If Liberals don't secretly want a return of the Bush Dynasty wouldn't they look closely at the material used to make the prediction and evaluate it to see if they could possibly do anything (everything?) to prevent such a (hypothetical) result?
Until the November election results are counted -- strike that word because the electronic voting machines do not leave any verifiable results -- until the November election results are being reported, we will use all the self-restraint we can muster to abstain from jumping to conclusions and/or making political predictions.
We were wrong in our Kentucky Derby prediction about Native Dancer, so for tomorrow's race, you're on your own, pal.
Didn't forecasts, predictions, and educated guesses about "the most likely outcome" provide the bulk of the Sunday morning talk shows' appeal until the Murdochization of Journalism occurred and American citizens were conditioned to watch and accept unexpected events without questions?
George Clayton Johnson, who wrote for "The Twilight Zone" TV series, advises young writers to be creative by rejecting the laws of logic and ask themselves "What if?" What would happen if political pundits rejected the Murdoch syndrome and began to ask "What if?" and (perhaps) achieve Twilight Zone levels of entertainment value in their evaluations of politics?
Here is an example: After a primary season where all Republicans enunciated radical policies for keeping the women folk under control, giving businesses unrestricted disregard for laws in an effort to provide more jobs, and asserting that the Social Security Program was about to go broke; what if a deadlocked convention turned and begged JEB to (in the name of family tradition and patriotic duty) accept the Republican Party nomination to be their Presidential Candidate?
If (hypothetically) the electronic voting machines with unverifiable results delivered a win to JEB, wouldn't he then be able to say he had a "mandate" to carry out the program formulated during the Primary process? If a deadlocked convention hands JEB the nomination, he won't be shackled by any campaign statements or promises.
Once a member of the Bush Dynasty gets a mandate, does Fox News bother with any debates about what the voters meant by their decision? When Fox decrees, does any other team in the Journalism game dare to risk being labeled "conspiracy theory nutcases" and deviate from the norm established by Fox?
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
