these basic facts about Iraq and the region. Yet, pundits still continue with the same narrative that he is somehow experienced. Obama's interview in 2002, shows that he has a clear grasp of foreign affairs.
By every objective measure, Obama is the best candidate. Yet the punditry is caught in its own narrative. But this time we have a candidate who is defining himself and his candidacy, and who shows a well deserved middle-finger to the punditry and their rules of patriotism and outrage.
Obama will win the general election. Expect a bump once he gets the nomination, and another one when he trashes McCain in debates.