Chris Floyd has an interesting piece at RedState on how the media can’t seem to find the many Gore voters turned Bush voters. The 9/11 Democrats aren’t all that hard to find, as the article and subsequent links made clear – unless you’re with the “mainstream” media, in which case they might as well be albino boll weevils in a cotton field.
And therein lies the problem for the media.
There’s the old story of how former New Yorker film critic Pauline Kael once exclaimed in 1972 “I donâ€™t know how Nixon could have been elected; nobody I know voted for him.” Like Kael, the liberal media, is, well, liberal. It exists within a comfortable bubble of liberalism in which everyone is as pissed off about Bush as they are. It’s a convenient reality distortion field that colors every aspect of the overwhelming majority of US media workers.
The problem being that if you’re going to offer objective analysis, you can’t do that will living in an insular ideological bubble. Yet that is precisely the way the media operates these days.
Certainly the flood of negativity has hurt Bush recently, and Bush’s poll numbers are well down from where they were. But Bush has yet to have his convention, and the debates are yet to come. It’s far too premature to say that Bush is down for the count. At the same time, one wonders how big a factor these 9/11 Democrats will be. Even if they represent only 1-2% of the electorate, that’s enough to swing a close race, but also a sufficiently small group that they would only register as a statistical blip in polls.
Certainly the Gore voter turned 9/11 Republican is hardly the mythological creature that the press would make it appear to be. It very well could be that the media will be sitting around on November 3 wondering how Bush won when no one in their ideological bubble voted for him.
UPDATE: Judith Weiss has more on the Voters That Shall Not Be Named….
UPDATE: VodkaPundit also notes that even Hollywood has gotten in on the act. Gary Oldman, Gary Sinise, James Woods, Dennis Miller, and Dennis Hopper have all said they’re Bush voters. Could it be that La-La Land is losing it’s loony liberalism?
OK, so probably not. But it’s still nice to see.
(And as an aside, James Woods has personally come face-to-face with Islamic terrorism. He may well have witnessed a dry run by the September 11 hijackers. One can easily see why such an experience would dramatically change one’s worldview.)
What’s interesting about the September 11 Democrats is that they may have radical disagreements with Bush on many other issues. They tend to be economically liberal and socially permissive. But when it comes to the War on Terrorism, they’re as hawkish as anyone. They probably don’t even give Bush a positive rating on many issues, except for the one that may well be Bush’s key to reelection.