From what I can tell, the reason there was no "red wave" is that people who are unhappy with both parties realized that the Republicans are worse and that the difference is big enough to matter. I haven't seen any polling on this, but I wonder if the attack on Paul Pelosi was a factor. After all, one of the biggest differences between the two is that the Republican Party has become something where an eighty two year old man getting hit in the head with a hammer is something to joke about, and the Democratic Party, whatever its faults, has not. Basic decency matters.
David French’s opinions on politics are routinely off a bit. Trump hating GOP candidates like Liz Cheney got destroyed in the primaries. The general election was an example of the power of a MSM and big tech being propaganda arms of the Democrat machine and feeding the kids a constant stream of emotive rage and fear stew. The kids came out to vote against their own self interests as adults. Trump was a large part of that rage and fear propaganda diet.
"The first is that mainstream media remain ultra-sensitive to charges that they have a liberal bias—and the response, regularly, is to bend over backwards to show they do not. So, by reporting that Republicans would sweep, they avoided having Donald Trump or Tucker Carlson ripping them."
I agreed with much of what Mr. Ornstein wrote, but this particular bit I have a hard time reconciling. I'm sure he consumes far more of the mainstream media than I do -- it's part of his job, and it's not part of mine. However, if the mainstream media *is* bending over backwards as he wrote, I don't see much evidence of it (or perhaps the mainstream media simply have no idea what "liberal bias" is). The whole "moral clarity" thing was all about abandoning pretenses to objectivity.
And the idea that they are bending over backwards to avoid having Donald Trump or Tucker Carlson ripping them is absurd. They hold both men in contempt and I find it hard to believe they share much audience with either.
From what I can tell, the reason there was no "red wave" is that people who are unhappy with both parties realized that the Republicans are worse and that the difference is big enough to matter. I haven't seen any polling on this, but I wonder if the attack on Paul Pelosi was a factor. After all, one of the biggest differences between the two is that the Republican Party has become something where an eighty two year old man getting hit in the head with a hammer is something to joke about, and the Democratic Party, whatever its faults, has not. Basic decency matters.
David French’s opinions on politics are routinely off a bit. Trump hating GOP candidates like Liz Cheney got destroyed in the primaries. The general election was an example of the power of a MSM and big tech being propaganda arms of the Democrat machine and feeding the kids a constant stream of emotive rage and fear stew. The kids came out to vote against their own self interests as adults. Trump was a large part of that rage and fear propaganda diet.
"The first is that mainstream media remain ultra-sensitive to charges that they have a liberal bias—and the response, regularly, is to bend over backwards to show they do not. So, by reporting that Republicans would sweep, they avoided having Donald Trump or Tucker Carlson ripping them."
I agreed with much of what Mr. Ornstein wrote, but this particular bit I have a hard time reconciling. I'm sure he consumes far more of the mainstream media than I do -- it's part of his job, and it's not part of mine. However, if the mainstream media *is* bending over backwards as he wrote, I don't see much evidence of it (or perhaps the mainstream media simply have no idea what "liberal bias" is). The whole "moral clarity" thing was all about abandoning pretenses to objectivity.
And the idea that they are bending over backwards to avoid having Donald Trump or Tucker Carlson ripping them is absurd. They hold both men in contempt and I find it hard to believe they share much audience with either.