Is The Media Starting To Accept Dean's Anger Triangulation Approach?
The Times ran a story today about Dean and his temper. They used for their graphic the cover from the National Review of an energized on-the-stump Dean (probably speaking at a Democratic event where he lambastes fellow Democrats for being Bush-lite) to embellish their point of the article. But in doing this, the Times then wrote what I thought was a levelheaded story of Dean and his temper, notably without the usual litany of comments from GOP operatives about how they want to run against him and without the usual litany of GOP comments about Dean the angry monster.
You may disagree with me here, but in doing this I think the Times does a great service to Dean and the Democrats by running an overheated cover from a right-wing opinion magazine and then throwing some cold water on what the magazine was trying to say. Sure, to preach to their followers you can expect right wing magazines like the National Review and the Weekly Standard to run stories like this about how much they want to run against an angry Dean in the general election. That is to be expected. But to then run a story on that line of thinking in the number one paper in the country and then undercut that argument is something else. The more stories that come out in the mainstream media like this along with the poll numbers from yesterday’s poll that show how close Dean is to Bush with his anger triangulation approach will tend to gradually move the media off the standard GOP-fed line of “he’s too angry” to one of “he’s angry but people are following him into a very competitive race.”
(Thanks to Charles K for leading me to the Sidney Blumenthal piece in the Guardian about Dean’s reintroduction of Clintonian triangulation.)