Reader's Favorites
Media Casualties Mount

Administration Split On Europe Invasion

Administration In Crisis Over Burgeoning Quagmire

Congress Concerned About Diversion From War On Japan

Pot, Kettle On Line Two...

Allies Seize Paris

The Natural

Gore Book Sales Tank, Supporters Claim Unfair Tactics

Satan Files Lack Of Defamation Suit

Why This Blog Bores People With Space Stuff

A New Beginning

My Hit Parade
Instapundit (Glenn Reynolds)
Tim Blair
James Lileks Bleats
Virginia Postrel
Kausfiles
Winds Of Change (Joe Katzman)
Little Green Footballs (Charles Johnson)
Samizdata
Eject Eject Eject (Bill Whittle)

Space
Alan Boyle (MSNBC)
Space Politics (Jeff Foust)
Space Transport News (Clark Lindsey)
NASA Watch
NASA Space Flight
Hobby Space
A Voyage To Arcturus (Jay Manifold)
Dispatches From The Final Frontier (Michael Belfiore)
Personal Spaceflight (Jeff Foust)
Mars Blog
The Flame Trench (Florida Today)
Space Cynic
Rocket Forge (Michael Mealing)
COTS Watch (Michael Mealing)
Curmudgeon's Corner (Mark Whittington)
Selenian Boondocks
Tales of the Heliosphere
Out Of The Cradle
Space For Commerce (Brian Dunbar)
True Anomaly
Kevin Parkin
The Speculist (Phil Bowermaster)
Spacecraft (Chris Hall)
Space Pragmatism (Dan Schrimpsher)
Eternal Golden Braid (Fred Kiesche)
Carried Away (Dan Schmelzer)
Laughing Wolf (C. Blake Powers)
Chair Force Engineer (Air Force Procurement)
Spacearium
Saturn Follies
JesusPhreaks (Scott Bell)

Biting Commentary about Infinity, and Beyond!

« Prescience | Main | Fight To The Finish »

Could The Blogosphere Propel Newt To Victory?

I once asked if Bill Clinton could have been elected in a world in which the blogosphere existed. I think the answer may have been "no." In fact, I suspect that it would have shredded the Sixty Minutes puff piece that Don Hewitt credited with saving his candidacy in a similar manner that it did the Dan Rather hit piece in 2004.

A similar question is whether or not it would be sufficient to overcome the MSM bias against Newt Gingrich.

He's said very little thus far that I'd disagree with. He seems to be more straight talking than even John McCain, and there's been a lot of implicit criticism from him of Bush on the war, which I think is badly needed, since most of that commodity has been provided by the brainless left, to date, and there is in fact much to criticize (in terms of the fact that he's been wobbly against the enemy, to the point of continuing to fear to name it).

If he runs, I don't think that the media will be able to get away with all the misleading hit pieces that they ran against him when he became Speaker in 1994. At the least, there will be an honest debate about his positions, instead of simple demonizing.

And of course, if elected, it's impossible to imagine a president more pro-space, and pro-free-enterprise-space, than Newt.

Posted by Rand Simberg at July 17, 2006 03:05 PM

Comments

A similar question is whether or not it would be sufficient to overcome the MSM bias against Newt Gingrich.

What Gingrich said when resigned was that he had been taken down by cannibals. The man talks a good game, but when he was actually at the helm, he cut and ran.

[Bush has] been wobbly against the enemy, to the point of continuing to fear to name it

This is a call for Tom "Nuke Mecca" Tancredo, not Newt Gingrich.

Posted by Rockwell Simberg III at July 17, 2006 03:44 PM

Newt is the greatest idea man in American politics since Ben Franklin last walked the Earth. Any President would benefit from having lunch with him at least once a week. But, based on his tenure as Speaker (which was stormy, to say the least), I wonder how good he would be as an implementor.

Mind, that doesn't mean I wouldn't vote for him over any Democrat and over a lot of Republicans as well.

Posted by Mark R. Whittington at July 17, 2006 04:18 PM

Would the blogosphere defeated Clinton? Probably, but I'm pretty certain that Dan Rather and the rest of the MSM WOULD have defeated Bush in 2004 had it not been for the blogs.

Posted by Cecil Trotter at July 17, 2006 06:08 PM

I think his marital problems and the way he handled them may have made him unelectable. I know my wife, no democrat, has said that she would never vote for him.

Posted by DanNY at July 17, 2006 07:13 PM

The USA saw a lot of economic growth and prosperity under the leadership of Clinton. It's a damn shame the single-payer health care system got killed. Someday this nation which spends trillions on defense might think of taking care of it's own citizens in a manner befitting of a first world country.

Posted by X at July 17, 2006 09:23 PM

X, in a First World country -- in any country worthy of that kind of exalted name -- in a country not populated by weasels, whiners and wimps, but by self-respecting adult men and women -- citizens take care of their own damn health care needs, thank you.

When we need someone to grovel entertainingly before his betters, we'll send for you.

Posted by Carl Pham at July 18, 2006 01:58 AM

If there had been a blogosphere in 1992, the Juanita Broaddrick story woudl have broken, and the Charlitte Perry story would have gotten more attention.

Posted by Alan K. Henderson at July 18, 2006 04:14 AM

Correction X, the country saw a lot of economic growth "in spite of" Clintons'.... whatever you want to call it; it certainly wasn't "leadership".

Posted by Cecil Trotter at July 18, 2006 04:40 AM

How many battalions does the blogosphere actually have?

Despite its self importance, did it have any effect on the last election? It did nothing for Howard Dean. It seems like a lot of talk and little real proof.

Posted by Bill Chase at July 18, 2006 06:47 AM

Despite its self importance, did it have any effect on the last election?

It took down Dan Rather and CBS, which were attempting to throw the election to Kerry. I think it made a real difference.

Posted by Rand Simberg at July 18, 2006 06:50 AM

X says: The USA saw a lot of economic growth and prosperity under the leadership of Clinton.

No, we saw a lot of economic growth from the tail end efforts of Reagan/BushI that finally played out. Clinton rode those coattails, and any other tail he could lay a hand on. Clinton's own economic plan was realized after the first two years of GW, when the "surplus" vanished, not by Bush's doing alone. Thanks to Bush II's tax cut plan, we're actually catching up to the damage left behind the Clinton deficit legacy.

Mac

Posted by Mac at July 18, 2006 07:09 AM

Despite its self importance, did it [the blogosphere] have any effect on the last election?

It took down Dan Rather and CBS, which were attempting to throw the election to Kerry.

That's the comforting story the blogosphere keeps telling itself.

Posted by Anon Mouse at July 18, 2006 09:25 AM

That's the comforting story the blogosphere keeps telling itself.

Yes. Because it's true.

Do you have an actual argument to make?

Posted by Rand Simberg at July 18, 2006 09:30 AM

"It took down Dan Rather and CBS, which were attempting to throw the election to Kerry."

This is based upon the dubious assumption that CBS was influential enough to win the election for Kerry.

Is that all the blogosphere can point to for its effectiveness? Dan Rather and CBS? Nothing more in the nearly two years since then?

Seems like a lot of beliefs and no proof.

Posted by Bill Chase at July 18, 2006 10:41 AM

This is based upon the dubious assumption that CBS was influential enough to win the election for Kerry.

That, plus the Swift Boaters getting a lot more of a hearing than they would have without the blogosphere. It was a very close election.

Is that all the blogosphere can point to for its effectiveness? Dan Rather and CBS? Nothing more in the nearly two years since then?

I didn't know that I was obligated to provide a treatise. I was just tossing out an example. And now you're changing the subject, which was what the blogosphere did in the last election.

Moving the goalposts is a typical tactic of someone losing an argument.

Posted by Rand Simberg at July 18, 2006 11:15 AM

"I was just tossing out an example. And now you're changing the subject, which was what the blogosphere did in the last election."

I was challenging the assumption in the blogosphere that bloggers have any real power at all. I'm seeking proof. Do you have anything other than CBS and Rather?

If you're going to claim that Newt can win because of the blogosphere, then don't you need to demonstrate that the blogosphere has the power to do that? Or is it okay to simply assert that it's true and claim that anybody challenging you is losing the argument?

Posted by Bill Chase at July 18, 2006 02:34 PM

If you're going to claim that Newt can win because of the blogosphere...

I made no such claim. I simply asked a question.

Posted by Rand Simberg at July 18, 2006 02:37 PM

Bill Chase, I think some of your language is imprecise. For example...

I was challenging the assumption in the blogosphere that bloggers have any real power at all.

It's not an assumption. It's a conclusion following observations like, indeed, the outcome of the Dan Rather/TANG memo kerfuffle, the national-level exposure of the Swiftees despite MSM attempts at suppression, the accreditation of bloggers to the national party conventions, the hiring of bloggers at major news outlets, the participation of national parties in blogging, et cetera and so forth.

I'm seeking proof.

Then you're out of luck. There's no such thing as proof of a question as vaguely defined and poorly-studied as this one. However, I suspect what you meant to say is that you're seeking evidence. In which case, your statement still needs modification, because you were given some evidence in the initial post. What you really saying is that you're seeking more evidence.

Posted by Carl Pham at July 18, 2006 05:24 PM

"It did nothing for Howard Dean"

Hmm I thought a great majority of the hype around Howard was the level of activity on lefty blogger sites. If anything it proved that there is a negative energy effect to the not being touted by the blogosphere because immediately after his little shouting jubilee all the support on the web died out in an instant. The air quickly deflated from his campaign in near lock step to the lefty bloggers jumping into the Kerry wagon.

Posted by Josh Reiter at July 18, 2006 09:11 PM

I've met Newt and he is quite charming in person. However, I think that he can seem somewhat off-putting on TV, which makes things more difficult for him. Also, his lack of executive experience might make his administration less effective. Having been an executive that had to deal with a legislative body (as governor, mayor, etc.) is important in governing.

It seems to me that if you don't have a clear legislative dominance, a president needs to have executive experience. And it is clear that both parties have problems in that area. (Or as an alternative, knowing where all the bodies are buried can substitute, cf. LBJ.) Even if the Dems win back the House or Senate by '08, they won't have a solid base of support due to the internal factions in each party.

Posted by ech at July 19, 2006 08:53 AM

I think I partly discussed my negative opinion of Newt Gingrich before. He still appears chock full of the arrogance and hubris that derailed the Republicans in the mid 90's. And let us not forget that Gingrich is the primary architect behind the Republican takeover of the Washington, DC ("K Street") lobbyists. And of course, there's the shifty divorce of his first wife.

Further, Gingrich seems to be of the same ideology as what currently dominates the Bush administration. I think it's unhealthy to allow this ideology to dominate a presidential administration for another four years. Might be healthier than whatever the Democrats offer up, but I think the Republicans can come up with a better solution.

Yes, he's a great idea man. But I don't appreciate his ideas. And I don't appreciate some actions both personal and political that this man has made. These indicate to me that Gingrich has seriously problems with judgement, political corruption, and perhaps pride,

I think the "blogosphere's" real power is in illuminating unusual or low profile candidates and perhaps in exposing potential weaknesses of candidates. I think that Newt Gingrich will benefit from blogger attention, but his weaknesses will be propagated as well.

Posted by Karl Hallowell at July 21, 2006 04:44 PM

The great thing about the internet, like the space frontier, is that it's big enough for everybody--even Republican koolaid-drinkers who think Tailgunner Newt is a great American.

Posted by Brian Swiderski at July 24, 2006 01:41 AM


Post a comment

Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?