Maybe it's 1960

In the mythology of American politics, the 1960 presidential election between Richard Nixon and John F. Kennedy is remembered as a watershed moment: TV vaulted the charismatic JFK to the White House as his sensible policy positions and high rhetoric soared above the petty, sweaty, dodgy vision of Nixon and his tired party.

But in fact, both candidates were riding high throughout the campaign. Nixon was polling ahead until the 11th hour. The final vote margin, probably padded with thousands of fraudulent votes on both sides, was razor thin.

What's interesting right now isn't the facts, but the mythology, created after the fact by many of the same media figures who had brought the handsome Kennedy to the public's attention only to be rebuffed by Americans who were not yet trained to respond to pretty candidates on television instead of traditional assholes like Nixon.

This year's election offers a disparity that I can't quite figure out. My eyes and ears tell me that Obama is way ahead. The conspiracy theories swirl: who are these pollsters and who are they calling to get these "all tied up" numbers? Will the vote be rigged in Ohio and Florida? After all, no one has shown that the Diebold loopholes have been closed. Bush isn't really going to voluntarily step down, is he?

But just as in 2000 and 2004, the media has a big, self-appointed part to play in the time we have left before November 4. To wit: it needs to keep up the illusion that it is out front of the politics of change in this cycle, and that America is at war with itself and struggling as never before to choose a path.

The American press is so lazy, so unfulfilled, so desperate to manufacture its very own, yearly watershed moment, that it will try to keep this election close until the last moment. The press wants a 1960 of its very own.