If
an Invisible Primary happens without media coverage, did it happen at all?
Of
course not!
They
say that the most dangerous place in Washington is in between a politician
thinking about running for president and a camera (“Look at ME!”). You add to
that the fact that the Washington media elite love nothing more than a good
prognostication horse race, and you have ample media coverage of the Invisible
Primary. Since the pundits began eying the 2016 contenders right around the
time Karl Rove blew his Election Night gasket on Fox News, this blog will also pay close attention to the way the
media cover those who wake up in the morning, look in the mirror, and
optimistically say: “Good Morning, Mr. (Mrs.) President.”
This
past week included a serious number of media mentions about the 2016 hopeful
class: outgoing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton wept, lectured, and waved
her hands angrily about Benghazi (proving she can show a wide range of
emotions); Sen. Rand Paul opined that were he president, Madam Secretary would
have been removed from her post (really Sen. Paul: You can stop worrying about
this particular hypothetical); and Gov. Bobby Jindal called his own party
“stupid” in order to show that he is smart. Let the Invisible Primary soothsaying
begin!
In
the case of Secretary Clinton, the media framing was (as is usually the case)
bifurcated along ideological lines. Depending on your selection of network or newspaper,
she was either lionized as passionate and articulate or, alternatively, denounced
as shrill and defensive. It was interesting to see how many of the majors used
three clips from Hillary (sorrowful, explanatory, livid) juxtaposed with clips
from her GOP opponents, specifically Sens. Paul and Johnson (disappointment,
disbelief, denial), as “balance”. These clip-collections made one specific
argument, no matter which party-tinted news outlet you were on: Hillary wants
to be seen as leadership material and the GOP isn’t buying it. If the 2008
narrative was that Presidential Hopeful Hillary was lacking in empathy and
warmth, this performance aimed its guns at that perspective. The only thing
missing was the delivery of her stand-up blue material. And if there was any thought that the
Republican Party would re-evaluate her after a generally well-received
performance as Sec State, we can dismiss that idea outright. Yep. They still
hate her.
Meanwhile,
as Gov. Jindal tried to situate himself as the leader of the Republican Party,
the media were right there to report on his progress. Coming back from the “he
sounds just like Kenneth the Page from ‘30
Rock’” claim after his 2009 SOTU response, Jindal wants to position himself
as a serious politico, someone with the savvy, chops, and timbre to take on the
most significant issues of the day. But since the media generally do not like
to deal with significant issues, Jindal was quoted extensively about the future
of the GOP. Since the Party is (apparently, and much like the Washington
Capitals) in a state of confused reorganization, 2016 hopefuls on the right have
stepped up to try and claim the mantle of responsibility. It was no coincidence
that in many accounts of Jindal’s speech, the name “Chris Christie” was
mentioned as well.
As
the Invisible Primary continues, so too will the stories that frame the
arguments about the contenders and the issues of the day. I cannot wait for
CPAC this year: I predict BIG mentions for Marco Rubio, Scott Walker and Nikki
Haley. Look at me – with all this forecasting, I could be a member of the
Washington media elite! Nah – let’s look at them instead.
Jindal missed his "Chris Christie moment" during the BP Oil Spill and he will forever be remembered for the State of the Union rebuttal. I also wonder why no media outlet mentioned the handling of Susan Rice compared to the lionization of Hillary Clinton. Rice merely provided talking points while Hillary Clinton is head of the Agency. I can only imagine the media narrative had Susan Rice yelled back at the panel and banged the table like Hillary did. My guess is Rice fell on her sword to protect Hillary's 2016 hopes and the media played along for the same reasons you mention...they love a horse race. The show must go on.
ReplyDelete