In statistics, this is known as an "outlier" - Everybody take a deep breath: "Gallup/USA Today poll shows McCain +4 among likely voters." Start of a trend or an aberration? YMMV depending on political affiliation.
Extra - Adam Nagourney of the NY Times whines: "Where's the bounce?" for The One.
3 comments:
The reaction of the far left and the media is going to be fun to watch. When the learn that most American voters don't want Obama's kind of change, they are going to be pissed. Good thing these people are anti-gun
Nothing in the 2008 election cycle is going to be fun for you to watch.
Click on Election Projection (linked on this very site) and see how "deadlocked" and "airtight" and "neck and neck" the race really is. The media you think is going to go nuts has actually been pushing a horse race against the preponderance of evidence.
Can McCain improve in the state-by-state polls? Of course. But just because it's possible to flip a coin and get 20 heads in a row doesn't mean you should bet that way.
It's impossible to persuade the unpersuadable that "liberal media bias" is mostly in the eye of the zealot. Here's something for the rest of us:
In study, evidence of liberal-bias bias
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-onthemedia27-2008jul27,0,712999.story
The Center for Media and Public Affairs at George Mason University, where researchers have tracked network news content for two decades, found that ABC, NBC and CBS were tougher on Obama than on Republican John McCain during the first six weeks of the general-election campaign.
You read it right: tougher on the Democrat.
During the evening news, the majority of statements from reporters and anchors on all three networks are neutral, the center found. And when network news people ventured opinions in recent weeks, 28% of the statements were positive for Obama and 72% negative.
Network reporting also tilted against McCain, but far less dramatically, with 43% of the statements positive and 57% negative, according to the Washington-based media center.
...
the center's director, Robert Lichter, who has won conservative hearts with several of his previous studies, told me the facts were the facts.
"This information should blow away this silly assumption that more coverage is always better coverage," he said.
...
the tracking applies a measure of analytical rigor to a field rife with seat-of-the-pants fulminations.
...
In 2006, conservative cable showmen Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly had Lichter, a onetime Fox News contributor, on their programs. They heralded his findings in the congressional midterm election: that the networks were giving far more positive coverage to the Democrats.
More proof of the liberal domination of the media, Beck and O'Reilly declared.
Now the same researchers have found something less palatable to those conspiracy theorists.
But don't expect cable talking heads to end their trashing of the networks.
Repeated assertions that the networks are in the tank for Democrats represent not only an article of faith on Fox, but a crucial piece of branding.
Weep for our Obamessiah. How they mistreat Him!
Post a Comment