| A campaign in which you allow yourself to become emotionally involved is like a rollercoast ride. One day you are optimistic and hopeful and the next you are full of despair about the outcome. Earlier this Summer, prospects looked bright for George W. Bush, the candidate I support. I was happy and confident that we could return a Republican to the White House. Then, after the Democratic convention, all the polls indicated a large Gore surge. Suddenly everyone was predicated an easy Gore win. I felt depressed at the thought of Al Gore being inaugurated next January. Yesterday, I felt pretty bad about the situation but then I received some cheerful news. In the Wall Street Journal, a piece on the editorial page pointed out that many of polls showing Gore ahead have a very poor historical track record and tended to overestimate the strength of Democratic candidates. Then on the way home, I saw a story in USA Today that reported that Bush had closed to within 4 points in the Gallup poll and, moreover, was leading by 4 points in another poll by voter.com. (Of course, the Gallup poll is the one that gets reported everywhere). Then this morning I crashed back to earth. I turned on the TV and Tim Russert, smilingly, showed a map of the Electoral College: Gore is only within 28 electoral votes to win. To make matters worse, Russert, says "This is very good news." Maybe he meant to complete the sentence with "for Gore" but he didn't. Even Tim Russert who has a reputation for fairness and did ask tough questions of Hillary Clinton in her debates, is openly gloating over an impending Democrat victory. How depressing! When I got to the office however my spirits were revived somewhat by checking into my favorite political site, National Review. A couple of articles pointed out that Bush seems to be reviving and that the Boston Globe has actually run the story that Gore�s latest anecdote about the price his mother- in-law pays for medications is a lie that was originally invented by congressional Democrats two years ago. Yesterday, on the subway, I overhead a woman refering to a tall tale someone told her as a �Al Gore type story.� Maybe that�s going to become a new expression for an invented or exaggerated story. How sweet! Even the Washington Post yesterday pointed out how dangerous Gore�s rhetoric is and how he irresponsibly attacks a new industry every day with unfair and demagogic attacks. Still, as National Review, points out the TV networks are still very reluctant to run negative stories about Gore. NBC, ABC and CBS played the "RATS" controversy to the hilt but completely ignored the story that a millionaire Texan trial lawyer funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars to the Democrats in exchange for a veto of a tort reform bill. The roller-coaster continues! |