Kos:Media nonsense

[cal04]

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/10/12/1601/5665/599/627909

Bowers takes a look at the Washington Post's state presidential labels:
http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=9018

Obama +13.8%: Battleground state (PA)
Obama +10.4%: Battleground state (NH)
Obama +10.0%: Battleground state (NJ)
Obama +9.5%: Battleground state (IA)
Obama +9.0%: Battleground state (OR)
Obama +8.2%: Battleground state (MN)
Obama +8.2%: Battleground state (MI)
Obama +8.8%: Battleground state (WI)
Obama +7.3%: Battleground state (NM)
McCain +6.8%: Leaning Republican (GA)
Obama +5.1%: Battleground state (VA)
Obama +4.0%: Battleground state (CO)
McCain +3.8%: Leaning Republican (IN)
Obama +3.5%: Battleground state (OH)
Obama +3.1%: Battleground state (FL)
Obama +3.0%: Battleground state (NV)
McCain +2.2%: Leaning Republican (WV)

Get it? Every state in which McCain has a lead, even if it's just 2.2%, is a "leaning Republican". Every state in which Obama has the lead, even if it's over 10 percent, is a "battleground".

It goes to something that Bowers recently noticed:

Here are the latest electoral projections from independent, small media electoral forecasting websites:

Election Projection: Obama 364-174
Electoral-Vote.com: Obama 349, McCain 174, 15 tied
Fivethirtyeight: Obama 347.6-190.4 McCain
Pollster.com: Obama 320, McCain 158, Toss-up 60
Real Clear Politics: Obama 277, McCain 158, Toss-up 103

There are many more, but I'll stop there. The key point is that all small media election projection websites, including the Republican Election Projection and Real Clear Politics, have Obama over 270 electoral votes. This is because polls now objectively show that Obama is well over 270 electoral votes. However, none of the big, and so-called liberal, media websites show Obama over 270 right now. Every single one is even more favorable to McCain than Real Clear Politics:

MSNBC: Obama 264-174 McCain
CNN: Obama 264-174 McCain
New York Times: Obama 260--200 McCain

None of these websites can admit what is patently obvious to even Republican poll watchers right now: Obama is over 270 outside the margin of error. The inability of these big media sites to simply admit reality--reality that is evident in their own reporting about McCain playing from well behind right now--is pathetic.

Maybe they are afraid of being accused of pro-Obama bias (probably). Maybe they are just biased toward McCain (possibly). Maybe they just suck at electoral forecasting (definitely). Maybe they are invested in a close campaign (absolutely). Whatever it is, you would be well served to never, ever listen to big media for election forecasts and horserace information.

They are invested in the horserace for ratings purposes, and they are certainly fearful of being accused of pro-Obama bias. So instead of providing an accurate picture for their readers, they misinform them.

I mean, Washington Post really thinks New Jersey is a battleground state? Really?

[skooooo]

1. interesting..thanks for posting

I guess they're trying to keep the race "close."

[intaglio]

2. K and R n/t

[boobooday]

3. Something familiar about this . . .

It reminds me of watching a cable news anchor stand in front of a full screen graphic that showed Bush with a 40% approval rating and call him a "still very popular wartime president."

[Willo]

4. I've watched CNN play with their EV Etch-a-Sketch board

day after day. No matter what the polls say or which states they touch, that damned thing has never reached 270 for Obama.

It must have the same programming as those electronic voting machines.

[BumRushDaShow]

6. They did the same thing during the primary

and they even continually put up "hypotheticals", where they would put states in Hillary's column that did not belong based on the polling in order to try to change the math somehow. And they did this right up to the final primary day.

[Willo]

8. They sure did. They also keep reporting she was ahead until

Obama to said during a stump speech that he was ahead in all areas.

The scary part was they gave Report A on Monday then Report B on Tuesday, with no hesitation or explanation.

[BumRushDaShow]

5. He must win all 50 states in order to "close the deal"

:eyes:

[sweetroxie]

7. The closer they keep it looking

the more they can camophlage a stolen election

[Laelth]

9. I fear that is their true motive. n/t

:dem:

-Laelth

[Blondiegrrl]

10. Fantastic analysis! I don't know who Bowers is, but I thank him

for setting it straight.

:toast:

[Stagecoach]

11. Which brings up a question

On election night, during their coverage, when can any of them declare someone as president? I'm trying to remember if any of that stuff changed since the 2000 election or not. Because, I was looking. And there's a possibility, based on current state-by-state polls, that Obama could go over the 270 mark by 10:00p.m. Eastern. Yet I wonder if the networks will stretch it beyond that to keep people watching.....or if they have to wait for all of the states to close their polls before they can declare someone the winner.