Manifesto Multilinko |
|
Interesting links and notes on updates to my main website.
[to search, use Blogger search in top bar] NEW BLOG
HOME ---- [contact me] My Blogger Profile View my photo galleries. Listen to my radio station. Currently ReadingThis is an Ottawa blog (Ontario, Canada). Cool blogs: McWetlog wood s lot La Tribu du Verbe Wil Wheaton Darren Barefoot Lectio.ca Blogger profiles in Ottawa Other good sites: Slashdot Wired News Mark Morford's Notes & Errata This page uses Extreme Tracker which is determining your referrer by running some JavaScript. The commenting system was Reblogger. |
Sunday, January 20, 2008
stupid media horserace coverage continues
Dudes it's a convention, with delegates, stop reporting it like it's first-past-the-post. Toronto Star - Clinton is big winner in Nevada - January 20, 2008 Big winner is she. Let's have a look. I'm trying to use CNN's site, but it reports different numbers depending on what page you use. So here's as good as I can figure out Clinton 51%. Number of delegates: 14 Obama 46%. Number of delegates: 14 She got 5% more and they have THE SAME FUCKING NUMBER OF DELEGATES. How is that winning? Let's look at her other big win in New Hampshire Clinton 39%. Number of delegates: 9 Obama 37%. Number of delegates: 9 Yeah, 2% and THE SAME FUCKING NUMBER OF DELEGATES. What a huge win that was. According to the media, if you "win" you get "momentum" (a concept with no objective basis in reality, invented by the media). When you have "momentum" it creates "expectations" (expectations which are also entirely invented by the media). What a load of shit. You want a reality check? Well here are CNN's front page numbers (keeping in mind as I mentioned they have different numbers on different pages) Yes, Hillary, the amazing winner, has FEWER DELEGATES THAN OBAMA. Not only that, if Edwards caucuses with Obama, which would make sense, they collectively have WAY MORE DELEGATES. Is the media retarded? Labels: demprimary2008, politics, rant, united states HOME - |