R

arely do you see a group of people more relieved than the mainstream media were at the end of October. Their choice for president—that would be Hillary Clinton, in case you’ve spent the past few years unconscious or underground—had been floundering. She had dissembled about her private server, the FBI was investigating her email practices, a democratic socialist was beating her in Iowa and New Hampshire, and Vice President Joe Biden was thinking of challenging her for the Democratic nomination. She couldn’t do anything right.

Then Clinton had a series of good days and the media declared the 2016 campaign more or less over. The results were in, and it was Hillary by a landslide. The triumphalism was so thick, you could have choked on it.

Hours after the first Democratic debate, Jamelle Bouie of Slate published an article that distilled the emerging conventional wisdom. Clinton, he wrote, had “outclassed” both Bernie Sanders and Martin O’Malley “with policy mastery and impressive political deftness.” Bouie was reassured by Clinton’s performance. Once again, he said, things were going according to plan. “Democrats shouldn’t worry.” Whew!

“In Debate, Hillary Clinton Sent a Message to Doubters,” the New York Times headline announced with propagandistic flair. “With her crisp answers to nearly every question, an aggressiveness her rivals did not seem ready for, and a level of confidence that has often been obscured over months of email questions, Mrs. Clinton sent an unmistakable message to Mr. Biden and to her party,” wrote Jonathan Martin.

The message: I got this.

Amanda Marcotte of Salon wrote, “Sorry, haters: Hillary Clinton won the Democratic debate.” Marcotte never identified the haters, which is too bad, because it would have been interesting to hear from them. After all, the overwhelming consensus of every human being on planet Earth was that Clinton had won. But why bother with journalistic accuracy when there’s a party line to follow?

Marcotte said that Bernie Sanders harbors “essentialist” ideas, such as thinking that a new mother might like to stay at home to care for her baby. Clinton, by contrast, “played up her intelligence and didn’t give in to the urge to try to get people to like her, which ironically makes it easier to like her.” Speak for yourself, Amanda.

Liberals were so giddy that by the end of the month they were making checklists of Clinton’s good fortune. CNN named “Six moments that made Hillary Clinton’s big October.” These included an appearance on Saturday Night Live in which she didn’t bomb, the debate, Biden’s decision not to run, and a session before the House Select Commitee on Benghazi from which she emerged relatively unscathed. CNN said the remaining moments came when Jim Webb and then Lincoln Chafee dropped out. As if either had had a chance to begin with.

Including Webb and Chafee just showed how eager the media were to portray a Clinton comeback. Could anyone have been surprised that Clinton won the first debate? She was the only plausible president on stage. Her competition included a cranky old lefty from Vermont, a boring and unsuccessful governor of Maryland, and two former Republicans who didn’t register in the polls. Victory was hers by default. Clinton could have stood there for two hours and not uttered a word. She still would have won. The alternatives are that unserious.

“If in January 2017, Hillary Clinton is sworn in as the 45th president of the United States,” wrote Todd Purdum in an October 22 piece for Politico headlined “Hillary’s Best Week Yet,” then “historians may well point to this month as the moment her campaign turned around.” That’s a big “if,” and an even bigger “may well.” When Purdum wrote those words, Election Day was more than a year in the future. Surely there will be other moments “her campaign turned around”? And won’t Clinton eventually have to face a legitimate, non-Democratic opponent?

Here was the latest case of the media’s turning a few incidents into a campaign-defining trend. “Hillary Clinton is on a major roll,” said the Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza. “What we learned (or relearned) about Clinton over the past 10 days is that in certain formats, she can be outstanding.”

Still, he went on, “it remains to be seen whether Clinton can get better at things like rallying big crowds to her side with a display of genuine passion.” After many years covering politics, you’d think Cillizza would know better than to use the words Clinton and genuine in the same sentence.

The media couldn’t get over the fact that the positive turn of events happened in a 10-day span. They were like children marveling at a sudden change in the weather. “The last 10 days of October have been the best of Clinton’s campaign,” said Andrea Mitchell. “It’s been a very good 10 days,” said Wolf Blitzer. “She’s had a great 10 days,” said Gloria Borger. “It has been a momentous 10 days for Hillary Clinton,” said Carol Costello. “What a difference 10 days make,” said another CNN anchor. “What a week—really, the last 10 days,” said Brooke Baldwin. Chuck Todd, the host of Meet the Press, used the “10 days” line six times in 24 hours. “We’ve had a good 10 days,” agreed Clinton aide Jennifer Palmieri.

But Cillizza and his friends were wrong. We didn’t learn or relearn anything about Clinton “over the past 10 days.” She was the same Hillary Clinton on October 31 that she had been on October 1. Clinton is a good debater, she has little competition for her party’s nomination, and she’s more popular than Congress. Well, give her a medal.

Here’s what else is true about her. She is still seen as unlikable and untrustworthy by the general electorate. She has a habit of making statements that are not, you know, true. And assuming she wins the Democratic nomination, which at this point only the FBI seems able to prevent, Clinton will be running for her party’s third term in the White House at a time when the public says the country is headed in the wrong direction.

“Can the GOP stop Hillary Clinton’s momentum?” asked Chris Matthews on October 26. I don’t know the answer. But I do know, with 100 percent certainty, that the media will do everything in its power to keep her momentum going.