Could The Media Have Missed the Real Story?
The real winners in New Hampshire were Obama and Edwards.
From The Huffington Post...
Gives me hope and all.
posted by kate @ 9:47 AM
2 comments
Out in Left Field
Where parenting and politics meet, but don't always play nice.
Saturday, January 12, 2008
From The Huffington Post...
Gives me hope and all.
kate
See my complete profile
Talk To Me
Blogroll Me!
My Musings from The St. Petersburg Times
from In The Loop
from tbt*
from The Weekly Planet
from the world wide web
2 Comments:
Wow, talk about spin. Welcome to a representative Democracy. Frequently if you add the totals of the second and third place candidates, you get a value higher than the stated support of the winning candidate. And really, that's all Loeb can say with any sort of confidence, although he desperately tries to cram more into it.
The trouble is, not only is his evidence admittedly anecdotal, the worst kind of evidence there is, his reasoning flies in the face of what everyone else has been saying regarding Iowa. The reason Obama pulled ahead there was supposedly the effectiveness of his campaign in turning out independents and loosely-attached Dems who hadn't caucused in years. This makes a certain sense since the total numbers of Dems caucusing in Iowa this year were so much higher than in 2004.
The problem with this becomes apparent: Obama supporters by and large support Obama. If he's not available as a choice, there's no reason to believe these independent and loosely-attached supporters would, in overwhelming numbers, throw their support behind Edwards, despite what "hundreds of supporters of both of them" and "hundreds of blog responses" might be whispering in Loeb's ear.
I also find it highly amusing that Loeb was more than willing to list exactly what was wrong with Hills while the best he can say about Obama and Edwards is they "represent a voice for change".
Well, so would a three-toed ground sloth with the distinct advantage that the sloth is inherently cuter than all three of the Dem frontrunners. Combined, even! The question is, change in exactly what direction and through what policies? So far, Edwards is still pretty opaque and Obama seems to be running his campaign in some sort of Smurf dialect, hoping his hope with hopefully out-hope other hope-having hopefuls hope hope hope hope hope.
Hope.
I never thought I'd be so annoyed by that word.
It seems somewhat of a false argument to effectively condemn Hills' policies and say Obama's and Edwards are so much better when Hills is the only one of the three to actually have real policy points and programs on record and thus the only one who's had them critiqued.
Edwards could be the Kingmaker, if he stays the distance.
Hey, the hair looks good, Kate.
(Just getting out of Florida should take care of those greys....ha ha).
See ya.
Sunny
Post a Comment
<< Home