Weighing In on Election Coverage

Reader Comments
Back to blog

Why is no one talking about the fact that this election is a referendum on George Bush? Why is there no exit pole question on this? Now the media wants to convince us that a 2-3% shift in the popular vote is a "tectonic shift" in politics. How stupid do they think we are? There will be no republicans in an Obama cabinet no matter how much speculation the media will espouse. We hear about Obama's strategy to take red states, as though a superior strategy was the difference. Again, this election is all about voters blaming the republicans instead of themselves for having voted for a second Bush term. For the tv news channels to claim they are objective and neutral or having any superior insight into the facts is just plain disingenuine. At least the newspapers admit to endorsing a candidate and do not pretend to be neutral when they clearly can not be. Some day honesty will prevail.

c ebetino of OH 11:04PM November 04, 2008

Barak Obama says that he wants to increase taxes on people and business' that make more than $250,000 a year. This sounds ok to those of us who make less than that until you look at it logically and to me it starts to look really bad. First, my utility company makes more than $250,000 a year so there taxes will go up and that cost will be passed on to the comsumer -(us)- to make up for lost profits, and lets face it, if they didn't increase there price's they would have to cut back on spending and jobs would be one of the first things to go. The same could be said about the local grocery stores, gas stations, and the vast majority of companies out there that provide us with a product or service. 99 percent of the products in my home were made by a company making more than $250,000. And I'm sure that if you looked around your home the same could be said about most of your stuff as well. That means school supplies will go up, medicines, clothes, everything. And what's worse is that most of us will not be able to afford as many goods and services so demand will drop and those companies will have to downsize and we will still end up loosing jobs. We must not Elect Obama even if this were the only reason.

robert rollins of CO 9:21PM November 01, 2008

On my homepage this morning , it said that a new study showed that the media had more positive coverage on Obama, than on McCain,....Yes,....that's right,....it does,.....because the candidate and the campaign are more positive, than McCain or Palin, or their supporters! How many solutions has McCain had, and how much time has he spent on the solutions to our problems? He was warned, the public doesn't want to hear the crap, that was thrown around during the primary, but solutions! He didn't listen, and now has turned to calling Obmama a Socialist, when he has said he wants to help the middle class as well, it's just that has no idea how! The republican party has never had the skill to do anything with the economy, look at the Ford administration 14% inflation, and the best they could offer was, WIN buttons, that meant Whip Inflation Now! That's it! The great Ronnie Reagan, invented the "trickle down theory", but as we found out the hard way, with overseas companies, that didn't believe in that theory, that it doesn't work in the 20th century, not to mention the current world market, when we have more of the same , coupled with our American companies joining the overseas companies, ...where? ....overseas! Bush's daddy didn't do a thing about the ecomomy, he just " raised taxes" , that's right, even after he said " read my lips ,..no more new taxes"! Along comes Bill Clinton, and because of his intelligence, and skill working with people, he balanced the budget for the first time in 40 years , and gave us the best ecomomy in 50 years! McCain should get negative coverage, ...he's negative, and he would be negative it elected!

Oplis Sloan of TN 11:59AM November 01, 2008