ext_69824 ([identity profile] jamesinclair.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] exsequar 2008-10-06 10:10 pm (UTC)

"I think the media refuses to acknowledge that traditionally staunchly red states are indeed wavering."

Parts of me want to think that it's because the media wants to be cautious so that any changes dont come back and bite them in the ass, after all, there is an entire month left. Part of me thinks it's because a close race gives better ratings, and announcing a blowout now would hurt their readership. And a tiny part of me thinks that the media wants Obama to win, and by making it seem close they get more Obama supports to the polls. If it's an obvious win, why vote right?

As for the youth vote, I think it's a very very bad idea to plan around it. Hillary beat Obama by a big margin here in MA, even though there are enough college students to tilt an election, and MA laws allow registration in two states (but only voting in one of course). Based on what I've seen, youth talk but don't vote. The turnout in the primary only solidified what I saw in our Governers race 2 years ago.

As for me, I'd prefer Biden as president over Obama. The whole change thing isn't doing it for me, and a large part of that is because I was in Venezuela when Chavez was elected and in Brazil when Lula won. Guess what their platform was all about. Change = populist and I don't think basing a campaign around it is a good thing.

Hell, Deval Patrick, the governor of MA (who I voted for) ran a campaign that pretty much set up Obama, and he's been a pretty lame governor. The biggest change we've had is his casino proposal, which was voted down (so no change)



Post a comment in response:

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting