One of the most annoying aspects of this primary election has been the sheer bloody-minded insistence of news outlets - particularly cable news networks - to prognosticate the news instead of just report it.
Today's coverage of the Pennsylvania Democratic Primary is no different and serves as a further indictment of an industry that is incapable of just reporting the facts.
It wouldn't be so bad were it that the opinions of reporters, talking heads and so-called experts are then being used to influence voters and to build a case whether or not a candidate should or should not stay in the race or even if they are electable.
An example came earlier this year with coverage ad nauseam whether Mike Huckabee or Ron Paul or Mitt Romney should drop out of the Republian Presidential Primary based upon their showing in a handful of election results and well before the presumptive nominee had achieved the necessary delegates to claim victory.
You're seeing it now ten-times over with Sen. Hillary Clinton. The whole process of electing the next president has been reduced to some sick reality show with today's election treated like a gambling spread. If the former First Lady doesn't win Pennsylvania by more than seven points then she has lost the nomination but if she wins by high double-digits well then Barack Obama might not have the momentum to take the fight into Indiana or North Carolina.
What a bunch of twaddle. What an embarrassment for journalists everywhere to have our industry sullied in such a sordid manner.
It's not up to the media to choose the winner here - although it would be nice to see some real investigative reporting on actual issues - but that's a different matter.
What's sad after being so wrong so often just during this primary season alone one has to marvel at the institutional lack of conscience or even a short-term memory. Why does CNN, MSNBC, and FoxNews (and other outlets) continue to speculate on the news instead of just playing it straight? People of all political stripes in America resents the notion of having overpaid celebrity news anchors telling the public what to think.
But it keeps on happening. It's like the Mariners sticking in Bobby Ayala to close games in the mid-90s. You knew what the result was going to be, you just had to wonder at stubborn lack of reasoning behind it.
Not that I'm being entirely altruistic here. Coming from the opposite side of the political aisle it is heartening to see the Clinton smear machine unleashed on the junior senator from Illinois. And staffers for John McCain must be silently giddy over news that Obama was forced to outspend his primary opponent 3-to-1 in the Keystone State simply to try to prevent his being defeated by double-digits.
No. There is something more pure and noble at stake here and it's not for exit and opinion pollsters or television personalities to decide when an American citizen should or should cease their efforts at attaining elected office. It's up to voters. Any move to hurry or jostle the decision making process of the electorate for coarse political ends flies smack in the face of 231 years of democracy.
The Republic is far more important than that.
Yes, Hillary Clinton is as flawed a vessel as it gets when it comes to carrying that ideal. And as corrupt at the Democratic National Committee has been for continually disenfranchising its voters in Michigan and Florida it is amazing that the race has been allowed to come this far.
But it is worth something to see this race, the Democratic Presidential Primary, played out to its natural conclusion.
Posted by DonWard at April 22, 2008 03:13 PM | Email ThisWhat a hypocrite.
Posted by: fred on April 22, 2008 04:40 PMI think the point was that the pundits are getting pretty tedious and have been poor procrastinators. So, please stay on-topic.
Posted by: swatter on April 22, 2008 04:52 PMWhich is precisely what Ward did in his January 29 post. He is a hypocrite.
Am I back "on-topic" now? Or am I merely a "poor procrastinator"?
That is the smirk-off on Fox News. Hume, Wallace, Rove, and all the rest are having trouble keeping from giggling. Then ya gotta switch to (P)MSNBC. There they are having a glum-off. Olberman, Matthews, Rhodes, are visibly gritting their teeth as they talk about the need for the donkey party to have time to heal.
The Dems may win in the fall, but the GOP can suck some enjoyment out of the coverage tonite. This has been a banner nite for John McCain.
Ah! Hannity and Colmes just came on. This is great. You can rate Hannity's smirk against Colmes glum.
Hmmmm, I think the smirk wins.
Hairy
Posted by: Hairy Buddah on April 22, 2008 06:53 PMWhat's next Democrats?...a bowl-off?...Steel cage match?...poo-slinging contest against primates at the Philadelphia zoo?
Posted by: Rick D. on April 22, 2008 07:27 PMThere seems to be a media takeover where all MSM are saying how "Hillary won a victory".
Yet, the Washington Post is showing the tally at 52%-48% with only 16% reporting!
Posted by: John Bailo on April 22, 2008 07:32 PMIt will probably end up 11 or 12% with Hillary pulling away.
And that's just 20 minutes after your post.
See, ya gotta go to the Fox News web page.
Hairy
Posted by: Hairy Buddah on April 22, 2008 07:46 PMDon't take the WASL any time soon because you just failed the reading comprehension test. The key phrase in the paragraph you're misquoting is "That's what conventional wisdom states at any rate." If you've read any of my posts about "convential wisdom" you'd understand my disdain for the subject and any comment that was according to "conventional wisdom" should be taken as the opposite.
Then again you might not understand and you might need someone to hold your hand while you read. Or cross the street. Or use the bathroom.
At any rate your Sound Politics No Prize is NOT in the mail.
Posted by: Don Ward on April 22, 2008 08:30 PMIf you memory fails you on that posting, how about your January 20 posting that declared: "Fred Thompson - he's functionally out of the race at this point."
You have been consistently doing what you are now calling "the most annoying aspect of this primary election."
How many more examples of your hypocrisy do you want? I could go on and on ....
Even Postman knows not to contradict his previous posts, or be exposed as a hypocrite, as you have now done. Congrats!
Posted by: fred on April 22, 2008 09:34 PMAs you'll note. I posted that comment on Jan. 29. Giuliani got out of the race that night. If I remember right he was out minutes after my post went up. Boy aren't I ev-eel for forcing the former New York mayor out of the race.
Last time I checked, I haven't advocated that someone get out of the primary race who is in a virtual tie for their party's nomination and who is raising millions of dollars.
But do keep on digging. Having your shocking ignorance recorded for posterity is humorous!
Posted by: Don Ward on April 22, 2008 09:54 PMIt is nice to see the Democrats are more messed up then the Republicans.
Posted by: Snuffy on April 22, 2008 10:21 PMRight on, Don.
What irritates the crap out of me more than anything is the whole Limbaugh "Operation: Chaos" shindig. For Pete's sake, let the Dems do their nominating, and let us do ours. Republicans disenfranchised THEMSELVES in Texas by switching and voting democrat, and they did that because the MEDIA told them that John McCain was the GOP NOMINEE when he WASN'T.
So yeah, it does all come down to the media. Sometimes I just want to reach into the TV set and slap those "Political Analysts" silly.
Ugh.
Posted by: Cydney on April 23, 2008 12:52 AMThe WWE did try to get Sen. Obama and Sen. Clinton to "settle the Democratic-nomination process in the wrestling ring.", but they did not take them up on the offer. Instead, Sen. Obama, Sen. Clinton and Sen. McCain all had taped speeches air during a WWE show.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6553284.html
Posted by: TrueSoldier on April 23, 2008 06:34 AMfred, you got me, but how about the prognosticators are procrastinators and that is the reason they are so tedious when the shows are on.
And don't you just hate the flags whipping by on the bottom of the screens these days? e.g. Obama leading the vote of young men in their early twenties still living at home and having minimum wage jobs by 51-49% in this key demographic?
Posted by: swatter on April 23, 2008 07:11 AMMy key demograhic they were showing today was the 57% of non-college grads choose Clinton. Sounds to me like the MSM was trying to say something about Clinton supporters.
Posted by: TrueSoldier on April 23, 2008 08:27 AMLet's see, TX vote was March 4th. At that point the only people left running were McCain, Huckabee, and Paul. McCain had 817 delegates, Hucabee had 206...even a Washington State HS student could tell you that the person with 817 delegates will hit the magical 1,191 delegates with or without your vote. It would have taken a serious miracle for Huckabbe to get the winner take all Texas.
Heck, in 2000 it was clear Bush was going to be the nominee before the vote even came to Washington St. Going to the GOP caucus it was pretty clear with the hundred or so Bush in 2000 signs around the room he was going to be the nominee. The media didn't tell the TX who the nominee was, the voters in the states who voted prior to TX told Texas Republicans who the candidate was.
Just comment and move along...
Posted by: Rick D. on April 23, 2008 06:49 PM