Letters to the Editor
-
Didn't you ever take statistics in college?
"Even more baffling is why 27 percent of these Wright-sensitive voters still chose Obama as their candidate."
I would have thought the answer to that mystery was obvious. These people were asked whether the coverage of Jeremiah Wright meant something to them. That is NOT THE SAME THING as being asked whether they would not vote for Barack Obama due to that coverage. It is entirely possibly for a person witnessing the relentless hounding of Obama for Wright's words to be affected by it- by feeling disgust at the media and sympathy for Obama. It is also possible that it simply didn't mean enough to get them to vote for Hillary Clinton.
Anyone familiar with statistics will be able to understand that an answer means nothing without an understanding of the question, and of how the person answering that question interprets it. Clearly, the media in this case saw only what they wanted to see- a flailing and doomed Obama campaign soundly trounced by controversy generated by the media itself, ready to implode en route to a return to the status quo.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why campaigns are won by votes and not by exit polls.