Blog @ MoreWhat.com

An LA Times report on polling in the state of Ohio has McCain leading slightly over Obama and makes the connection with the 2004 race being similar between Bush and Kerry. That year Bush had a slight lead, according to the report, and won the state by about 120,000 votes. If memory serves, Obama lost Ohio and Pennsylvania to Clinton in the primaries as well as other states typically considered extremely important to win the November election. Electoral polls have shown Obama in the lead over McCain for some time now.

But what happened in 2004, during the 2008 primaries or in polling to date may not matter. And the vacillating almost forecast from the LA Times source on this report is nearly as meaningless as James Carville’s humorous statement that there is a name for a candidate that relies on the young vote……loser. So what is the point of this LA Times report? Maybe it is supposed to be subliminal. At one point the author refers to the pollster opinion that you cannot count on those indicating crossing party with their vote as they ‘typically will return to their nominee’.

Have you seen an abundance of reports suggesting there will be significant defections by the voters of one party switching to the other side? How about the suggestion that McCain’s choice of Palin for VP would draw disaffected Clinton supporters to the ticket? It would seem reasonable that no matter what has been said that Democrats overwhelmingly will vote for Obama and likewise Republicans will vote for McCain. The candidate advantage will probably come from those not affiliated with either party. The independents that Rush Limbaugh frequently defines as liberals or Democrats who are too timid to announce their left leanings.

Many times during the life of this blog the author’s stand has been that of an independent. Over the years the voting record includes both Democrats and Republicans as well as third party candidates. Only since the Iraq war and continued lefty insanity over social issues and national security and some other items has the leaning been decidedly conservative with no independence in voting selection. So Mr Limbaugh, does that square with your contention that independents are nothing more than liberals too timid to announce their left leanings? This would be one of those times that this blog strongly disagrees with the opinion of the Rushbo.

The opinion here is that independents ARE flocking to McCain/Palin and will have a dramatic influence on the election outcome. Whether or not that will be sufficient to result in victory for the GOP ticket remains to be seen. Those polling reports that suggest this race will go down to the wire due to its narrow margins seem to be the most intelligent forecast. That is why the LA Times report linked above is viewed as another waste of time by the MSM to subtly suggest the larger Ohio margin of party defections going for McCain will reconsider at ballot time hence eliminating McCain’s slight lead in Ohio. The fact is no one knows for sure.

The NYT is at it again with another of their staff they refer to as some sort of political guru. The byline displays two names and Adam Nagourney is listed second. The guess here is that the other name is of the one who wrote the piece under the supervision of the second. Nagourney was introduced on a television report this week with a title that denotes the NYT thinks highly of him for things political. So how does the NYT fish wrap do in this scenario?

You gotta love the title and it does raise the chances that this installment won’t be an MSM adulation piece on Obama. Either that or as a reaction to all the MSM bashing by the public lately, they are taking a more careful approach to bias and not being as open about it. The title is ‘Obama’s Tone Sharpens as Party Frets.’ To anyone that understands Obama as the Fairy Tale defined by Bill Clinton, this title raises optimism for the continued decline of the D’s Presidential nominee.

Too bad that the first paragraph of the piece indicates Nagourney is an idiot or he really did not participate in the story with two names in the byline. The use of phrasing like ‘drawing sharp connections’ to yet again describe the only charge Obama can muster against McCain is pathetic. And to exaggerate or embellish it with the lame phrase ‘coordinated, partywide message is moronic. Repeating that McCain is four more years of Bush with different words does not render it valid. And Obama cannot get away from the statement as it is the only one he has focused on for months. It is an insult to voters. Take any several recent Presidents of either party, analyze their administrations and you will see similarities and differences enough to demonstrate significant distinctions among them. Get over it Obama and the NYT this point is a loser. Is that all you’ve got??

And the fish wrap NYT continues with Obama calling McCain out of touch with a long career in Washington. This is the same Obama who encourages his surrogates to define Palin as inexperienced since his inexperience would make doing it himsolf even more laughable. And he defines McCain with the same rhetoric that can be leveled at his VP nominee Joe Biden. So again, Obama and NYT fish wrap, is that all you’ve got??

The NYT continues by describing the Obama portrayal of McCain’s early days in Washington as ‘among the most pointed attacks put out by Mr Obama.’ So Mr Obama and the NYT, how do you contrast that with your Joe Biden? It is either true for both or not true for both. You can’t have it both ways. The reason you can’t is that both McCain and Biden have been in Washington for a long time. So where does it split? That point between inexperience and experience that you have been tightroping on for days now.

It is suggested in this piece from the NYT that Dems say Obama should get back on message. The problem is he doesn’t have a message and anyone repeating what he says as their evidence Obama is the One is too easily influenced and makes a great target for con artists like Obama. Mr Slick Marketing with the near criminal assistance from the MSM since before the primaries earned his ‘celebrity’ criticism as well as the MSM complicity and was annointed by them as the One while the D party and the far left fringe consider him their Messiah. That is all Obama has regardless of how many times the NYT fish wrap repeats reworded praise of him.

Another criticism directed at McCain from the NYT fish wrap describes McCain’s TV ad about Obama and sex education distorts the record. Their analysis ends with reporting that Obama voted for the measure in Illinois in committee but the measure never made it to the floor for a vote. Is that because the measure was not restrictive enough for Obama and his colleagues? Why does the NYT stop on the details when it has served their purpose of helping Obama? Why don’t they finish the story? Is that because it would vindicate their charge against McCain?

The NYT, still campaigning for Obama.

And in the same piece, the NYT fish wrap goes on to say that Obama’s involvement in education was more than sex education. They mention the Annenberg Challenge but fail to mention that Obama and Bill Ayers ripped off about 100 million dollars to support scamming the public with cherry picking which grantees were awarded projects that fit their personal political agendas. Similar to the ACORN project which is curently being investigated by law enforcement.

The NYT, still campaigning for Obama.

It was thought this series of posts on the MSM still working for Obama would conclude with this second post. But the NYT has provided a target rich environment requiring at least one more post to finish the current series of MSM blunders on behalf of their chosen candidate, the ONE, the Messiah, that causes the MSM to abandon standards of journalism in favor of their left leaning liberal agenda.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Trackposted to Diary of the Mad Pigeon, Rosemary’s Thoughts, Woman Honor Thyself, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Cao’s Blog, Wingless, NN&V, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe

This entry was posted on Saturday, September 13th, 2008 at 7:25 am and is filed under Public Affairs, wordpress, Politics, campaign, election, News Media, disclosure, ethics, Opinion. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.