My first comment about the NH primary is that the MSM blew it again. They overstated the Obama momentum and participated in making Hillary into a victim, something women naturally would find offensive. The majority of women in NH voted for Hillary because there was a strong gender sympathy. I heard women interviewed yesterday including many female journalists who rallied around Hillary even though they may not
even support her. The hyperbole of the pundits changed the dynamics of the NH primary. The polling was probably accurate until Sunday when the women gave Hillary a protest vote against the MSM. I applaud the NH voters for that.
As I am writing this piece, the MSNBC pundits including Russert, Williams, and Matthews are calling this primary one of the biggest upsets in political primary history. That analysis is probably the biggest exaggeration in primary history. Both Iowa and NH are populated by mostly white rural Americans representing the least typical voting population and a microscopic view of the electorate. The next question is whether the African American voters and especially the women will rally around Obama creating the same bounce for Obama in the more populated states as the women did for Hillary in NH.
I suspect that the polling in the other states will give us a better clue about this than they did in NH. Statistically, polling in larger states are not nearly as volatile and subject to short term swings caused by media hysteria. That will be the true test of where the Democrats stand. In the long run, it will be better for all of us. While Clinton has won the day, the jury is still out. And in the process, her victory gives Edwards a better chance to argue his important populist issues.
novamradio.com
Sheldon Drobny was the co-founder of Nova M radio and Air America Radio. He has supported many philanthropic causes and is currently involved in purchasing radio stations for liberal talk radio with his new company, Nova M Radio, Inc. Mr. Drobny specializes in business and tax matters and is admitted to practice before the U.S. Tax Court as a non-attorney. Less than 200 non-attorneys have been admitted to practice before the U.S. Tax Court since its inception in 1942. Mr. Drobny received a Bachelor of Science Degree in accounting from Roosevelt University in Chicago and is a member of Beta Gamma Sigma, an honorary fraternity recognizing acadamic achievement in colleges of business administration.
I agree with your article. I have come to dislike the term "mainstream media". I have heard Fox refer to themselves as "mainstream". It implies that everything other than the 'mainstream media' is suspect.
I would suggest if anything your article is mainstream.
There is nothing mainstream about Fox. They are narrow, sectarian, biased. A more accurate name would be 'corporate media' or 'commercial media' and even that is probably being too neutral.
by
JesusReyes (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 4 comments)
on Wednesday, January 9, 2008 at 9:26:39 AM
Headline: POLLS and TALLIES disagee! Q: Which one's wrong?
I am not knee-jerk sure the Polling (prediction) numbers are always wrong.
Pollsters got it down to an exact 'science,' almost -- just talking 'reputable' pollsters here, (check into methodology and technique) -- and voter pre-polling numbers' track record has been spot-on with eventual real results, some going back 50 years, or more; except, political polls all began going goofy-wrong the first time computer programmed touch-the-TV voting began, circa 2000.
It isn't surprising and could be expected that polling accuracy has steadily improved, since the most of the experience, practice, and therefore refinement of polling has been on behalf of merchants and marketers studying customers and aiming to sell mass-produced gizmos and doodads ... and flinty corporate bean counters are notorious for not liking to pay for services that don't deliver promised results. Pollsters and polling today, are the 'fittest survivors.' They got it down to a science. AND have a longstanding track record of accuracy.
New Hampshire polling numbers 'predictions' were consistent in results across several different poll-takers.
Since this polls-got-it-wrong phenomenon started, (with the computer-programmed voting booths), where unexpected results have come out it has been in the favor of the rightwing fascist politics every time.
So I'm not thinking Hillary would computer-rig the ballot tallies; I'm thinking more Karl Rove fascists would -- in the state (NH) of the Rove lookalike / talkalike / actalike: chubby Senator Sununu. Because, as previous OpEd News articles observed, the rightwing fascists have bet everything and are counting on the Democratic candidate being Hillary to hurl their hate at.
And I'm not the only one surveying the unexpected tallies in NH, who thinks such things. Also, I'm not the only one who doesn't really care which Democratic candidate wins; Hillary or Obama or Edwards, nor even Richardson. (I'd vote for Kucinich, or Gravel, else count me abstainer ... or third party.)
All-in-all, the spin that the massmedia got it wrong in NH -- "bad intelligence" from the pollsters -- sounds to me like more spin. Spinning spin? Spin squared? Although I do very much like Sheldon's line, "the worst (media-rife) analysis in history."
Like, who knew that ONE single shady-looking character (there's a video of him in action at BradBlog, see for yourself), owns and controls ALL the Diebold computer-programmed ballot-counting devices used in New Hampshire ... and he's a big Republican donor and supporter ..... hmmmmm ....
Y'know, all those corrupted ballot-counting machines that were around in the 2004 election, didn't go away. Most states have NOT thrown them out. They're ba-a-ack.
Just sayin' ... read some reports, keep some perspective ... before we get too carried away about what the meaning of 'meaning' is.
by
meremark (1 articles, 3 quicklinks, 25 diaries, 495 comments)
on Wednesday, January 9, 2008 at 12:23:56 PM
If Karl Rove's tampering with Diebold, it ain't to skew results to Hillary. Look at the analysis: Hillary got the DEMOCRATIC vote. Obama got the INDEPENDENT (i. e. dissafected Republican) vote. Karl Rove is scared to death of both of the Clintons.
by
terk (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 15 comments)
on Wednesday, January 9, 2008 at 1:20:11 PM
I am sick to death of reading articles and comments today written by men who keep repeating: women voted for Hillary because she's a woman. I didn't hear these people whining that Barack Obama won because he's black and black people voted for him--oh, that's right, if we mentioned that he's black that would be racist, but it's fine to sling all sorts of sexist crap at Hillary Clinton because she's a woman.
Liberal men are just as authoritarian as conservatives: oppose their candidate at your peril. If you don't vote Obama you must be a traitor. And speaking of crying, I'm also too tired of all the liberal men crying and whining that NH was rigged because their candidate didn't win. Who you gonna trust? I guess the only people who should be trusted to run the rest of the primaries are the Obama supporters--according to them everyone else in the country is a crook.
by
terk (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 15 comments)
on Wednesday, January 9, 2008 at 1:17:09 PM
When a reported tally is a count of ballots nobody voted ...
... as such reported tallies have been happening starting in 2000 ...
then it is NOT about Hillary or Obama or another, nor is it about Who votes for them or Why they vote for them. But DO hold onto your convictions and preferences, you might be able to start an argument or fight with those weapons against other Democratic voters ... which would make the Republican fascists very happy to watch.
by
meremark (1 articles, 3 quicklinks, 25 diaries, 495 comments)
on Wednesday, January 9, 2008 at 2:00:12 PM
5 comments
How would you rate this?
You must be logged in (if signed up) to do ratings.
It's free to signup! And easy. And takes just a minute or two....
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
