More on The Media – Part 2

I commented earlier that the media was misreporting poll data and asked if this was bias or and attempt to sway the election. Jim Geraghty has and article in National Review Online that further elaborates this “misreporting” of election polls. Maybe it is as simple as being a better cliffhanger for the news organizations. Geraghty’s views are interesting and worth reading as he quotes a Republican operative; although I am optimistic not as much as Geraghty’s “Obi-Wan Kenobi”. Article excerpts:

Gallup had Bush ahead by eight, ABC had Bush ahead by five, Fox had Bush ahead by seven, Time had Bush ahead by five, Battleground had Bush ahead by four, he was ahead in the ABC/Washington Post tracking poll by five points or so much of the week... "And they still wrote that the race is tied!"
[…]
Does that sound like the America you know, Jim? In 1952, Harry Truman hadn't been aggressive enough in fighting the Korean War; the American people felt he was holding MacArthur back; and they were so angry with Truman that he didn't run. They had a choice between Adlai Stevenson or World War II hero Dwight Eisenhower. They picked Eisenhower — because they wanted to win the war — instead of the guy who could negotiate it.

In 1972, the last wartime election, Americans had a choice between the candidate of the peace movement, Mr. George "Come home, America" McGovern, and Richard Nixon. Nixon won in a landslide.

In 1984, America again had a clear choice. On one hand, there was Walter Mondale: the embodiment of the Democratic foreign-policy establishment, Jimmy Carter's vice president — the man who was determined to learn how to coexist with the Soviet Union. On the other hand, they had the policies of Ronald Reagan, who was seeking to defeat the Soviets through strength. Again, they chose the fighter in a landslide.

(Read here)