Horserace Reporting

American Enterprise Institute scholar Norman Ornstein has an article in The Atlantic that explores a theme that we've touched on:  the pass that's been given to extremist Republican candidates by the political press, in particular the formerly great Washington Post Bezos Bugle and the New York Times.  Ornstein believes that it's because to expose their radical views -- which are in part borrowed from the John Birch Society -- would run counter to the "narrative" that the press has established for this election cycle.  The narrative, in brief, is that "establishment" Republicans have re-captured their Party from the "kooks," represented in the past by such luminaries as Christine "Not A Witch" O'Donnell and Todd "Legitimate Rape" Akin.

With campaign journalists locked into "The Narrative," any evidence to the contrary is avoided, and focus is placed instead on gaffes and miscues from the opponents. As Ornstein concluded:

"For horserace reporting, the broader narrative is a good one to frame and organize stories and coverage. But it’s not a very good way for readers to figure out how the people they vote for might actually behave in the Senate. And that’s not very good news for voters or the political process."

BONUS:  Charles P. Pierce has more evidence -- if that's even necessary at this point -- of silly, blinkered, horserace reporting at the expense of, you know, real journalism.