It's the economy stupid

Slogans and catch phrases are a big part of campaigns. When Bill Clinton made his march to the nomination back in 1992, his chief aides posted a sign in the War Room that said "It's the economy stupid."

It seemed so simple then. "It's the economy stupid!" But what is it now?

A. "It's the War Stupid"

B. "It's the economy stupid."

C. "Experience"

D. "Change"

If I was asking this question last week, the answer would seem so simple that you would think I was stupid to even ask it. Change would be the winner. It was Senator Obama's slogan, and of course former Senator John Edwards was busy saying he was the change agent. It was such a great slogan that Senator Clinton had to start talking about change and how experience is important to bring about change. Mitt Romney grabbed change and took off running.

Where on earth do you think Barack Obama and company came up with the idea that "Change" will work. Perhaps they got the word from the people they were using it on last week. Yes, the Clintons'. Take a look at this cover of Time that hit the stands right after the election that swept Bill Clinton into the oval office. So I guess what goes around comes around.
This morning everyone in the world of politics is singing Billy Joel's tune, "Don't go changing to try to please me." So what is it this week? Maybe this week it's experience. Clearly that's what Clinton and McCain have been touting. So what will it be next time around? I'm going to let you in on a little secret. I have no idea. One thing I do know, the pundits and pollsters will tell us. They are always so smart before an election and it seems to me they don't look all that smart after.

What's great about elections is that voters decide. That's the way it ought to be. I'm such a political junkie that I spent the last presidential election cycle visiting a website daily with the latest polls. It tracked polls in each state all across the country. On election day it showed that Senator John Kerry would be the next President of the United States. I remember a friend telling me you can take it the bank. The polls said it was a slam dunk. He was wrong, the polls and pundits were wrong.

So why can't we learn our lesson? I have no idea. But I do know every four years we all sit around and grouse about how there is no substance. We don't know where the candidates stand on the issues! Every four years people plead with the news media to start reporting on substance. Please stop with the horse race stuff, will you!

Well, here we go again. The jockeys are back on the track in the form of candidates. We all take our places in the media, trying to pick which horse will come in first. If they don't win here they can't continue. You would think after our disastrous horse race coverage of the last few days we'd back off. I mean, last night I was watching Keith Olbermann and some guy was saying Clinton was in big trouble, she was going to lose, and her campaign staff was going to get the heave ho.

So I got off the air this morning and there is a political analyst on ABC saying something like, "If he doesn't win there, he can't continue." What shouldn't continue is this nonsense. It eats up too much time that could be used to discuss the issues, and where the candidates stand. A couple of things were decided last night. In New Hampshire the people chose Senators Clinton and McCain. We also learned that the news media is always better when it reports the news, and always at it's worse when it tries to predict it.