Over the years where I’ve read and participated in discussions of political journalism I have rejected lefty academic analysis of false balance extended to Republicans and their ideas that were premised on a notion of Democrats and their ideas being qualitatively better, ya know, cuz…. egalitarianism being better than whatever Republicans are. Or whatever. Such that this is a pervasive thought, and I think it is, I think it’s a lot of hoeey that comes not from logical evaluation but from lefties wanting to pat themselves on the back for their inherent goodness, which then gives them carte blanche to pursuit an ends / means strategy that’s counter to democracy. We’ve trod that ground here before…
Well, Trump v Clinton… As a matter of cosmic truth, Clinton is a superior candidate, and one doesn’t really need to parse a lot to come to this conclusion if you’re an informed adult. So yeah, these Matt Lauer softballs to Trump…. That’s a real false balance problem, as far it goes.
Weeks ago I made a list of political issues on a draft for this blog as an exercise in seeing if I could make myself vote for Hillary. Superficially, the answer is no. I agree with her and the Dem’s on about 3 of 15 issues. I’m still a real Republican. But I think I will vote for her because she’s the candidate of normalcy, and Trump is the candidate of absurdity. And that I will also do it as an expression of intellectual elasticity.
At this moment there is this notion the race is a dead heat, that Trump has come back. Meh. I’m not going to be fooled this time, he’s going to lose.
Added: No, they are not equally bad:
Additional thought: Am I sympathetic to Clinton such that we have an equal terms debate right now? No, not sympathetic. She did earn enough of that on her own.