- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
I often wonder to what extent Americans are influenced by spin. Consider the issue of Hillary's sinking poll numbers. How many people believed that Clinton actually had a 30 point lead over Obama? and if she did, what on earth did they think it meant? I'm not saying that the pollsters got it wrong (although that's always possible), but how hard can poll numbers be that early on and how valid are they as a point of departure?
I also wonder why we seem not only to spin the news and the numbers but also, consciously or not, seem to tinker with the way we spin them. For example, tomorrow if we wake up to find that Clinton has won Californina, we'll probably read something along the lines of "Clinton managed to 'eke out' a 7% point lead over her opponent, Barak Obama, in a state in which she had previously held a 30 point lead." Frankly, my impression is that most elections with a winning edge of 5% are usually trumpeted as "landslides" and "blow outs" by the MSM. So what's going on?
Part of the problem has to do with an attempt by the news media to "entertain" us, but surely part of it is driven by the tendency of the press to parrot back and eventually incorporate the views of rival political camps into an ongoing conversational schema. The 24 hour news cycle certainly aggravates this pernicious tendency, and it's not just evidenced in terms of campaign reporting. Consider the coverage of the White House, where you have Candy Crowley and friends receiving breakfast second hand from Dana Perino every morning, day in and day out, after which a grateful nation receives a third hand spew of the usual Bush lies.
You saw this in the lead up to the Nevada caucuses when the MSM were spreading the Obama talking point that as a result of the endorsement of the Culinary Workers union Obama certainly would scoop up the better part of the Latino union vote. If the MSM had only done its homework, if they had only checked things out, if they had only asked Latino voters how they intended to vote and why, they might have uncovered the fact that Clinton's support was pretty much unassailable (even in the face of what appears to have been strong pressure/or intimidation on the part of the union). Instead the MSM seemed to take the Obama camp at its word. I don't think you can account for this sort of thing by blaming politics. It arises from laziness.
Oddly, my impression is that the Obama camp seems to receive the "reporting" of the MSM as evidence of the validity of what they have been saying, when in fact, it is simply a re-cycled Obama talking point. Obama will certainly get some of the Latino vote in the West, but the idea that Latinos will march behind the existing coalition of Obama constituencies, is far fetched.
When I listen to my Latino friends in California and New Mexico I frequently hear them referencing both their numbers and what they perceive as their growing base of political power. I often hear things like "Man, there were a lot of brown faces in that crowd." It is a kind of dawning recognition of the understated power of "la raza." My sense is that Latinos are drawn to Clinton for two reasons. The Clintons were building a base in the Latino community before this election cycle started. In a sense, Latinos seem to be more interested in who they "see" in their communities than what they "hear" from someone else who drops by to make a speech, but even on the level of rhetoric, Latinos seem to be less swayed by soaring speeches importuning them to join the Obama campaign to effect "change" than with the plodding recitation of just exactly what Clinton will do for them and theirs when she is President.
I'll probably not watch the early coverage of Super Tuesday this evening. As a Clinton supporter, I find that my enjoyment when she wins is usually diminished by the overall tone with which those same wins are discussed in the MSM. So I'll probably wait until early tomorrow morning to see how things played out. I may even be wrong about how the MSM will cover Super Tuesday this evening. That would be certainly nice.
Finally, to Obama supporters, I want to assure you that while you may not be sure at this point whether you will vote for Clinton if she wins, I will vote for Obama if she loses.
