I keep wondering what the “pundits” have to offer us when they managed to blow Tuesday Night’s coverage so badly. So insanely cued up to pick a “winner” and a “loser,” they failed to notice that the Alabama and Mississippi races were, for all practical intents and purposes a TIE.
Roughly 30 percent apiece and more or less an equal number of delegates when the smoke’s cleared.
Really? That’s the best you can do?
I suppose that after almost a year of non-stop GOP shop slop, the quaint notion that we don’t know a damned thing more than we knew last week (minus the “Must Win” and “Inevitability Narrative” phony yak-stories), comes as no surprise, and yet remains surprising to those who have spent the first fifteen minutes of every broadcast for the past year yakking about the GOPrexy Stakes, with only occasional stories about the owners and jockeys astride these seemingly antediluvian mounts.
In a year in which the syndicates backing the candidates are AT LEAST as interesting as the nags they’ve got their cash tied up with, is there anything new to learn about Santorum, Romney or Gingrich?
And if so, why aren’t they actually looking? No, it’s devolved into a political peep show, where you feed your quarters into the machine and dead, passionless industrial political porn comes sluicing out in five minute chunks.
But, sooner or later, perhaps they’ll tire of predicting the future and bother reporting on the present and the past.
I realize that reporting actual facts, rather than mere conjecture, is a little more difficult, but, haven’t we heard every science-fiction scenario already? And what’s wrong with actually allowing events to unfold? Were reality safe and predictable, we’d have no need for reporters.
Here’s a blast from the past to look into
There was no “winner” and no “loser” in Alabama or Mississippi. Not in any practical or “real” sense.
It was just a tie.