Tuesday, July 15, 2008

It's a Crouere summer (part III: director's cut) 

In early June, Jeff Crouere wrote a Bayou Buzz column titled "Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton: Democrats Pick The Weak This Week":

Despite the political disadvantages from his party, McCain now has the advantage going in to the fall election.

If he was facing Hillary Clinton in the fall election, McCain would be the underdog. Facing Barack Obama, McCain is the favorite.
...
The only way for Obama to win in the fall will be to invite Clinton to join the ticket. An Obama-Clinton ticket would be a powerful political force and would insure victory for the Democrats in the fall... Despite the political advantages, due to the political fireworks between the two, a political marriage is unlikely. Thus, expect a McCain victory this fall.

That's pretty clear. Crouere believes Obama is doomed to lose unless Hillary is on the ticket. Obama is too "weak" to beat Str8 Tawlk, so we can "expect a McCain victory this fall".

However, this week Crouere writes another column about the presidential race. He begins by identifying some longstanding political dynamics (none of which have changed significantly since his last column).

U.S. Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) has received the benefit of a fawning media... He has been receiving hundreds of millions of dollars in donations and will be able to outspend his opponent U.S. Senator John McCain... The incumbent Republican President is extremely unpopular due to worries about the economy and the war. The housing industry is in a depression, the oil crisis is getting worse and the Republicans are taking the blame. So, Obama is well positioned to take advantage of anger with the incumbent and the party in power. Republicans have controlled the White House for two terms and voters seem to like changing the political power structure on Pennsylvania Avenue every eight years.

Crouere puts these obvious political dynamics together, and radically changes his view from a month ago:

Yet despite his significant financial and political advantages, Obama and McCain are tied in the latest Rasmussen poll. The race is a toss-up even though Obama is a great speaker and McCain is not very good in front of a microphone. The amazing thing is that this race is even a contest... Obama should be ahead by double digits and should cruise to victory.

When and more importantly "WHY" did Obama suddenly become the favorite over the past month, in Crouere's view? What changed? Why is it "amazing" that the race is a contest when McCain was "expected" to win unless Obama took Hillary for veep?

Crouere offers no explanation for the change in his position. He simply identifies more longstanding political trends that he surely was aware of last month:

The GOP has been in disarray for years and the losses in the 2006 mid-term elections were followed by embarrassing losses in special congressional elections. Voters are tired of the Republican Party and want a change.

Did he just realize this?

To say the least, McCain is very fortunate to be in this game at this point.

Wait-- all of a sudden, that's the "least" Crouere can say? Huh? Crouere's turned his evaluation of McCain's chances inside out, and that's the "least" he can say?

Actually, no. I think a professional political analyst/pundit like Jeff Crouere needs to say more. Much more. Why is McCain no longer a lead pipe cinch to win? Why is he suddenly a long shot, who is "very fortunate to be in [the] game"? Crouere should tell us why his earlier column was so flawed, or explain what unforeseen conditions occurred during the past month that made him radically alter his political handicapping.

However, instead of explaining his new position, Crouere simply concludes:

[McCain] needs to energize his disillusioned conservative supporters while still working to bring on independent and moderate voters.... Don’t be surprised to see McCain choose the Louisiana Governor to give the Republican ticket a much better chance of victory this fall.

I see: A month ago Obama couldn't beat McCain without Hillary. Now, suddenly, McCain needs Jindal to greatly improve his chances for victory.

That's too funny.

-- McCain's the favorite (slap) McCain's the longshot (slap) He's the favorite (slap) the longshot...

-- I said I want the truth!

-- He's the favorite and the longshot.
...
-- Forget it Jake, it's Croueretown.

My election predictions here still hold. I'll say more about them in the coming weeks and months. There's no hurry. But, should my analysis and predictions change, I will respect my readers enough to tell them why they changed.

As for Bobby Jindal being McCain's veep selection, I've been surprised how the pro-Jindal chatter has ratcheted up again in recent days. I just can't see it happening for the reasons I listed here (among many others). To me, it's unthinkable. But I would so love to be wrong on this one. (All of Jindal's apparent strengths will actually turn into weaknesses for the GOP ticket during the national vetting process.)
---
Flashback: Here's Part I and Part II. of YRHT's "Crouere Summer" series.



---
*

Labels: , , ,

8 comments DiggIt! Del.icio.us

8 Comments:

I agree that Jindal wouldn't make a good VP, not at this point. He should finish his term here in Louisiana at least. WIth a successful gubernatorial term under his belt, he'd be better positioned to go onto the national stage.

Of course, if Obama finished a term or two as Senator, he'd be better positioned to go on the national stage. Right now he's an untested leader, unsure of himself and his platform. He simply doesn't have the seasoning necessary to be a creditable president.

By Anonymous PawPaw, at 12:53 PM  

I think Paw Paw just said Obama would make an incredible President.

By Blogger jeffrey, at 1:09 PM  

The Republican Party has problems because the actions needed to energize the base are becoming repellant to the independents required to get a majority of the vote.

By Anonymous joejoejoe, at 4:25 PM  

Crouere is the dullest partisan hack in the Republican shed. I can't stand his smug repetition of talking points as though he's saying something original. Which is why I'm glad to see that someone's kicking his ass on the ringside mat.

By Anonymous Schroeder, at 4:28 PM  

Chad Rogers we blah enough at last year's RISING TIDE. Let's not make the mistake of thinking Crouer would be more interesting or entertaining.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:54 PM  

Dude, what's the obsession with 1983?

"What songs represent 1983 (or thereabouts) to you?" On Monday

"Cruel Summer" on Tuesday? Is this your way of answering your own question?

By Blogger bayoustjohndavid, at 9:24 PM  

The answer is easy he is a talking head and as to fill time and space with his words, not his viewpoint (though it is supposed to be) and so he and all the other on both the right and left bleat away just to make noise. what are they? just that, noise. the signify nothing

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:21 AM  

"Dude, what's the obsession with 1983?"

Actually, Monday's post prompted me to check the date of that song, I was amused to find out it was 1983, too.

By Blogger oyster, at 9:44 AM