Letters to the Editor
-
Why isn't anyone stating the obvious? Obama is DONE...THE FIX IS IN (part 2)
Opinion research, polling, and statistical sampling have been finely honed over many decades and are quite accurate--whether we're talking of tracking polls, final pre-vote polls, or election day exit polls. For many years before 2000, exit polls were used to accurately call election contests around the country, sometimes with as little as 10% or less of the actual vote being counted, and sometimes with the declared winner actually trailing in the vote count at the time of the announcement. Why? Because of the proven accuracy of the method, people! The fact that all of the late polls--ALL OF THEM--were not just wrong, but wildly and shockingly inaccurate, should give pause to even the most Pollyannish among us. For cynics and realists like me, the message couldn't be clearer: The Shaheen Democratic machine came through BIG for Clinton. Billary must have cashed in some BIG chips, pulled some strings, called in some favors.
But, will the American people, Democratic partisans, the other candidates, or the media seriously question what just happened? Hell no. Everyone other than a few skeptics and cynics like me is too invested in our rotten system to examine this in the way it should be. The media and candidates and Democratic Party are all full-fledged members of the establishment and are not going to upend thatapple cart, no matter what. If they cared about democracy and electoral integrity, they'd have fought harder in 2000 and 2004, but they folded like lawn chairs, so nothing will happen now either. On top of that, these people (in the media especially) are craven cowards when it comes to really challenging power and privilege, and they enjoy helping to shape (rather than merely reflect) public opinion and gaming the system to help create the most competitive, controversial, dramatic, and entertaining process possible (they need to keep their readers and viewers enthralled, dammit!) But don't kid yourself--these people are smart and well-connected, and they know what happened. Why do you think it took so much longer to call the Democratic contest than the Republican last night? It wasn't because it was so much closer--Clinton held a steady 3-4 point lead from start to finish (which of itself should be suspicious to anyone who cares), and plenty of past races have been called early with margins no bigger, and sometimes even less. No, it was because the media folks saw results that were frankly incredible and highly implausible based on all the other data they had, and they knew something was up.
The powers that be behind the Democratic Party don't support a message of profound, fundamental change and reform any more than the Republicans do. Although they'll profess otherwise, they fear a large and unpredictable voter turnout, a youth surge into the polls, as much as the Republicans do. Entrenched interests and Boomers run both parties and the political system now, and the existing climate of low turnout by dedicated minorities of voters (known entities), widespread non-participation, disengaged youth, and pervasive apathy and disenchantment suits them just fine. The Obama wave needed to be stopped cold by any means necessary. A surprising upstart rebellion from within the party is just not in the cards right now. For probably a multitude of reasons, a decision was made at some level...and the fix was in. The arrogance of those involved is evident from the fact that they gave Clinton the shocking win, rather than just allowing her to lose by only a few points (which would have still been suspicious given the last polls and would have still allowed her to spin it as a moral victory and herself as the "Comeback Kid" redux.) A signal was being sent, and they didn't give a shit who saw it for what it was. They can count on media silence and public indifference.
Actually, they can count on more than media silence--the media is hard at work shaping and propagating the PR spin that emerged from the result. Starting late last night and going full force today, we've been treated to a series of stories that, when put in context with what was being reported ONLY 24 HOURS AGO frankly defy sense. So, we're hearing about how the "experience" voters swamped the "change" voters at the polls; how the young voters stayed home while older voters stormed to the polls in droves; how Obama's campaign appearances on Monday and Tuesday were poorly attended while Clinton's were thronged with enthusiastic supporters (this is rich, considering that the media reported the exact opposite just yesterday, as I mentioned above); how Clinton's emotional moments of the past few days won her a huge surge in newfound respect and sympathy (also rich, given the mixed reactions to them, even among women); how the perceived debate dynamic of the boys tag-teaming and ganging up on the girl secured her a wave of female sympathy votes; how women bucked the trend in Iowa and went for her in crushing numbers, thus seeming to touch off a gender war dynamic in the campaign (one that, ironically enough, the Clinton campaign has unleashed. They'd better hope that doesn't come back to bite them on the ass); how voters snapped out of their trances regarding Obama and backed off, deciding he needs to be examined and vetted in more detail (which clearly contradicts all the data gathered in poll after poll in the days leading up to the vote); how independents ignored the Democrats and flocked to the Republican polls instead to give McCain a big win, thus depriving Obama of much of his support base (also clearly contradicting the turnout and exit poll data which showed the Dems outpolling the Repubs among independents and Dem turnout to be much higher in a strongly Republican-leaning state);
(to be continued...)
-
Why isn't anyone stating the obvious? Obama is DONE...THE FIX IS IN (part 3)
how the racial bias of white America was expressed in the NH vote because it was secret balloting rather than the public caucusing of Iowa, which allowed many whites who expressed support for Obama to secretly vote otherwise without being exposed as frauds as they would have been in Iowa (notice how this story also serves to get in racial digs against Obama, in the course of "exposing" the possible racial bias of NH voters--both clever and sleazy); how tracking polls and exit polls are unreliable and untrustworthy and just wild guesses (thus ignoring the well-established and finely-honed scientific and mathematical principles behind them, as well as a decades-long track record of superb accuracy and reliance on them by the media and political parties); how Hillary and Bill publicly distorted Obama's voting record and beliefs in the last day or two and may have swayed some fence-sitters that way (going so far as to send out a campaign mailer to women saying that Obama opposes abortion rights and that Clinton has to win in order to stop him, as reported by a recipient of one mailer on Air America Radio this morning); and much more.
We even heard this morning of a poll from yesterday by some small college in NH (not the University of NH) that was strangely unreported on yesterday, that showed Obama beating Clinton by only one point--well within the statistical margin of error. WOW! Impressive! Why was no one talking up this poll yesterday? Why didn't the Clinton campaign use that as evidence to show that she was closing the gap and could win after all, rather than slogging through Tuesday feeling "despondent, even fatalistic"? It was the only poll out of many that showed Clinton even close to Obama, by a long shot. And yet we didn't hear about it until today. Hmm. Regardless, that same poll called the Republican race for Mitt Romney, who ended up losing to McCain by a healthy margin, so you can be the judge of just how accurate it was.
Any flimsy straws the media can grasp to attempt to explain the inexplicable.
Wake up people. You are being played, deceived, manipulated. If my thesis about NH is correct, do you honestly think that Obama will go on to win the nomination? Get a grip. Clinton will win the Democratic nomination, and Obama will start to fade away as mysteriously as he first appeared. Clinton's nomination will give the Republicans a huge boost and a unity they now lack, and make it more likely that McCain will be their nominee (and he can out-experience Clinton any day.) It will also almost certainly lead to a Bloomberg run as an independent--a wild card that will bleed independent voters away from Clinton, who will desperately need them to win in November. Gird your loins, another Republican president looms on the horizon. The Dems will yet again snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
I say this all not as a strong Obama supporter, nor as a Clinton hater. I've been an Edwards guy from the start of this campaign and I still am, although he has no chance to win the nomination. I'm not a registered Democrat but I'm far to the left politically. I've always had a great deal of respect and admiration for Clinton as a person, even while disagreeing with her on many issues and knowing that she and Bill can play dirty politics behind the scenes with the best of them. Nor does her gender factor into my analysis at all (being harder on her than I would be on a male candidate in an analogous situation.)
However, after watching last night unfold I could only feel disgust and shame. We're observing a scripted and choreographed entertainment spectacle unfold before us, not a true election campaign. There's no sense fooling ourselves any longer.