Thursday, Dec. 27, 2007 | midnight
By David McGrath Schwartz, Las Vegas Sun
Reporters love the pundits. They are all-knowing, or at least are supposed to sound that way. They are always ready to dissect an opinion poll or interpret a news development. They provide strong quotes, which editors like.
For a reporter on deadline, they can be a gift: Please capture an entire state's ethos in a sentence or less, thank you.
Nevada is in the national political limelight this year as never before because of the state's early presidential caucus on Jan. 19. So the Sun thought you might want a little background on the stable of opinionators whom the national media are turning to for insights into the contest.
We don't have the think tanks and wonky research groups more mature states have. Instead, it's a small group of analysts most local media types have tapped for years. To get acquainted with them, turn the page.
David Damore
UNLV political science professor
There's a bit of vanity that goes along with being a pundit.
“It can be personally gratifying,” Damore said. “There is that ego boost. It's nice that you're in a profession and you have something to say.”
Plus, his bosses like seeing a UNLV name in the paper.
“The university likes it,” he said. “They want to be known for something other than basketball.” (He said they keep collections of the articles in which their professors are quoted.)
But aside from the campus feel-good, he notes, he doesn't see any benefits to being a Nevada pundit.
“I haven't been comped or anything like that,” he said.
With the Nevada caucus, he has been getting more attention. When the call comes from outside the state, Damore invariably is asked to open with an explanation of Nevada politics.
“Mormons are politically powerful -- everyone who runs the state knows each other from high school ... Basically, I fill in the blanks,” he said.
For the most part, he doesn't mind reporters and their queries. But he does know that when reporters keep asking him the same question, they are searching for a predetermined answer. “You get the sense they're waiting around for you to say something that fits into their argument,” he said.
He is now dabbling in the other side of the media-reporter relationship, writing a column for the new online publication politickernv.com.
A registered Democrat, Damore said the longer he lives in Nevada, the more he finds himself moving toward libertarian viewpoints. He moved here from California in 2000.
Memorable bit of punditry: He was quoted in a story in The Economist before the 2004 general election. “They took me out to lunch,” he said. “That was nice.”
Who will win Nevada's Democratic caucus: “If you look at organization in the state, I would say Clinton.”
Turnout for that caucus: 20,000 to 30,000, he said, “given Nevada's history and the fact it's on a three-day weekend.”
Michael Green
History professor at College of Southern Nevada
Green moved here when he was 2 years old and likes to offer historical context for political stories.
He's also unabashedly on the liberal wing of Nevada Democratic politics and a registered Democrat.
So why do reporters go to him?
“They're looking to find somebody who is available and knowledgeable,” he said. “Mostly, because I'm convenient.”
(He's also rather self-deprecating.)
His biggest peeve? Giving time and thought to helping a news organization analyze something but failing to receive a mention. He remembers spending extensive time helping the national ABC network on a lengthy documentary on Elvis Presley. But Green got nary a mention in the piece. “Not so much as a thank you,” he said.
Although he deals mostly with the local media, he has been cited in national publications -- and he finds most of the coverage superficial and predictable. “They inevitably deal with the glamour and glitz of the Strip,” he said. “I suppose it's like South Carolina, where they show the stately old mansions.”
He argues that Nevada instead should be viewed as reflective of the nation, given its rapid growth and diversity. It's much more than the Strip.
Green also notes that Nevada has voted for the winner in every presidential election since 1908, except in 1976 when Nevada went with Gerald Ford instead of Jimmy Carter.
Memorable bit of punditry: As Gov. Jim Gibbons faced negative stories in The Wall Street Journal, Gibbons publicly aired a theory that Democrats were paying for the negative coverage.
Green told the Las Vegas Review-Journal: “What Gibbons is doing is sounding like a guy broadcasting from his bedroom on public access on the far end of the AM dial in Buttflap, Alabama.”
Who will win the Democratic caucus: “I can tell you who won in 1908. 2008 is harder.” For the record, Nevada voted for William Jennings Bryan, who lost to William Howard Taft.
Turnout: “30,000. 50,000 if the weather's nice.”
Eric Herzik
Professor of political science, University of Nevada, Reno
Herzik is averaging a call a day from reporters as the caucuses approach. But he has been popular among media types in the state since the early 1990s, when he rose on the radar after an American Civil Liberties Union representative observed that Herzik analyzed state politics in his classes.
Herzik is a registered Republican and often gets identified as such. But much of his analysis, he says, is nonpartisan.
“I consistently say that Democrats have done a better job organizing their caucus than the Republicans,” he said. “I just think that's a true statement.”
So why do reporters go to him for quotes?
“This is both vanity and a put-down -- but I talk in sound bites,” he said. “I know you guys need a quick, to-the-point answer. So I try to give it.”
Most academics, he said, shy away from talking to the media because they want reporters to write 2,000 words representing the professor's point of view, nuances and all. (This in a world where daily newspaper stories are closer to 600 words.)
Herzik said that only once in his career as an analyst has a newspaper taken a part of what he said totally out of context. So he continues to offer up his analyses and quotes when people call him.
“I think it's part of my job,” he said. “I'm paid by the state of Nevada, and I analyze state politics. Call it outreach.”
Memorable bit of punditry: When Gov. Kenny Guinn entered the governor's mansion in 1998, Herzik compared Guinn, a moderate Republican, to former Gov. Bob Miller, a moderate Democrat.
“I said that I call him Kenny Miller.” It got back to Herzik that Guinn did not appreciate the quip. “Looking back, it was a smart-alecky comment.”
Who will win the Democratic caucus: Clinton, as long as she does well in Iowa and New Hampshire.
Turnout: 25 percent or less of eligible voters. With 420,146 registered Democrats, that would be more than 100,000 participants.
Jon Ralston
Las Vegas Sun columnist, TV host of “Face to Face With Jon Ralston” and publisher of the daily e-mail newsletter “RalstonFlash.com.”
His position with the Las Vegas Sun makes him off-limits for local media types, particularly the everyday print reporters who believe that as a columnist, his views are already known publicly.
But with 20 years covering state and politics, Ralston is often the choice for the national media, most recently in a two-part PBS series focusing on Nevada's early caucuses.
Ralston says some national correspondents come to the state with the presumption Nevadans aren't as smart as everyone else.
“It irritates me when the national media come in with their cliches,” he said with a shake of his head. “They ask if the showgirls are going to caucus.”
He sees it as his obligation to set the record straight. He is also aware, though, of the danger of seeming provincial.
“I try not to be a cheerleader, but acknowledge the reality of Nevada.”
Ralston, who is not registered with any party, has said the idea that Nevada's caucus will highlight Western or local issues is a “canard.”
“The issues that matter to voters here are the war, the economy, health care,” he said.
Memorable bit of punditry: In 1998, just days ahead of the general election, Ralston told The Washington Post the race between Sen. Harry Reid and then-Rep. John Ensign could come down to a few hundred votes.
“The Reid people were furious,” Ralston said. Ensign lost to Reid by 428 votes.
Who will win the Democratic caucus: “It's too early to know.”
Turnout: “I think it will get more than 30,000 people. Any less than 30,000 will be regarded as a failure.”
David McGrath Schwartz can be reached at 259-2327 or at [email protected].
Join the Discussion:
Check this out for a full explanation of our conversion to the LiveFyre commenting system and instructions on how to sign up for an account.
Full comments policy