Okay, we are all sick of the pundits talking about New Hampshire as if they have a clue about what happened. The most obscene of these is Chris Matthews contention that people lied to pollsters about their intentions to vote for Obama.
Keith Olberman on Msnbc probably got this one right.
Last night he showed a sampling of 6 different polls that showed Obama taking in 35-37 percent of the vote. He ultimately took in 37%. Seems the polls could not have been better regarding Obama.
The polls got Clinton wrong. This would appear to suggest that the high voter turnout brought newcomers to Hillary's camp in larger numbers than the pollsters imagined.
So, there was no real surprise in New Hamshire for Obama. The media does enjoy these things. It gives them something to talk about in a 24 hour news cycle.
The reality after Tuesday is the same as it was before. Obamais front-runner on the Dem's side (from the standpoint of most delegates). Hillary and Barack are virtually tied in the National polls.
On the Republican side, Huckabee is the top delegate holder at this time. He is also fairing quite well according to the national polls.
My only hope is that people are taking the opportunity to check over all of the candidates so they can make an informed decision.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
And now, it's off to Michigan. I'm not fond of the in-between "politics" that plagued us. It's getting dirty. Ah, surprise, surprise! And, hypothetically speaking, the Mayor of New York will only damage the possibilities of one of the several strong candidates.
On a lighter note, one news story was "cute", wherein a father decided to have his baby's picture taken with EVERY candidate. Needless to say, the baby's reactions were varied; seems the Democrats won with smiles.
I look forward to your Michigan commentary.
As follow-up to my earlier comment, not yet visible, I'd like to provide the link to the baby story. The slide show within ghe article is precious and worth viewing, I think!
http://www.slate.com/id/2181495/nav/tap3/
One more comment for today. Since I cannot post independently, I apologize for incorporating everything within your New Hampshire post.
I exercised to "The View" today. Are you familiar with the format and hosts? Well, it seems as though we're not the only ones paying careful attention to every word being uttered during this important year. Three takes from three different women:
Whoopi wants to hear everyone, regardless of how insignificant a contender he/she might seem. She feels that during the rhetoric being tossed around, something very significant might be mentioned...something that needs our attention. This made me re-think my earlier position about even more contenders.
Joy disagrees and wants the field limited to those currently running. She does not want to see the chances of someone strong watered down by more candidates (my earlier position).
Elizabeth is keeping a chart...yes, a chart of every word uttered by every candidate. She doesn't want to forget. She wants the ability to truly weigh every word, as the election descends upon us. Not a bad idea in this "He Said-She Said" world we live in.
Food for thought. I hope you don't mind my lengthy input here, Jon. Again, thank you for the space.
By the way, the new look is very nice.
Post a Comment