I've been getting a lot of positive feedback on my post yesterday about this Washington Post article that seemed to have been written by the Marc Elrich campaign itself.
Read my detailed desconstruction of the piece here:
I have some additional thoughts today on this example of journalistic activism on behalf of the county Democratic Party by the Washington Post.
Thinking about the article, I realized that there was little to no original material or reporting involved. It is simply a fleshed out version of speeches Mr. Elrich has given all summer at candidate forums. The talking points are precisely the same as the ones in those speeches. Since when does journalism involve articles based on the talking points of the subject?
Again, when does a piece change from an article into an in-kind contribution to a campaign?
Then there is the issue of this vulgar display of power by the Post. We're in the final weeks of the campaign. Marc Elrich has over $100,000 in campaign contributions. The Post has written articles featuring his quotes every week this year. He's "gotten his message out" beyond all reasonable measure.
Why the need for this heavy-handed, victory puff piece?
It suggests that Mr. Elrich and his colleagues are far weaker than the "prevailing wisdom" suggests. And rightfully so. They have a record of utter failure. They've offered no new ideas or even any specifics of what they will do if elected/reelected.
Sounds like they and the Post are scared. And they've been running scared. They have yet to agree to a single debate this fall, and they just threw senior citizens overboard, demanding that organizers of a long-scheduled senior issues debate tomorrow cancel it. Of course, they'll never admit that, but, come on, this was scheduled months ago. Only they could have stopped it, as all Republicans were going to attend.
You can give them a real scare by voting Elrich, Floreen, Leventhal and Riemer out of office on November 2.