SIGN IN to access Harper’s Magazine
Need to create a login? Want to change your email address or password? Forgot your password?
1. Sign in to Customer Care using your account number or postal address.
2. Select Email/Password Information.
3. Enter your new information and click on Save My Changes.
Subscribers can find additional help here. Not a subscriber? Subscribe today!
During the past few weeks, thousands of reporters and commentators have produced countless stories feverishly speculating about who Barack Obama would pick to be his vice presidential nominee. “Obama Veep Speculation Reaches a Crescendo,” ran a headline in the Wall Street Journal. “Who’s No. 2? Obama Keeps Everybody Guessing,” said the Washington Post. “Speculation over VP picks hits fever pitch,” Reuters chimed in.
Of course, as Chris Lehmann pointed out in an interview here the other day, the obsessive interest in the VP picks, and the accompanying analysis about whether it would help or hinder Obama or McCain, was largely limited to Washington political reporters and cable-news producers. “Not only do reporters write about what they’re talking about, but they’re writing about each other,” Lehmann said. “Notice the passive construction in these stories about ‘rampant speculation’ and ask yourself, ‘Who’s doing the speculating?’ It’s the reporters who are; most voters, being sane people, might think about it for a second but then they move on to the next thing in their day.”
Now the Washington Post has published the results of a survey about the Biden “impact,” and it turns out there isn’t one. A full 75 percent of respondents said Biden’s selection would make “no difference” to their chances of supporting Obama this fall. Thirteen percent said it would make them more likely, ten percent said it would make them less likely, and two percent had no opinion on the matter.
So to sum it all up, impolitely: Despite the saturation news coverage and week after week of talking-head blather about the topic, the public just doesn’t give a shit.
More from Ken Silverstein:
Perspective — October 23, 2013, 8:00 am
How pro-oil Louisiana politicians have shaped American environmental policy
Postcard — October 16, 2013, 8:00 am
A trip to one of the properties at issue in Louisiana’s oil-pollution lawsuits
Discussed in this essay:
The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History, by Elizabeth Kolbert. Henry Holt. 352 pages. $28.
The extinction symbol is a spare graphic that began to appear on London walls and sidewalks a couple of years ago. It has since become popular enough as an emblem of protest that people display it at environmental rallies. Others tattoo it on their arms. The symbol consists of two triangles inscribed within a circle, like so:
“The triangles represent an hourglass; the circle represents Earth; the symbol as a whole represents, according to a popular Twitter feed devoted to its dissemination (@extinctsymbol, 19.2K followers), “the rapidly accelerating collapse of global biodiversity” — what scientists refer to alternately as the Holocene extinction, the Anthropocene extinction, and (with somewhat more circumspection) the sixth mass extinction.
Ratio of husbands who say they fell in love with their spouse at first sight to wives who say this:
Mathematicians announced the discovery of the perfect method of cutting a cake.
Indian prime-ministerial contender Narendra Modi, who advertises his bachelorhood as a mark of his incorruptibility, confessed to having a wife.
Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!
Science’s crisis of faith