Well, that took a long time. Less than two weeks after the interminable 2002 election season ended, the media has started polling for 2004 elections. They have so little news to cover that they have time to cover the horse race aspects of an election for which the horses are still unknown?
BTW, what did they find out?
A CNN/Time poll conducted November 13-14 shows that two-thirds of the public thinks Gore will be the likely Democratic nominee in 2004, but half surveyed said the former vice president won't win the White House. Only 41 percent said they would vote for him if the election were held today.Really? No kidding? Hey, I'll give CNN a hint, to save them some polling money: he won't win in 2008, 2012, or 2016 either.
But then CNN adds the caveat, buried at the bottom of the article:
Despite the numbers, Gore is not out for the count. Polls taken this far from an election aren't always a good indicator of what may happen in the future.Again, no kidding. So why the hell did they bother to do the poll, then? Could the media be any less useful if they tried?