From Eleanor Clift's article on "Wal-Mart Women" in Newsweek, in which she explains why under-$60,000 a year women will not (contrary to McCain's pollster) save his flailing campaign (see here).
What's shaping up is not comparable to '92, the last time a Democrat
won the White House. "It's much more serious and devastating to
Republicans," says Stan Greenberg, who was Bill Clinton's pollster.
Democrats lost seats in '92; Clinton had no coattails. Obama may enter
the White House with close to a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate
and a doubling of the Democratic margin in the House. This is a
watershed election. Typically, every four years, somebody wins,
somebody loses, and life goes on. But Obama represents generational
change that has huge political repercussions. He wins 63 percent of
voters between the ages of 18 and 29. For the Republicans, "It's not
just a lost election, it's a lost generation," says Greenberg.
will they blame for this turn of events? "Overwhelmingly, it's you
guys," Greenburg told reporters at a Washington breakfast last week.
Republicans are convinced that media bias in favor of Obama tipped the
election in his favor, and that coverage of Sarah Palin has been
unfairly harsh, conveying sexism as well as anti-conservative bias.
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, always a GOP crowd pleaser, calls
the mainstream media "Pravda." Blaming the press may feel good. But it
won't solve the problem of a party that has lost its way.
Blame the media or blame themselves. Is it really any wonder they blame the media?