Tuesday, November 04, 2003

Reuters issued a curious piece of bias this morning under the headline “Mayoral Races May Hold Clues for 2004 Elections”. I read the article, fully expecting a balanced analysis portending next November’s White House race. Instead, I was treated to two profiles of Democratic candidates, each polling far ahead of Republican opponents in cities that are traditionally Democratic. First up, Philadelphia incumbent mayor John Street, who is riding the crest of a popular wave heading into today's vote after accusing the White House and Justice Dept. of orchestrating a conspiracy to discredit him. Next came Gavin Newsom, the San Francisco Democratic mayoral candidate, who’s described as a “moderate” in the article despite glowing endorsements from left-wing stalwarts Nancy Pelosi and Dianne Feinstein. He’s a full 20 points ahead of his Republican challenger in the latest poll numbers.

I re-read the article twice, thinking I had missed something. But, my search for the “clues” to next year’s federal race was fruitless. I ended up wasting an extra 5 minutes perusing a puff piece about Democratic candidates running strongly in Democratic strongholds.

Is this article another case of journalistic wishful thinking or just plain cluelessness? Go back and read about the “close” California gubernatoral race the newswires were gushing about just hours before Arnold blew Gray Davis away by double digits. Do you see a pattern here?


Post a Comment

<< Home