From a reader:
I don’t have cable TV, and up here in Canada I was unable to find the debate on radio, so I have been following it via the postings on the Corner, and on the debate comments section created on Little Green Footballs.
I’ve noticed something very interesting – the professional observes like the fine folks at NRO (which is my all-time favorite web-stop, incidentally) generally had unhappy reactions to tonight’s debate, while the regular citizens at LGF were much, much happier about it. Both groups are equally partisan towards the President; both groups are equally disdainful of John Kerry; and the regular citizens at LGF — although not professional politicos like the NRO staff — are reasonably well informed people who have followed the election avidly. And yet the reactions between you guys and them are miles apart (more or less).
I wonder if the burden of being a pundit alters your view of what is transpiring on that debate stage, and in thus handicaps pundits when it comes to assessing how these things will play to regular folks. I don’t mean that as an insult – I have a lot of respect for you and your compatriots’ opinions, and I read NRO and The Corner every day both to be informed, and to keep my spirits up while the West tries to wage a war against terror. It’s a great place, and you guys do great work. But, I wonder if your perspective is a bit skewed by your profession, and your legitimate concern over the election. Mark Steyn has commented on a number of occasions that in the last election, most pundits were sure that Gore won the debates, only to wake up and find Bush up by a few points the next day. Maybe we will see that here.
Anyway, thanks for all the fine work you NRO folks do, and keep it up. And for once, don’t take offence when I say: I sure hope you guys are completely out of it!