Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to NewsvineHappening right now on the evening news. Stephanopoulos says that the 20 delegates Edwards won, and presumably will now release to Obama, make up for the delegates Hillary won in West Virginia yesterday.
Will the last Clinton campaign staff member to leave please remember to bring the is-is, for the sake of posterity. Because, you know, Clintonism is in its final days. Ahh...
Subscribe
Comments
I mean, after all, one of the loudest voices in American media today is Rush Limbaugh, and he has pulling heartily for Hillary Clinton all this year, and that has had an effect. In fact, Republicans may have given Hillary her margin of victory in Indiana.
Rush Limbaugh is a entertainer, who is paid to give his opinions on politics and other matters. Since he's in the opinion business rather than the news business, his opinions have no bearing on the question of media bias.
The bias/inaccuracy of the mainstream media is found in the reporting ranks, where not only is the left-of-center outlook of the professional class nearly universal but also a herd mentality prevails. On issues such as this, the very fact that media outlets are declaring Obama the winner causes other media outlets to declare Obama the winner.
And for all Limbaugh's bloviating about "Operation Chaos" (the goal of which is apparently to cause turmoil among Democrats, not to help Clinton), I don't believe for a second that Limbaugh adherents have had a statistically significant impact on any primary contest to date.
Posted by: Simon | May 15, 2008 11:53 AM
"I still don't see why, from Clinton's point of view, she should drop out." -- Simon
I don't get it either. I thought part of our vibrant election system was the give-and-take of the conventions, that the primaries are an important first step, but the real decision comes down to the brokering that goes on when the delegates finally meet. Just because the last few conventions have been nothing but rubber stamps and campaign kickoff parties doesn't mean that's what they're supposed to be. Haven't some past conventions even ended up picking a compromise candidate who wasn't previously a serious contender at all? I didn't learn much in history class, but I seem to recall something like that.
But now, because the Ordained One has a small mathematical lead, his opponents are just supposed to shut up and go away, even though there are serious indications that he's not the strongest candidate their party can provide. (And ditto for Ron Paul supporters.) And is it really up to Edwards to decide whom "his" delegates vote for anyway?
Posted by: Mhoram | May 15, 2008 12:04 PM
And is it really up to Edwards to decide whom "his" delegates vote for anyway?
Nope. Once he releases them, they're free agents.
Not that his whopping 20 delegates are likely to tip the balance anyway.
Posted by: Simon | May 15, 2008 12:40 PM
from The New Republic/Jonathan Chait:
"Measuring the Limbaugh Effect
Some reporters have speculated about the impact of the "Limbaugh effect" -- partisan Republicans crossing over to vote for Hillary Clinton solely to help weaken the Democrats against John McCain. The sieze of the effect is hard to measure. But there is one numerical measurement, first pointed out to me by the Pew Survey's Richard Auxier following the Pennsylvania primary, that gives some sense of it.
One exit poll question asks Indiana voters who they would support in a Clinton-McCain contest. 17% of them say McCain. Of those voters, 41% say they would vote for McCain over Clinton. In other words, these voters, 7% of the Indiana electorate, voted for Clinton in the primary but have no intention of supporting her in the fall.
Now, this isn't a precise measure of the "Limbaugh effect" -- no doubt there are some Republicans who backed Obama in the primary out of anti-Clinton sentiment, but plan to vote for McCain in November. But it is a good place to start when making a ballpark estimate. And it's a sizeable number -- 7% may wind up being as big as her margin of victory."
http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2008/05/06/measuring-the-limbaugh-effect.aspx
To say that Limbaugh is not part of the media because he doesn't claim to be a reporter makes little or no sense when he is known to have a huge audience and a substantial influence on the electorate. It's like saying the Drudge Report isn't part of the media, because Drudge doesn't have a hard copy outlet. So? It's still media.
Posted by: Kit Stolz | May 15, 2008 1:08 PM
Ex,
You REALLY think Obama is going to do something for GLBT Americans? He'll sell them out the way you say the Clintons did. No proesident who wants to be a part of the mainstream wmove on gay rights.
Except he won't have a chance.
Because John McCain will be president. And that will be preferable to Obama.
Posted by: Scott R. | May 15, 2008 5:18 PM
Post a Comment
Are you aware of our Rules of Conduct?