L.A. Times: Pay No Attention to Those Gallup Results Behind the Screen
The lead story in today’s L.A. Times claims on Page A1:
National polls suggest the race is a tossup. In presidential contests, though, the trick is stringing together victories in enough states to clear a 270-vote majority in the electoral college
It’s true that some national polls have the race as a tossup. But at least one very respectable polling organization has released some startling polling showing McCain waaay ahead. We’re not told that on the front page.
On Page A10, we’re finally told a little more of the story:
In the face of these obstacles, Republicans see it as a victory of sorts that the race is as competitive as it is. Indeed, several recent polls show the race as close to dead even, and a USA Today/Gallup Poll survey made public Monday showed McCain ahead among registered voters, 50% to 46%.
And?
Aaaaand?
OK, fine. I’ll say it, since you guys won’t.
And it also showed McCain ahead 10 points — 54% to 44% — among likely voters.
When that news hit, I wondered how it would be portrayed. I ultimately concluded it would likely be ignored entirely.
I hate to say I told you so (actually I love to), but I told you so.
And as DRJ already reported, the Gallup tracking poll has had McCain with a five-point advantage for two days now.
More honesty, please.
P.S. The L.A. Times article adds: “If the map were a roulette table, Obama would be dropping chips all over.”
Yeah, and if Obama were a cow, he would be dropping chips all over.
And y’all at the L.A. Times would be following him around with a Hefty bag and a giant shovel.
Gordon Brown may be clueless but not all Brits are so ignorant. This is just pitiful.
Mike K (2cf494) — 9/9/2008 @ 9:13 pmYour link is an excellent article, Mike K. Thank you.
DRJ (7568a2) — 9/9/2008 @ 9:18 pmGood one there. Damned good one.
Chuck (b1c599) — 9/9/2008 @ 9:20 pmYeah, and if Obama were a cow, he would be dropping chips all over
Arnold (1a3b0c) — 9/9/2008 @ 9:31 pmOK, I’m thinking of suing you for the broken ribs I got from laughing so hard.
aaaaand, the LAT would be ignoring the methane footprint emitted.
Ed (f35a20) — 9/9/2008 @ 9:48 pm#1 Mike K: Terrific article. Does a terrific job of explaining some of the cultural divide that makes Sarah Palin what she is, and the Democrats what they are.
And the comments are priceless!
EW1(SG) (3f9181) — 9/9/2008 @ 9:55 pmThis cow chips strategy, is that the same thing as the 57-state strategy that Sen. Obama recently abandoned?
Daryl Herbert (4ecd4c) — 9/9/2008 @ 10:10 pmThe L.A. Times, otoh, did trumpet its earlier Obama+15 outlier.
Funny how that works.
Karl (1b4668) — 9/9/2008 @ 10:35 pmYawn. When Rassmussen starts talking about 10 point leads, wake me up. They seem to be one of the few reliable poll organizations left.
That said, Barry should be way ahead, considering that the MSM is in the tank, and the economy nearly so. Even a flat-growth scenario spells bad news for the Republicans, since they’ve held the White House for eight years.
I’m reminded of the expected easy win for Gore in 2000, while others are reminded of ’72.
Casey (9ee427) — 9/9/2008 @ 10:36 pmCasey, 2004 was supposed to be an easy win for Kerry too, until he botched the DNC.
SPQR (26be8b) — 9/9/2008 @ 10:43 pmObama is down to a two-state strategy: desperately trying to win Ohio, and desperately trying not to lose Pennsylvania.
Icy Truth (f6198c) — 9/9/2008 @ 10:46 pmBetween fudging the truth about the polls and transforming positive stories about Sarah Palin into negative ones (hello, JAR), there’s been so much “burying the lede” going on across the newsrooms of America that there’s a backhoe shortage.
L.N. Smithee (8dbd9a) — 9/9/2008 @ 11:21 pmSmithee, thanks a bunch, I’ve wondered meaning of Burying the Lede:
In news style writing, burying the lede is beginning a piece with details of secondary importance to the reader, while postponing more essential points of fact or narration.
The spelling “bury the lead” is also common, but “lede” is a traditional variation which avoids ambiguity with the chemical element lead (historically used in printing).
Moultrie (0c2c01) — 9/10/2008 @ 3:41 am‘You can put lipstick on a pig’…n Obama can try some lipstick on himself….
what a jerk ! what’s he thinking if stitting in the white house.
Sue Tay (5f34b7) — 9/10/2008 @ 3:46 amWell, to pimp my own site, I asked a simple question:
A question for our friends on the left:
So, why isn’t Senator Obama ahead by twenty points?
This Other Dana (3e4784) — 9/10/2008 @ 3:49 amDemocrats like to quote the Real Clear Politics electoral map but upon investigation one can see most of the state polls were done in July to Mid August.
Dennis D (ae900a) — 9/10/2008 @ 4:33 am“…and desperately trying not to lose Pennsylvania.”
Don’t forget about Michigan – there’s a strong possibility that it’s very much in play. After all, still lots of bitter, clingy, religiony, gun – toting, bible – thumping/book – burning rustics there.
Dmac (e639cc) — 9/10/2008 @ 6:52 amIt’s interesting, Dmac. For the moment, at least, it looks like Obama is forgetting Michigan.
Shhh. Don’t tell him.
Icy Truth (ce4e0f) — 9/10/2008 @ 7:01 amIcy, from what I’m reading from the local papers there, he’s frantically setting up shop on a statewide basis, since the primary fiasco regarding the delegates hampered his earlier efforts. Should be very interesting, indeed.
Dmac (e639cc) — 9/10/2008 @ 7:21 amBaracky is running a great campaign. Keep doing what you are doing, Baracky.
JD (5f0e11) — 9/10/2008 @ 7:29 amObama supporter at the Jewel parking lot: Excuse me, sir, can you spare some change? I ran out of hope.
nk (21731d) — 9/10/2008 @ 7:34 amHeh.
Dmac (e639cc) — 9/10/2008 @ 8:04 amBy the way, Bennett’s book Anglosphere Challenge, is excellent. Not very PC, I’m afraid.
Mike K (2cf494) — 9/10/2008 @ 8:15 amThis is all just a distraction.
Racists
JD (5f0e11) — 9/10/2008 @ 8:24 amI see I’ve stumbled onto one of the mean Websites. Well suited to the sarcastic hockey Mom.
I think what this is really about is that America is an empire in decline, and its politics reflect that, all trivia, all the time. If you want to know what your country would look like if it had been run by liberals the past 100 years, take a look at Canada, where I happily live now: everyone has health insurance, we have better public transport, fewer prisoners, lower violent crime, not at war. My adopted country is better than my home country, sad to say.
BruceM (007a23) — 9/10/2008 @ 10:10 amOh, and Canadians can expect to live two years longer than Americans, too.
BruceM (007a23) — 9/10/2008 @ 10:11 amWe are just as happy as you that you live in Canada, BruceM.
nk (21731d) — 9/10/2008 @ 10:40 amAs an avid Obama supporter, I’d not be surprised at all to see McSame and the Pig Bull win. We’ve learned all too many times that the more Repug-licans lie, the more Boobus Americanus eats it up. They say you get the leaders you deserve — considering we can never underestimate the stupidity of the American electorate, it’s possible they’ll get the two liars they deserve, and then the GOP can finish off this democracy once and for all.
sem (eeeb6e) — 9/10/2008 @ 10:48 amaw, nk, you mean you don’t want health insurance, better public transport, fewer prisoners, lower violent crime, not being at war? It’s really not so bad–y’all should try it!
BruceM (007a23) — 9/10/2008 @ 11:33 am“Canadians can expect to live two years longer than Americans, too.”
– Bruce M
Two commie years! I think I’d rather die at a nice, patriotic 75!
Leviticus (ab6dbd) — 9/10/2008 @ 11:44 amI think the L. A. Times has a point. Presidents don’t get elected by gaining more votes than the other guy; they get elected by getting more electoral votes which means gaining the majority of votes in a combination of states such that the candidate has sufficient electoral votes to win so it really doesn’t matter that there exists a (as in ONE) poll showing McCain with a 10 point lead, nationally, among likely voters.
You all know this. I’m not telling anyone here anything they don’t know already. So why not simply acknowledge that the Times is making a perfectly valid point: that unless McCain wins majority vote in the right combination of states, those national 10 points among likely voters is irrelevant?
Craig R. Harmon (3a26cc) — 9/10/2008 @ 12:16 pmCanadians don’t live longer. It only seems longer. If it is so great, pray tell me why so many bitching Canucks hang out in S. Florida in winters? And why so many with the means to so actually come to the good old USA for timely and quality medical care? I have a friend in Ireland who had colon cancer. Where do you think she went for treatment? New York City. But naturally most citizens of lesser means don’t mind dying first while waiting for tests or being shut out from elective procedures. Yes, the USA sucks big time..that’s why Canada has millions of illegals flocking there to freeze their cojones/make the big bucks.
madmax333 (0c6cfc) — 9/10/2008 @ 12:52 pmWhat the L.A. SLIMES need a few less readers like several hunderd cancilations of subcriptions
Krazy Kagu (cb0b17) — 9/10/2008 @ 1:28 pmmy goodness madmax you are well-named. I’ll stick with the facts though. It’s a better way to have a civilized discussion.
Of course wealthy Canadians spend the winter in Florida or Arizona–duh, it’s warmer. But if Canadians do go to the US, they need to make sure they have extra insurance, because so many things that are covered here are not covered there, and extremely expensive. One person I know went to Atlanta, unfortunately without insurance, and had to spend one night in hospital, total cost of $12,000 by the time they added up all the unnecessary tests and costs. Your system is a negative model, not just to Canadians, but worldwide. Even our conservative parties try to assure us they don’t want a US-style system.
BruceM (007a23) — 9/10/2008 @ 1:54 pm