Would another bush* term mean better TV ratings?

[NoBorders]

Wouldn't the networks/cable prefer another bush* pres, with the potential for more ratings-boosting conflicts, middle east invasions, layoffs, divisive cultural wars, etc... -compared to a Kerry presidency with a focus on peaceful resolution to conflicts, stemming job losses, open-mindedness on social issues etc? I was thinking about the apparent media bias, and wondered if this isn't part of it.

Think how bummed they must be that the Kobe Bryan trial isn't going forward.

[zbdent]

1. We have a winner!

Remember, Reagan was so afraid of the media screwing things up that he held a war and didn't let the media in!

I think that this misAdministration informed the reporters, "Hey, we're going to war with or without you. If you play nice, we'll let you go with us. If not, well, you're on your own over there, if we even let you near there. And, if you are there, there might be a stray bomb or two that might fall in the wrong place."

[NoBorders]

2. And it wouldn't even have to be that overt

I think there's a media zeitgeist floating around out there that a Bushco presidency would be more 'exciting' and provide more news fodder.

[eleny]

3. I've been wondering about if he would be the lamest duck of all

But that depends on if we at least take and hold the Senate.

[emulatorloo]

4. Don't worry, they will manufacture many scandals for Pres Kerry

Have you forgotten haircut gate, travel gate, etc etc etc?