Super Monday

After complaining that John Edwards was too polite in the last debate, media parrotheads started complaining that he got too aggressive in Sunday's one hour scour, ruined his good guy image, seemed desperate and may have lost his spot as v.p. in the process. Give the guy a break. He tried the I'm an Outsider card, a proven loser this year, probably to convince Howard Dean people to work for him on election day in the Super Tuesday states where Deaniacs have some sort of presence. But he gave Kerry the perfect opportunity for a very clear comeback, asking him if he thought the country could be changed from Washington. Yes, Kerry said, because that's where the Congress is and where the White House is.

The entertainment value was a little different this time, with everybody fighting with the questioners as much as with each other. But this debate is very unlikely to have any effect on tomorrow's voting. It was held on Sunday morning, 11 a.m. on the East Coast, when mostly political addicts and reporters are watching. Not more than a handful of people in California probably saw it, since it was either on too early or was rebroadcast during the Oscars. And the soundbites were mostly Kerry's. Though Edwards again showed some skill at quickly and efficiently communicating the heart of the matter.

Kerry got some Ohio and New York newspaper endorsements on Sunday, and the San Francisco Chronicle this morning. These endorsements tend to say what the voters have said: yes, Edwards is a smart and articulate guy, maybe a more attractive candidate (to some), but he is not ready to be president. Kerry is.

The latest polls show no indication of Edwards' famous last minute closing; the trend in Georgia is towards Kerry. Kerry's lead in New York, California and Ohio is hefty. Maryland is looking good, and the New England states are solid. The only poll done in Minnesota so far was by the Kerry campaign, and it showed a formidable Kerry lead there as well, but it's a caucus state so polls are dodgy. Still, we see Kerry winning 7 states by 20 points or more, and 3 states by no less than 10 points, for a total of them all.

If it is this lopsided, then Edwards really will have to think about dropping out, or face the possible humiliation of losing to Kerry in the south next week. He'll be under a lot of pressure to do so, because the Dems don't want to risk the opposite possibility of Kerry doing well everywhere but in the south, when it's clear he'll be the nominee and Edwards can't possibly overtake him. But if Kerry does face him down in the south, then he'd be that much stronger---but Edwards wouldn't have much of a future in the party anymore.

The danger for Kerry is that he's now expected to win all 10 and win big. That sets a pretty low bar for Edwards. The only other storyline on Tuesday night's coverage is to jump on any sign that Edwards isn't being pulverized everywhere.

Why does this matter? It's a good idea to try figuring out how the media parrotheads operate, because in anything like a close or difficult race, their attitude towards candidates can shape the campaign. The media despised Al Gore, and so they joyfully grabbed every lie and self-serving characterization the Bushies gave them. Certain of them (like the Howard Fineman/Gloria Borgia crew at CNBC) seem ready to do it to Kerry this year. But voters so far this year have been operating with their own dynamic, and the bobbleheads have been trying to adapt their patter. But they can't quite keep from spraying their cynicism everywhere. The interaction of candidates, party, voters and media will decide this campaign, and the election will decide nothing less than the forseeable future.