Where Was I?

There’s a store here in DC running a really fun sale.

Buy a pair of shoes. Tell a joke. Get the second pair free.

It doesn’t even have to be a good joke. I asked. It rarely is.

But they still hold the promo twice a year anyway.

I like it.

Trading something fun for something funky.

Apologies for the radio silence yesterday. I left for NYC at 6am and didn’t get back here until after 11pm.

It was a long day. Mostly productive. Definitely educational.

I have it on decent authority that TV news divisions are suffering a significant cash crunch.

Too many channels? Not enough quality content? Internet the new BMOC? Consumer apathy?

Just breakfast for thought.

I know Paul. I like Paul. A lot. He’s a solid guy.

When he recounts this saga, I trust this is exactly how it went down.

First off, John’s got a nice roundup here of online progressive reaction to last night’s results. The common thread seems to be a “blame the media for a backlash” analysis. However, I’ve got a slightly different take.

Here I go being all pundity again. I can’t help it. Indulge me.

I just don’t think cable news has that much power. I think the plugged in online crowd often overestimates the amount of time invested by the average voter. People not in politics or writing about politics or somehow connected to politics have more important personal priorities. Like baseball practice and piano lessons and getting a meal on the table. Knowing what I do about cable ratings, it’s unlikely Chris Matthews – or any cable anchor for that matter – turned the tide of an entire primary. It’s just not logical.

This could be too esoteric, but I’d add Clinton struck a nerve when she started to passionately explain her commitment and experience. Not because she welled up and garnered a sympathy vote – although some dipsh*t is bound to make that assumption – but because she started to sound human. And she spoke to a common experience too many people have encountered.

Getting passed up for the gig even though you’re more qualified.

She hit the nail on the head when she fired up Saturday night, and she drove it home over the following 48 hours.

This isn’t a race thing or a gender thing. It’s a human thing. More often than not, style trumps substance. Clinton may have tapped into a latent frustration with fluff. Not to say that Obama isn’t possibly an excellent choice for the Democratic nomination, but Clinton’s power lies in her having learned the trade. She feels she’s put in the time. She’s paid some dues. She’d like to collect.

Maybe reminding voters there’s an actual job at the end of the marathon gave her the lead this leg. Maybe. We’ll see if it sticks.

Bonus: Give yourself 10 points if you catch the Broadcast News analogy at play.

UPDATE: James has got a good post about possible explanations for last night’s outcome:

ALL OF THE ABOVE? NONE OF THE ABOVE?

In social science, looking for a single variable to explain outcomes tends to be problematic. Likely, it was a combination of the above factors, and quite probably some not listed, that explains what happened yesterday.

What do you think?

OK, one more: MK has a funny explanation:

Sounds like grown-up voters came home to Hillary instead of getting caught up in Obama-mania. Or, as my colleague Amanda posits: “All the young people went to the Obama victory party and were too busy drinking to vote. Kinda like a really awesome tailgate where you forget to go to the game.” Heh, I know that feeling.

Count on Wikipedia to bring some unexpected humor from time to time.

Because it’s the “online encyclopedia that anyone can edit,” just about everyone with a fraction – and only a fraction – of a brain cell thinks it’s hysterical to edit in fake info. Talk to Brian Chase, various Congressional staffers, or the anonymous Chris Benoit editor about why this is such a bad idea.

In any case, it still happens, and Wikipedia’s taken to locking down high profile entries to slow and/or stop the inevitable.

But stuff still slips by. And the one I found today is pretty good.

My friend Chez wrote a scathing – albeit dead-on and hysterical – condemnation of fired Philly anchor Alycia Lane. After rereading his post for, like, the third time, I decided to search for the email Rich Eisen’s wife wrote to Lane when Lane sent the married man bikini photos. I remembered reading it back in May but was curious to see it again.

I found it here, but then went to Wikipedia to see what more there was to know about Miss BadJudgment, and I came across this nugget:

Background

Lane, a native of Lake Grove, New York, on Long Island, is of Puerto Rican descent on her mother’s side and Welsh descent on her father’s. Lane’s credentials include a Master’s Degree in Broadcast Journalism from the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University, an undergraduate degree from the State University of New York at Albany where she graduated with honors, and two ample breasts. She is a member of the National Association of Hispanic Journalists and speaks fluent Spanish.

bold emphasis mine

teehee

UPDATE: In the time it took me to compile this post, someone went in and fixed the entry. Wikipedia editors can be zippy like that. But because the site is completely transparent, you can also still see where the goofy addition used to be.

I wake to radio each morning. Sometimes it’s NPR. Sometimes WTOP. Lately, it’s been C-SPAN for the sheer entertainment factor.

a) They’ve got some trouble getting it together technology-wise
and
b) Their callers tend to sound six shades of crazy

It’s a good reminder not to overestimate the power of common sense. Case in point, the guy on now is rooting for Giuliani. Because no one else has “his kind of background.” I kid you not.

I’m looking forward to seeing how the day – and the day’s coverage – shakes out.

Someone. Please.

I had a copay jump from $21.72 to $70 on the same RX just 30 days apart.

I’ve got to find out why, but I’m dreading the call. I suspect it has something to do with a deductible, but I’m not convinced enough to let it go.

The whole system’s so sick. In fact, if you know someone truly working to make it better, I’ll drop everything and join the crusade tomorrow.

I’d say today, but we both know this phone call to medco’s going to drain my afternoon.

UPDATE: In the interest of honest disclosure, the call actually took no time at all, and I discovered it was a deductible issue. However, my offer still stands re: mending the mess.

I preface this post by reiterating my reporting does not imply an endorsement of one candidate or another. Trend observations and analyses should be taken on face value.

Now, that said, here’s where online video’s going to favor Obama:

He’s arguably the most charismatic and inspirational public speaker we’ve seen in a long time. Clinton (Bill not Hillary) is brilliant and natural and nothing if not convincing, but Obama conveys a sense of passion reminiscent of the voices behind great movements. And now, in the day and age of Youtube, you don’t have to see him in person to get it. He translates. And all it takes is one energized college kid to pass the video on to his friends, and Obama’s got himself a congregation of tech-savvy supporters.

We know the takedown power of viral video. That concept’s still in play. But we’d be remiss to ignore the boost candidates stand to gain through the medium as well.

Hillary’s heated response (heated being the Youtube title) re: change from Saturday night’s debate is one of the week’s most viewed clips so far. How you interpret the soundbite is up to you. You either see her as combative or confident, but either way, you see her in a vacuum, and you are left to formulate your own interpretation. No anchor intro. No pundit translation. For better or worse, it works to get the word out in a new, more fluid forum.

And in this context, I agree that change is good.

We just came up with the best Strip Club name ever:

Hubba Boobba

(you’re SO going to remember this at some point tomorrow and laugh out loud)

ABC news just featured their “Internet Reporter” who reported pure crap.

Ron Paul’s supporters rule the online world. You can’t report online polls (like ABC’s debate-related Facebook polls) without noting that Ron Paul’s supporters heavily outweigh others. The “results” mean nothing. They are an indication of nothing.

According to Facebook, Ron Paul appeared the most presidential. Shocker.

George Stephanopoulos just reported that people are passionate about the economy BASED on a Facebook poll clearly manipulated by Ron Paul supporters.

For the record, I’m not knocking the Ron Paul peeps. I give them credit. They have proven their power once again. They’ve convinced the naive that their views speak for the whole of Republican voters. Or at least according to ABC.