How the media got Obama elected

[PhiGam]

http://www.howobamagotelected.com/

Very interesting, I didn't know some of the stuff about Obama/Biden myself.

[DaemonSeid]

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLI...umn/index.html

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by PhiGam

http://www.howobamagotelected.com/

Very interesting, I didn't know some of the stuff about Obama/Biden myself.

One thing that struck me as incorrect off the bat...I didn't think Biden quit a previous campaign because of plagiarism. If they're talking about the '88 Presidential campaign, I thought he stopped the campaign because of the aneurysm.

ETA: This type of stuff strikes me as being as ridiculous as the "Bush stole the election" criticisms that DS posted above. Both are, in my opinion, Monday Morning Quarterbacking at their worst.

[KSig RC]

There isn't a "roll eyes" smiley big enough for this one - seriously?

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

There isn't a "roll eyes" smiley big enough for this one - seriously?

Here you go:



Meanwhile, I thought that Newsweek's post-election article on the campaigns was interesting.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by KSigkid

One thing that struck me as incorrect off the bat...I didn't think Biden quit a previous campaign because of plagiarism. If they're talking about the '88 Presidential campaign, I thought he stopped the campaign because of the aneurysm.

But plagiarism and aneurysm rhyme, silly, so it MUST be the same thing.

[aopirose]

Originally Posted by 33girl

But plagiarism and aneurysm rhyme, silly, so it MUST be the same thing.

I see you've been reading the columnists in our newspaper.

[AGDee]

Originally Posted by 33girl

But plagiarism and aneurysm rhyme, silly, so it MUST be the same thing.

Yeah, all those y/isms.. who can keep em straight?

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by KSigkid

One thing that struck me as incorrect off the bat...I didn't think Biden quit a previous campaign because of plagiarism. If they're talking about the '88 Presidential campaign, I thought he stopped the campaign because of the aneurysm.

From Wikipedia FWIW:

Main article: Joe Biden presidential campaign, 1988



"In 1987, Biden ran as a Democratic presidential candidate, formally declaring his candidacy at the Wilmington train station on June 9, 1987.[83] When the campaign began, Biden was considered a potentially strong candidate because of his moderate image, his speaking ability on the stump, his appeal to Baby Boomers, his high profile position as chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee at the upcoming Robert Bork Supreme Court nomination hearings, and his fundraising appeal: he raised $1.7 million in the first quarter of 1987, more than any other candidate.[84][85] Biden received considerable attention in the summer of 1986 when he excoriated Secretary of State George Shultz at a Senate hearing because of the Reagan administration's support of South Africa, which continued to support a system of apartheid.[86]

By August 1987, Biden's campaign, whose messaging was confused due to staff rivalries,[87] had begun to lag behind those of Michael Dukakis and Richard Gephardt,[84] although he had still raised more funds than all candidates but Dukakis, and was seeing an upturn in Iowa polls.[88][85] In September 1987, the campaign ran into trouble when he was accused of plagiarizing a speech by Neil Kinnock, then-leader of the British Labour Party.[89] Kinnock’s speech included the lines:

"Why am I the first Kinnock in a thousand generations to be able to get to university? [Then pointing to his wife in the audience] Why is Glenys the first woman in her family in a thousand generations to be able to get to university? Was it because all our predecessors were thick?"

While Biden’s speech included the lines:

"I started thinking as I was coming over here, why is it that Joe Biden is the first in his family ever to go to a university? [Then pointing to his wife in the audience] Why is it that my wife who is sitting out there in the audience is the first in her family to ever go to college? Is it because our fathers and mothers were not bright? Is it because I'm the first Biden in a thousand generations to get a college and a graduate degree that I was smarter than the rest?"

Though Biden had cited Kinnock as the source for the formulation many times before, he made no reference to the original source at the August 23 Iowa State Fair debate in question or in another appearance.[90][91] While political speeches often appropriate ideas and language from each other, Biden's use came under more scrutiny because he somewhat distorted his own family's background in order to match Kinnock's.[5][91]

A few days later, Biden's plagiarism incident in law school came to light.[15] It was also revealed that when earlier questioned by a New Hampshire resident about his grades in law school, Biden had inaccurately recollected graduating in the "top half" of his class when he actually graduated 76th from 85, that he had attended law school on a full scholarship, and had received three degrees in college.[92] In fact, he had earned a single B.A. with a double major in history and political science, and had received a half scholarship to law school based on financial need with some additional assistance based in part upon academics.[92]

The Kinnock and school revelations were magnified by the limited amount of other news about the nomination race at the time,[93] when most of the public were not yet paying attention to any of the campaigns; Biden thus fell into what Washington Post writer Paul Taylor described as that year's trend, a "trial by media ordeal".[94] Biden lacked a strong demographic or political group of support to help him survive the crisis.[88][95] He withdrew from the nomination race on September 23, 1987, saying his candidacy had been overrun by "the exaggerated shadow" of his past mistakes.[96] After Biden withdrew from the race, it was revealed that the Dukakis campaign had secretly made a video showcasing the Biden–Kinnock comparison and distributed it to news outlets.[97] Also later in 1987, the Delaware Supreme Court's Board of Professional Responsibility cleared Biden of the law school plagiarism charges regarding his standing as a lawyer, saying Biden had "not violated any rules".[98]"


FWIW: About the aneurysm, again from Wikipedia: "Biden had felt poorly physically during parts of the campaign, suffering repeated headaches and at one point in September 1987 having to halt a speech in New Hampshire for 15 minutes after feeling faint.[27] In February 1988, he suffered the first of two brain aneurysms that required life-saving surgery and seven months away from the Senate in order to convalesce from.[35][36][37] Biden and others would speculate that had his campaign not ended early, the aneurysms might have been more severe or detected later and that he might not have lived out the year.[7][27]"

I think the poll question had it right. But then I think the media played a huge role in this election. The coverage was in no way equally as critical of the candidates.

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by KSigkid

One thing that struck me as incorrect off the bat...I didn't think Biden quit a previous campaign because of plagiarism. If they're talking about the '88 Presidential campaign, I thought he stopped the campaign because of the aneurysm.

ETA: This type of stuff strikes me as being as ridiculous as the "Bush stole the election" criticisms that DS posted above. Both are, in my opinion, Monday Morning Quarterbacking at their worst.

well....that's pretty much why I posted the link and left nary a comment....lol

[Munchkin03]

Originally Posted by PhiGam

Very interesting, I didn't know some of the stuff about Obama/Biden myself.

You didn't know it because it's not true.

I feel like this election from the media's end, more so than any other previous, involved a lot of "fact-checking," so if rumors ran rampant, it wasn't because of the media. It was a lot of people wanting to believe stupid stuff. This is true on both sides.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by Munchkin03

You didn't know it because it's not true.

What wasn't true as reported in the poll? The bit about Sarah Palin seeing Alaska from her house? EATA: Even if the points about Obama/Biden are debatable, it seems that people should have been able to associate the claim with a candidate.

I don't think that website is genius or anything and I'm not trying
to promote Zogby polling, but I don't think the info in the poll questions is as inaccurate/problematic as you seem to suggest..

I'm using wikipedia for ease:

Obama ran for State Senator when Alice Palmer decided to run for Congress in a 1995 special election, and he received her endorsement.[2] After finishing third in the primary, which was won by Jesse Jackson, Jr., Palmer returned to request that Obama drop out of the race and let her run again for the seat.[3] Obama declined, and Palmer decided to run against him. Prior to the primary, Obama challenged the validity of ballot petition signatures for his opponents, resulting in their exclusion from the ballot and allowing him to run unopposed in the primary.[2][4] Obama won the heavily Democratic 13th district by a large margin.[4] He was easily reelected in 1998, and again in 2002 (after redistricting to span Chicago lakefront neighborhoods from the Gold Coast south to South Chicago).[2][5]

The coal industry comment seems to pull from multiple sources and maybe unfairly out of context but it's hard to say that he didn't put that idea out there. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMwBbl6RoIs (the label makes me laugh)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZxnT5tHVIo

ETA: here's Ayer's acknowledging Obama having a reception in his home when he started his state career: http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Politics/S...6251086&page=2

I think the issue isn't that the media needed to be hammering the weak, crappy stories about Obama and Biden necessarily, but if you are going to hammer McCain about his houses and Palin about whatever, and it's going to run through multiple news cycles, it's somewhat perplexing that equally potentially inflammatory stories about Obama and Biden didn't get the same play in the mainstream press, especially from the big networks in TV coverage. I think there are instances that actually gave more coverage of the Obama/Biden response to an issue being raised than there ever was to the original issue. The news would essentially be Obama/Biden campaign points. The coal issue may be a good case in point. Wouldn't an unbiased press been willing to fully report the economic implications of Obama's proposed energy policies?

We can talk about the validity of the reasons why, but what this maybe crappy poll and website was trying to point out was that there may have been an imbalance in the message that got out.

[Munchkin03]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

I don't think the info in the poll questions is as inaccurate/problematic as you seem to suggest..

We can talk about the validity of the reasons why, but what this maybe crappy poll and website was trying to point out was that there may have been an imbalance in the message that got out.

It's all sensationalism, and I for one am tired of it. In my previous post, I noted that this nonsense happened on both sides. Maybe the media played a role in it, maybe it didn't. It's a moo point now. Obama won by a virtual landslide.

But I've noticed that you like to have the last word when we're discussing a topic. I'll let you have that, since it's obviously more important to you than it is to me.

By the way? Still not changing my signature.

[ASTalumna06]

If you walked down the street and asked 20 random people two questions:

1.) Which candidate spent $150,000 on clothes?

2.) Who is Nancy Pelosi?

(or any other combination of meaningless question vs. an important one) I guarantee that at least half of the people could answer the first question and not the second.

The point is, all of the people who answer #1 correctly won't be Democrats and all of the people who answer #2 correctly won't be Republicans.

I truly believe that the reason Palin was pointed at more frequently in this campaign is because she was McCain's choice. Not ours. Obama was running for president himself, and he made it to the top through votes. Palin was seen as a joke from day one, if only because nobody knew who she was, and McCain's decision was seen as one to simply get votes from women. And then on day two, all hell broke loose with the news of her pregnant daughter.

All four candidates fumbled, but the ones that were hit harder were Palin and Biden. And no one can sit here and say that Palin didn't dig her own grave. She couldn't even give Katie Couric the name of a newspaper or magazine she reads.

Basically, there are no conclusions to be reached from this website, and it has nothing to do with why Obama won the election. There were questions like "Who said that there were 57 states?" but nothing asking, "Where does Obama stand on the economic crisis plaguing the country?" And there will always be people who vote for candidates for ridiculous reasons, there's no getting around that. This year, it was because Obama was black, or because McCain was old. In four years, people might like the hairstyle of one of the presidential candidates... who knows!

If you're going to try and make an accusation like "The media is the reason Obama won," you at least need a more extensive interview process than asking 10 people random questions that have nothing to do with actual campaign policies and ideas.

[Tinia2]

Originally Posted by PhiGam

http://www.howobamagotelected.com/

Very interesting, I didn't know some of the stuff about Obama/Biden myself.

Several problems have been reported about both site and survey:
Take your pick of which link(s) to look at:
Zogby Engages in Apparent Push Polling for Right-Wing Website :
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/...h-polling.html

An Interview with John Ziegler on the Zogby "Push Poll" :
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/...-on-zogby.html

Zogby’s Misleading Poll of Obama Voters:
http://blogs.wsj.com/numbersguy/zogb...ma-voters-459/

Zogby won’t duplicate Obama poll:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15829.html