What I expect now...

[sleigh]

The news mongers want news. They want conflict and excitement and drama. There's no conflict, excitement, or drama in "by all indications, the election's pretty much over and Obama's going to win in a walk." You even have Real Clear Politics (not exactly a liberal site) saying that Obama currently has enough electoral votes locked up to win (286, by their numbers). Yet until yesterday, CNN's count still had Obama under 270 (they now have him at 277); MSNBC's electoral map has Obama still at 264. Even that liberal bastion, the paper that makes right wingers froth at the mouth, the NY Times, has Obama at 264.

There's no liberal bias. There's a bias against elections that aren't close and therefore newsworthy.

So what I expect to hear now from all the media outlets is variations on "McCain is making up ground and things are tightening up! This is gonna be a close one! A nailbiter! Sturm und drang!" I saw it starting today on MSNBC, with two of the talking heads saying that -- despite the fact that every single instant poll on the debate indicated that Obama was the clear winner and did the best job of swaying undecided voters -- "I think McCain won this one and the polls are wrong. I see McCain making this race much tighter on the next few weeks." They followed that up with a panel of six undecided voters, three of whom said they were now going to vote for McCain. "See!" the talking heads exclaimed. "There! That proves it."

Expect it. And because they're also talking about it all the time, it may turn into a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Comments

[barbarienne.livejournal.com]

It may turn into a self-fulfilling prophecy. Or it may the excuse that makes an election stolen by chicanery look possiblyslightlyperhaps real. [/paranoia]

What I don't want is for people to say, "Oh, Obama has it sewn up. I don't need to get out and vote for him." I want people to be pissing their pants that somehow, someway, McCain might win, and therefore they need to get their asses to the polls and vote against him. Truman won somehow, didn't he?

[sleigh.livejournal.com]

You're right that the danger in an election that doesn't appear close may be that people will sit on their hands and not vote, and thus change the outcome. And there's still the possibility of some Bradley effect causing the polls not to reflect the reality (though I'm dubious about that...).

But yes, everyone still needs to get out and vote!

[smofbabe.livejournal.com]

And there's still the possibility of some Bradley effect causing the polls not to reflect the reality (though I'm dubious about that...).

Saw an interesting article that posited that the Bradley effect if it exists at all would be muted this time around because people could cloak it by claiming to be disturbed by Obama's Rev Wright connection.