Too often, especially among reporters covering a presidential campaign, we first see “pack” journalism, followed at some point by “against the grain” journalism. When it comes to John Kerry’s prospects, we’re apparently just starting to see the latter. It couldn’t come at a better time.
“Pack” journalism has reporters scrambling to be on the same page as all of their colleagues. “Everyone” is saying Kerry’s campaign is in disarray, the media explained in early-September, so his chances of winning are remote. The race, we were told, may very well be slipping away.
Eventually, reporters get tired of a narrative and become anxious to question the conventional wisdom. If nearly every story since August has said that Kerry’s in trouble, reporters start itching to say the opposite.
This cannot, of course, get crafted out of whole cloth. Even when reporters want to challenge the conventional wisdom, they need something to go on to make their pitch seem salient. In the case of Kerry’s “comeback,” there’s plenty:
* Kerry has a bunch of new and brilliant Clinton-era staffers
* Most polls show Bush’s post-convention bounce dissipating
* Kerry’s hitting Bush where it counts — Iraq
* The reality is Iraq is making Bush appear ineffective, incompetent, and out of touch
* Kerry’s known as a great “closer”
All of this comes together to shift a campaign’s momentum and generate stories like this one.
Aides to John F. Kerry are suggesting that the Massachusetts senator has turned a corner with newly aggressive attacks on Bush’s Iraq policies. It may be too early to declare that he has, but Kerry appeared more confident on the campaign trail this week in framing his differences with Bush on Iraq, and some Democrats believe he has weathered what could have become a decisive moment in the presidential contest.
“Ten days ago, we were at a huge fork in the road,” said Democratic pollster Geoffrey Garin. “This could have become 1988 [when Bush’s father took control over Michael S. Dukakis shortly after Labor Day] and was a real moment of danger for the Kerry campaign. In a lot of ways, he’s survived it and we’re back to a very competitive race again.”
The shift prompted the Boston Globe’s Scot Lehigh to argue today this is the beginning of a surge that may ultimately take Kerry to the White House.
This week, John Kerry got laryngitis but found his voice. And if Kerry rebounds to win the presidency, this period will be seen as the public turning point in the campaign.
That transformation started on Monday, when Kerry abandoned his previous self-protective process position on Iraq and attacked four of the president’s central claims about the war: that it is instrumental to the battle against terrorism, that it has made America safer, that things in Iraq are on the right track, and that it would have been worth fighting even knowing that Saddam Hussein had neither weapons of mass destruction nor collaborative ties to Al Qaeda.
Having laid out his arguments in powerful terms in his New York University speech, the Democratic nominee followed it up with an effective critique after the president addressed the United Nations on Tuesday.
Here’s the best indication that Kerry has finally decided to drive a stake in the ground on Iraq. Kerry’s campaign knew that, in response to Kerry’s speech, the Bush-Cheney team would immediately redouble its assault on Kerry as an inveterate flip-flopper.
The candidate, however, waved away those concerns.
“I don’t care. I am not going to sit and listen to Bush not face reality,” Kerry said, according to one adviser.
So, with just 39 days until voters head to the polls, a handful of reporters (for now) are starting to note that Kerry has turned things around, the worst is behind him, he has a focused message and has “found his voice,” new staffers have him on track, etc. All of this has the benefit of being true, which should boost the chances that it’ll become the new and improved conventional wisdom.
Something to look out for.