A reminder there’s still an election
Howard Kurtz of the Washington Post writes that some journalists are prematurely looking to the expectations of a Barack Obama presidency, without waiting for voters to have their say Tuesday.
In his Media Notes column today on washingtonpost.com — titled “Journalists name 44th president” — Kurtz reminds:
“Polls have led journalists astray before. As recently as the middle of last December, Hillary Clinton led Obama by 30 points in a Post poll, while Rudy Giuliani was the GOP front-runner. Weeks later, the polls led many pundits to predict that Clinton would lose the New Hampshire primary, which would leave the former first lady’s campaign “gasping for breath,” as The Post put it on the morning of the primary. Clinton won and revived her candidacy.”
Kurtz quotes pollster John Zogby:
“The media still misunderstand and, to a great degree, still misrepresent polls. It’s a cliche, but what we offer is a snapshot in time. We don’t predict, can’t predict.”
Kurtz begins his article:
“Barack Obama has a problem: He’s going to sweep so many Democrats into Congress that he will “face high expectations,” as the New York Times put it, to deliver on his promises.
“Obama will attempt to fashion a “new New Deal,” most likely with Larry Summers as his Treasury secretary, New York magazine says.
“John McCain’s defeat will be a lonely one,” Newsweek reports, but Sarah Palin could revive the Republican Party for 2012.
“So much for the formality of next week’s election. Many pundits and publications seem so certain of a big Democratic win that they’re exploring the intricacies of an Obama administration and whether the party will have a filibuster-proof 60 votes in the Senate.”
“If the mainstream media are wrong about Obama and the voters pull a Truman, that is going to be the end of whatever shred of credibility they have left,” says Tobe Berkovitz, associate dean of Boston University’s College of Communication.
Kurtz later writes:
“To be sure, the forward-looking pieces in the Times, New York magazine, Newsweek and elsewhere are sprinkled with caveats about “if” Obama wins and the “possibility” of a Democratic sweep. But the lack of similar speculation about a McCain administration makes clear which way the journalism world is leaning.”
Steve Parker is the deputy managing editor for news, and oversees the Post-Dispatch's front page. STLtoday's online news editors are on his newsroom team. Parker has been at the paper since September 1980. 
My friend works at Cooper Electric last week their company had layoffs.
Today (st Louis office) we had a meeting about more layoffs possibly coming.
SO to prevent further layoffs not telling you who to vote for, but if our business
is taxed more we will have to lay you off.
How terrible to use this tactic. The election should not be used in this way.
How many other companies are trying to get their employees to vote for their candidate.
Maybe top corporate heads do not know this tactic is used, but this is despicable.
Dear “Pundits” -
While I will be voting for Senator Obama, please do not predict the election until after 12 midnight on the 4th. Just remember your predecessors who gave us “President Dewey”.
Sandy,
My son owns his own company. He only employs four or five people. He told me that he got into a political discussion with several of his employees, kind of on the spur of the moment, when they were telling him how much they liked Obama. That is when he said that if his taxes go up, he may have lay somebody off.
So you think it would be “nicer” if company owners didn’t explain the consequences of higher employer taxes and just surprised the employees with the layoffs, later?
Star20,
Two large men with bulges in their pockets, walk into a dry cleaners in 1930 Chicago. One man says to the owner of the business, “Nice joint ya’ got here. It’d be a shame if anything ever happened to it!” “Ya know, for a c-note each week, my boys’ll make sure you’re protected.” Your son’s business may burn down and employees will be laid off. An earthquake or a flood may result in people being laid off. The business could fail on its own and people would be let go. But to imply that voting for a certain candidate who may or may not raise taxes on his business (does he make more than $250,000 per year?) might or might not result in employees losing their jobs, is exactly the very same implied coercion I cited with the dry cleaner. To answer your question, yes, it would be nicer if business owners kept their strong arm consequences to themselves.
Dear Editor,
First, I would like to make known I am voting for McCain. This election is one of choosing the lesser of two poor candidates. I think both parties have not been able to nominate strong candidates needed to run this government because of extremes in both parties.
If you are for a socialist type government then Obama is your candidate. He has stated a number of times that he wants to spread the wealth. He wants to give to those a needed helping hand. I suggest that this is paramount to doing the following. Schools should tax students who do well in the class room. If a student has a 98 average and another has a 71 average. Tax the 98 student 9 points. He now has an 89 and the other now has an 80. The field is now leveling for both. This is basically what he has proposed to do in taxing Americans.
On the college level we can do the same thing. A student with a 4.0 gets taxed .5 and this goes to a student with a 1.5. I know if you present this to all those smart college students who are for Obama they will pressure their admistrations into developing such a taxing system. And if they really are true believers they should demand it. Can you imagine the medical schools using the Obama level concept in recruiting future doctors?
On health care, just look at the failures of Canada, the UK, and the rest of Europe. Socialized medicine is a failure. If Bill Clinton was just an average American under Obama/ Hillary plan he would have to wait in line for his turn on the table for any procedure. Also you tell doctors where they can practice and what they can practice in medicine.
On foreign affairs, you have to wonder if Obama has a real sense of the world. He says things like our troops are killing innocent civilians but never makes any statement about 9/11, The USS Cole, the bombings of our embassies or about how terrorists kill innocents all over the world. In fact I don’t know if he thinks there is a war with neo fascist Muslims.
This election like all elections has grave implications on the judiciary as well. An Obama presidency would surely send leftist socialist judges to all the circuit courts as well as the Supreme Court. He would like to see judges take away individual rights and give more power to the central government. So, in conclusion, think how either man’s presence in the White House would impact on the USA.
Yours truly,
Robert Jamelli
Hazleton, PA