Wednesday, February 06, 2008
Super Tuesday: The Press get it wrong again!
It was certainly no surprise that McCain did the best of the Republican candidates. The Democratic results were altogether more interesting.
I was watching MSNBC for much of the afternoon, then switched to CNN and a while later, BBC America. The American channels had Obama neck and neck with Clinton in New York and with a very large lead in California. I suppose the main thing that shows, is that Obama supporters are more likely to talk to the pollsters standing by polling stations.
I find it interesting is that in the UK, Bill Clinton, who people there absolutely loved, is now suddenly as demonised as he has been over here among so many Democrats who used to call him the best President of his generation. How has this come about? Has he suddenly become a bad man? Has he changed and I somehow missed it? Is the press getting a message through to people? Is it the fact that in supporting his wife, the former President must spin for Hillary and against Barack? I’m suspecting the latter, with a little help from press bias.
And I just got my answer, as an analyst speaks the words :”because of what the Clintons did”. I have heard these words from others. But what did the Clintons do? After the Florida primary, Hillary went to Florida. The press make that sound like she broke an agreement and campaigned there. And the ‘educated’ people who watch news channels have been suckered into believing it. Pollsters will have us believe that educated people are going for Obama by a margin of 2 to 1. Further proof, in case anyone needed more, that education doesn’t equal smart.
As is being discussed today, apart from Obama’s home state, Illinois, large states that will vote for a Democrat in the General Election voted for Clinton. Obama surprisingly won in the conservative states, but these will vote Republican in November, so maybe those aren’t the best places for him to be strong. On the other hand, a delegate is a delegate no matter where they are from. But perhaps Democrats would do well to note that Clinton can win where the Democrats need to win.
And I have a question about the Obama change. Seeing as he doesn’t talk about details and merely repeats that we need change, can anyone who intends voting for the man please tell me, apart from the face, what changes by voting for him!
Viagra Online
I was watching MSNBC for much of the afternoon, then switched to CNN and a while later, BBC America. The American channels had Obama neck and neck with Clinton in New York and with a very large lead in California. I suppose the main thing that shows, is that Obama supporters are more likely to talk to the pollsters standing by polling stations.
I find it interesting is that in the UK, Bill Clinton, who people there absolutely loved, is now suddenly as demonised as he has been over here among so many Democrats who used to call him the best President of his generation. How has this come about? Has he suddenly become a bad man? Has he changed and I somehow missed it? Is the press getting a message through to people? Is it the fact that in supporting his wife, the former President must spin for Hillary and against Barack? I’m suspecting the latter, with a little help from press bias.
And I just got my answer, as an analyst speaks the words :”because of what the Clintons did”. I have heard these words from others. But what did the Clintons do? After the Florida primary, Hillary went to Florida. The press make that sound like she broke an agreement and campaigned there. And the ‘educated’ people who watch news channels have been suckered into believing it. Pollsters will have us believe that educated people are going for Obama by a margin of 2 to 1. Further proof, in case anyone needed more, that education doesn’t equal smart.
As is being discussed today, apart from Obama’s home state, Illinois, large states that will vote for a Democrat in the General Election voted for Clinton. Obama surprisingly won in the conservative states, but these will vote Republican in November, so maybe those aren’t the best places for him to be strong. On the other hand, a delegate is a delegate no matter where they are from. But perhaps Democrats would do well to note that Clinton can win where the Democrats need to win.
And I have a question about the Obama change. Seeing as he doesn’t talk about details and merely repeats that we need change, can anyone who intends voting for the man please tell me, apart from the face, what changes by voting for him!
