NY Times: What senate race?
To every blogger and right-winger concerned with howling over the Old Gray Lady's sins of omission (strange bedfellows are often aligned on this one), Sunday's Op/Ed pages of the New York Times must have seemed like more MSM business as usual. Even so, the paper's round-up of pivotal Senate races around the country was a sign of sorts.
"While my assignment was to write about Minnesota's important Senate race," begins Charles Baxter, a Minneapolis-born author who teaches at the U of M. "I think there's more to be learned right now from the far closer contest in Minnesota's Sixth Congressional District."
While it's true that the Bachmann/Wetterling race is closely contested, handsomely funded and critically important for either party, Baxter's piece really is about who it isn't about. That is, is the margin of Amy Kobuchar's lead in the polls over Mark Kennedy so much that the Times doesn't think the race is compelling enough to cover?
If so, that would be shocking turn for what was supposed to be one of the most closely watched Senate races in the country. It's true that the campaign as been devoid of suspense, if not drama (the misguided conspiracies behind last week's Bloggergate non-story notwithstanding), but it ain't over till it's over, right?
For example, the hometown papers aren't willing to say that Kennedy's toast. This excerpt from a story in today's Pioneer Press: "Although the spread is wide--15 points--it's not insurmountable, according to experts."