RedState heard Palin's teleprompter broke and she soldiered on like a pro! A guy who watched the speech in view of her teleprompter says that is not true, at all, wtf. Too late! The story's already being repeated as gospel!

Drudge says Oprah refuses to have Sarah Palin on her show! Oprah says there hasn't been any discussion, we only just heard of this woman a week ago, wtf, I'll have her on later. Who cares?

Hell, on a macro level various people call Sarah Palin a "maverick" and "reformer" and then she is one. Democrats can't replicate this strategy because there is not a legitimate news organization in the world that would unquestioningly use Kos (or even HuffPo??) as a source.

But if they want to try we'll happily post an item on that one time Martin Balsam and Robert Shaw hijacked Joe Biden's Acela and killed the engineer and he outwitted all of them and drove the train to safety. Now we wait for Chris Matthews to take the bait!

It's not like the man has to start something new. His own news site, Breitbart.com, does huge traffic because it's where all of Drudge's wire report items link to. He also has a video site, and he worked on the launch of the now-successful Huffington Post (though he's since divested—he's a true conservative believer).

Breitbart works the afternoon shift at the Drudge Report. The two have remarkably seamless editorial styles, though some feel Breitbart has a lighter touch. More importantly, while Matt Drudge himself rarely speaks to the press or flits about in public settings, Breitbart is actually popular, and even a bit of a real-life schmoozer:

Before we left [a party at the Republican convention], the pundit Jonah Goldberg accused him of being the most popular guy in the room.

At the National Journal party, publisher David Bradley was delighted to finally put a face to the name. “That’s Andrew Breitbart?” he exclaimed. Walking into the Weekly Standard party, a friend from L.A. greeted him. “Have you had a chance to take a shower yet?” joked Steve McEveety, who is Mel Gibson’s producing partner.

Okay big shot! Breitbart is truly Dr. Jekyll to Drudge's Mr. Hyde. And a good man to know. We plan to get a good deal of comedy value out of his new venture.

[NYO]

• Marc Jacobs is "returning?" Well, if the designer can leverage his sex life into a New Yorker profile, he's probably a decent fit here, in the pages of the New Yorker's more fashion-conscious corporate sibling.
• Movie moguls Harvey and Bob Weinstein plummet to 87 from 41. But they're so used to sinking feelings they probably barely notice them anymore.
• Venture capitalist (and godfather to Google and Yahoo) Michael Moritz fell to 88 from 56. Is the shine off Google that badly?
• What an odd time to add Walter Mossberg to the list. The grossly overpaid Wall Street Journal technology columnist was recently replaced on CNBC by the Times' David Pogue, whose theater background and hammy stage personality make him by far the more interesting gadget czar in the era of Web video. (Mossberg moved over to Fox Business, owned by his paper's new owner.) Pogue doesn't make the list, probably because he doesn't have a big power conference like Mossberg's D - All Things Digital.
• Conceptual artist Damien Hirst debuts all the way up at 31??
• Bill Keller of the Times is hip now! Wait, what?
• Ha ha, nice knowing you, hedge fund guys! Wait, no, not "nice," the other thing. Awful!

Your comments on further strangeness are welcome in the comments, although really it's best not to think too hard about these things, which publishers change at random basically just to screw with you.

THE VANITY FAIR 100:
2007 ranking in parentheses

1. Vladimir Putin, Russian Prime Minister (new entry)
2. Rupert Murdoch, News Corp. (1)
3. Sergey Brin (3), Larry Page (3), and Eric Schmidt (new entry), Google
4. Steve Jobs, Apple, Disney, and Pixar (2)
5. Warren Buffett, Berkshire Hathaway (5)
6. Jeff Bezos, Amazon (23)
7. Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al Maktoum, ruler of Dubai (new entry)
8. Roman Abramovich, Millhouse Capital (30)
9. Angelina Jolie & Brad Pitt, actors, activists (new entry)
10. Al Gore, eco-warrior (19)
11. Bill Clinton, Clinton Foundation (6)
12. Michael Bloomberg, Mayor of New York, Bloomberg L.P. (9)
13. Bernard Arnault, LVMH (8)
14. Steven Spielberg, DreamWorks SKG (7)
15. Ralph Lauren, Polo Ralph Lauren (13)
16. Steve Ballmer, Microsoft (returning)
17. François-Henri Pinault, PPR (new entry)
18. Barry Diller & Diane von Furstenberg (15), IAC; Diane von Furstenberg (15)
19. H. Lee Scott, Wal-Mart (12)
20. Lloyd Blankfein, Goldman Sachs (new entry)
21. Jamie Dimon, JPMorgan Chase (new entry)
22. David Geffen, DreamWorks SKG (16)
23. George Lucas, Lucasfilm (40)
24. Jerry Bruckheimer, Jerry Bruckheimer Films (26)
25. Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook (new entry)
26. Ronald Perelman, MacAndrews & Forbes (31)
27. Jeff Bewkes, Time Warner (22)
28. John Lasseter (66), Andrew Stanton (new entry), and Brad Bird (new entry), Pixar, Disney
29. Herb Allen, Allen & Co. (21)
30. Miuccia Prada, Prada S.p.A. (44)
31. Damien Hirst, conceptual artist (new entry)
32. Sumner Redstone, Viacom, CBS (70)
33. Arnold Schwarzenegger, Governor of California (50)
34. Tom Hanks, actor, director, producer (32)
35. Robert Iger, Disney (36)
36. Bono, singer, humanitarian (28)
37. Larry Ellison, Oracle (20)
38. Larry Gagosian, Gagosian Gallery (84)
39. Howard Stringer, Sony (17)
40. Peter Chernin, News Corp. (24)
41. Philippe Dauman, Viacom (68)
42. Vivi Nevo, NV Investments (59)
43. Oprah Winfrey, Harpo Productions (14)
44. Jon Stewart, The Daily Show (89)
45. Stephen Colbert, The Colbert Report (87)
46. Carlos Slim Helú, Teléfonos de México, América Móvil (11)
47. Karl Lagerfeld, Chanel (52)
48. Giorgio Armani, Armani Group (37)
49. Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, Kingdom Holding Company (new entry)
50. Mike Nichols & Diane Sawyer, director; ABC News anchor (42)
51. Jacob Rothschild, financier (33)
52. Mickey Drexler, J. Crew (55)
53. Jeffrey Katzenberg, DreamWorks Animation (38)
54. Leslie Moonves, CBS (25)
55. George Clooney, actor, producer, director, activist (27)
56. Jay-Z, hip-hop (47)
57. Oscar & Annette de la Renta, Oscar de la Renta (53)
58. Judd Apatow, producer, director, actor, writer (new entry)
59. Robert De Niro, Tribeca Enetrprises, Tribeca Productions (34)
60. Bill Keller, The New York Times (new entry)
61. Mick Jagger, the Rolling Stones (60)
62. Bruce Wasserstein, Lazard; Wasserstein & Co. (43)
63. Ted Forstmann, IMG Worldwide (new entry)
64. Anna Wintour, Vogue (new entry)
65. Brian Roberts, Comcast (57)
66. Brian Grazer & Ron Howard, Imagine Entertainment (65)
67. Mukesh & Anil Ambani, Reliance Industries, Reliance ADA Group (new entry)
68. Jeff Zucker, NBC Universal (returning)
69. Jeff Skoll, Participant Media (61)
70. Jonathan Ive, Apple (83)
71. William McDonough, William McDonough & Partners (new entry)
72. Bobby Kotick, Activision Blizzard (new entry)
73. Shigeru Miyamoto, Nintendo (new entry)
74. Matt Drudge, the Drudge Report (new entry)
75. Donatella Versace, Gianni Versace S.p.A. (77)
76. Diego Della Valle, Tod’s (63)
77. Henry Kravis, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. (51)
78. Marc Jacobs, Marc Jacobs, Marc by Marc Jacobs, LVMH (returning)
79. Jean Pigozzi, investor, art collector (86)
80. Paul Allen, Vulcan Inc. (71)
81. Charlie Rose, Charlie Rose (80)
82. Frank Rich, The New York Times, HBO (82)
83. John Galliano, Christian Dior, Galliano (new entry)
84. Jann Wenner, Wenner Media (74)
85. Joel & Ethan Coen, movies (new entry)
86. John Malone, Liberty Media (69)
87. Harvey & Bob Weinstein, the Weinstein Company (41)
88. Michael Moritz, Sequoia Capital (56)
89. Steven Rattner, Quadrangle Group (97)
90. Arianna Huffington, the Huffington Post (98)
91. John Paulson, Paulson & Co. (new entry)
92. Vinod Khosla, Khosla Ventures (62)
93. Jerry Weintraub, Jerry Weintraub Productions (76)
94. Tobias Meyer, Sotheby’s (new entry)
95. Tom Brokaw, NBC News (returning)
96. Doug Morris, Universal Music Group (99)
97. Jimmy Buffett, Margaritaville (96)
98. Jeffrey Sachs, the Earth Institute at Columbia University, Millennium Promise (new entry)
99. Steven Cohen, S.A.C. Capital Advisors (45)
100. Walter Mossberg, The Wall Street Journal (new entry)

[Vanity Fair]

The Cocoon

Frank Rich isn't worried. His Sunday column takes comfort in the race's underlying stability:

As I went on vacation at the end of July, Barack Obama was leading John McCain by three to four percentage points in national polls. When I returned last week he still was. But lo and behold, a whole new plot twist had rolled off the bloviation assembly line in those intervening two weeks: Obama had lost the election!

Rich is a card-carrying member of the media's "cocooning" wing — Kaus's phrase for their perfect faith that the 2004 election was "Kerry's to lose" (as ABC's The Note had it). His column then ran through the usual catechism of reasons that Obama is better than McCain and will therefore win.

Curmudgeonly, right-leaning Russ Smith (the NY Press founder and longtime Mugger columnist), also isn't likely to be too concerned by Zogby. Writing for SpliceToday, Smith strangely decided to dive into the cocoon with Rich, writing that he didn't mind Rich's "bewilderment at the hundreds of articles claiming that Obama is in danger of blowing the election" because "there's no reason to believe that Obama has suddenly forfeited his formidable frontrunner status, no evidence that his extraordinary campaign team will repeat the disorganized, sullen and fractious effort of John Kerry's four years ago."

Smith's conclusion starts with an oddly familiar phrase:

It's Obama's race to lose, and if the Senator is as politically savvy as he's demonstrated so far, once the convention's over he'll let his huge salaried staff and untold number of volunteers register more voters and prepare for the debates with McCain, which, given the GOP nominee's penchant for petulance and botched facts, ought to pave the way for an eight-point victory and Electoral College wipeout.

The Point For Not Getting Too Worked Up

Because the media loves the sexy that dramatic new numbers bring, they predictably ignore all others, like today's Rasmussen poll showing Obama narrowly ahead, 47%-46%. Frank Rich is right about one thing: Since late July, the trend in the two daily tracking polls, Gallup and Rasmussen, has been steady: Obama has polled between 46% and 48%, according to Rasmussen, while McCain's scores ranged from 45% to 47%: A one- or two-point race. Gallup shows the same general story, although with lower numbers for both candidates (meaning, more undecideds).

It's more reliable to examine each candidate's numbers separately, rather than focusing on the gap between them, as the media always does ("McCain up by 5!" "Obama up 2!"). The press never points out that a poll's margin of error applies to each candidate's number — e.g., McCain's 46% and Obama's 41%, not the 5-point gap between them, and that that margin of error has to be doubled if looking at those gaps, which are twice as volatile.

Volatility, of course, is pundit gold: it allows the manufacture of storylines – for example, it will be widely said tonight that the Zogby poll is evidence that McCain's (dastardly, frivolous, misleading, as the pundits will intone) attacks on Obama's "celebrity" took their toll. Or, others will say, it's the crisis with Russia. In times of crisis, Americans will turn to a seasoned war hero like McCain.

And that is how the press creates the illusion of suspense and narrative fitting their own biases by focusing on the inevitable outlier polls. Probability theory holds that one poll in 20 will be flawed beyond the announced margin of error. Since there are many more than 20 polls conducted each month, the media is guaranteed a regular diet of outlier polls with dramatically different results.

Even so, this Zogby poll probably isn't deeply flawed. Most likely, it just didn't press the undecided voters very hard, to say whom they lean toward (you should probably put less stock in polls that report high numbers of undecideds). If it is correct, the poll most likely means that while McCain has now consolidated his Republicans (in early July he was polling in the mid-to-low 40's), with strong performances like last Saturday's at the Saddleback evangelical forum, it's Obama's supporters who are now shaky, for reasons having everything to do with McCain's attacks. It's hard to believe either candidate has a floor lower than about 46% — meaning that those shaky Obama supporters will probably come back when they have to make a choice.

The Point for Laying Money On McCain While the Odds Are Good

But Obama's decidedly not a lock. Here, Frank Rich and the cocooners are wrong: Obama does have a problem. In July, the outlier polls, which Rich rightly discounted, mostly showed spikes for Obama (as did, therefore, the polling averages) – and at the time, the Obamaphiles were ecstatic, proclaiming each 9-point or double-digit Obama lead in countless Facebook status updates. Now the outliers point the opposite way, Obama's lead in the polling average has narrowed, and Facebook is silent (unless, of course, a lot of your friends are Republicans).

Under their noses – doh! this always happens in August – he has been turned into one more abnormal Martian Democrat running for president, a meme dating back to "egghead" Adlai Stevenson. To a list that includes Michael Dukakis, indulging himself with a leisurely summertime tour of Western Massachusetts as the Bushites introduced the rest of the country to Willie Horton, and John Kerry windsurfing as the Swift Boaters went to town on him, you can add Obama summering in Berlin and Hawaii while McCain morphed him into an airheaded starlet. (To the GOP's frustration, they could never make Bill Clinton into an un-American, even though he'd demonstrated against the Vietnam War on foreign soil: the greasy fries and skanky girlfriends made that impossible.)

The real wise guys, of course, will think this whole discussion of national polls is pointless. "It's not a national election," they'll repeat, "it's 50 state elections!" Cocooners, who don't like the recent national trends, have been taking refuge in the RealClearPolitics electoral vote map and its "No Tossup State" option, which until just last week gave Obama an overwhelming 323 electoral votes, 53 more than needed.

The wise guys are wrong, though. You should watch the national polls, if only because they are more up-to-date and consistent in quality, and allow you to follow trends. The state polls are a lagging indicator – many are not fresh, or are done by local political consultants, colleges, or newspapers with limited polling credibility. Besides, the swing states tend to swing as one, and will follow the national trends. They are politically average – that's why they're swing states.

And sure enough: Today, the RealClearPolitics "No Tossup" map shows McCain ahead, with 274 electoral votes, four more than enough to get elected.

Other stories linked to on Drudge include "Swedish wrestler Ara Abrahamian throws away medal in Olympic hissy fit," "Huskers dismiss 2 wrestlers accused of posing nude," and "High school wrestler arrested for assault, exposing genitals during practice."

An editorial written by Republican presidential hopeful McCain has been rejected by the NEW YORK TIMES — less than a week after the paper published an essay written by Obama, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

The paper's decision to refuse McCain's direct rebuttal to Obama's 'My Plan for Iraq' has ignited explosive charges of media bias in top Republican circles.

'It would be terrific to have an article from Senator McCain that mirrors Senator Obama's piece,' NYT Op-Ed editor David Shipley explained in an email late Friday to McCain's staff. 'I'm not going to be able to accept this piece as currently written.'

MORE

In McCain's submission to the TIMES, he writes of Obama: 'I am dismayed that he never talks about winning the war—only of ending it... if we don't win the war, our enemies will. A triumph for the terrorists would be a disaster for us. That is something I will not allow to happen as president.'

NYT's Shipley advised McCain to try again: 'I'd be pleased, though, to look at another draft.'

[Shipley served in the Clinton Administration from 1995 until 1997 as Special Assistant to the President and Senior Presidential Speechwriter.]

MORE

A top McCain source claims the paper simply does not agree with the senator's Iraq policy, and wants him to change it, not "re-work the draft."

WHINE WHINE WHINE.

Of course there is bias at the New York Times Op-Ed section. It is the Opinion section! We call BIAS on the Wall Street Journal for not running our op-ed, "everyone who reads this section is a retard."

Drudge!!

First and foremost, is the depth — and the quality — of Drudge's readership. Drudge's number of unique visitors is regularly touted but what is more important, in terms of his ability to drives news cycles, is that every reporter and editor who covers politics is checking the site multiple times a day.

Phil Singer, former deputy communications director for Hillary Rodham Clinton's presidential campaign and now a Democratic consultant, called Drudge's "elite readership" a key to his influence. Singer added that a walk through any press filing center at a debate reveals every other laptop, at least, has Drudge's website up on its screen.

In other words, Drudge is still massively influential because all the reporters and editors who cal him influential still assume he's influential, so they refresh him every 20 seconds. See how that works? That's called "gatekeeping."

The funny thing is that if all of these people magically decided to switch their homepages to, say, the Huffington Post or Yahoo News (or maybe just a well-curated RSS feed!) tomorrow, the tenor of your "news" would change immeasurably but you would not be any less informed!

But everyone appointed Matt our "national political assignment editor" (to quote GOP op Kevin Madden) back in 1996 or something and they're all too lazy to find a different website. Even though Matt has definitely fallen off of late! He barely touched Reverend Wright at all, for instance, and that certainly didn't stop that story from dominating for two weeks.

Still, we love and admire the man, because nobody does anything like this better:
See, the stock market is collapsing. So here is a bear eating a fruit salad.

"'I will always be there to fight against that,' Schwarzenegger said, prompting loud cheers and a standing ovation from about 200 people at the annual convention of the Log Cabin Republicans, the nation's largest gay Republican group. The Austrian-born governor immediately cracked that he wished activists would instead focus on passing an amendment to allow naturalized citizens to run for president.

"A Schwarzenegger spokeswoman, Julie Soderlund, said it was the first time the governor publicly stated opposition to the measure, though he has held the view for 'some time.'" This means I must love Schwarzenegger the politician as much as I love Schwarzenegger the big crazy man-actor. Because everyone here is gay! [PE.com via Drudge]

Every so often, Drudge will randomly highlight some photo he finds on the wires as proof of media bias. Today, it's Hillary Clinton with a DEVIL hovering just behind her. Because the greatest trick the Devil ever played was convincing the world he doesn't bake.

Of course, it was goofy how quickly the lame Drudge thing became a major issue, considering that the photo didn't even meet the high standards of Wonkette's "funny pictures" tag. Still, though, there it is, on the front page of both of New York's tabloids (as seen above). The Post and the Daily News get to call out Hillary for attempting to "smear" Obama while also running the smear-y photo, legitimizing the idea that a black man with a funny name wearing something that looks vaguely like a turban is terrifying. Everyone wins! Except Hillary Clinton.

(There was also yesterday's entertaining Situation Room argument.)

And today, Politico star journos Mike Allen and John Harris declare Clinton's entire campaign apparatus to be totally at sea, possessing "only a faint and highly improvisational strategy about what to do over the next seven days...." Meanwhile, a CBS poll has Obama pulling ahead nationally, and the Times says "Mr. Obama has made substantial gains across most major demographic groups in the Democratic Party, including men and women, liberals and moderates, higher and lower income voters, and those with and without college degrees."

Of course, this means that if Hillary wins Texas or Ohio—let's keep in mind that winning either or both of those is well within her grasp, especially with such a nice underdog narrative coming along now to boost turnout, and another goddamn debate airing tonight—the race will never ever end and the candidates will just keep exchanging leads while the press relentlessly beats up on Hillary and begins to plant vague fearmongering doubts about Obama's Other-ness. And the rest of the world will become terribly confused when we elect John McCain.

Back when Hillary was inevitable and unstoppable, Mr. Drudge seemed rather pleased. "I need Hillary Clinton. I need to be part of her world. That's my bank," he famously announced. Clinton's camp, perhaps not sufficiently wary of the man who nearly took down her husband, reached out by appointing former DNCer Tracy Sefl their unofficial Drudge emissary.

But Drudge, who enjoys being convinced of his importance, dislikes being portrayed as manipulatable. Shortly after the New York Times brought the world the story of how Matt and Hil are sitting in a tree, the Drudge Report reverted back to its traditional "merciless smearing of that Clinton harridan" mode, with the photos of Hil becoming even more grotesque and unflattering than ever before, the most pointless anti-Clinton stories suddenly getting major play, and the treatment of Obama remaining surprisingly even-handed.

Which, perhaps, explains this story, the clearest proof yet that if Clinton's campaign hasn't yet removed Ms. Sefl from the Drudge beat, they really ought to. Drudge, handed a hilarious photo of a Democratic politician, one that he could play as proof that this politician was un-American or too "different" or "foreign" to be president (a media narrative portions of the Right have been trying to push as Obama surges), turns it into a story of Hillary Clinton's inept and straw-grasping team. He even includes a cute little "EDITOR'S NOTE" explaining that "other leaders have worn local costumes," which he follows with hilarious pictures of Hillary, G.W. Bush, and Bill Clinton looking like ponces in wacky clothes. Amazing.

Update/Clarification: Ms. Sefl has denied being involved in sending the picture to Drudge. And we believe her! Because, rly, she's too smart for this kind of foolishness.

[DRUDGE REPORT]