| # | Author | Message |
1
| Mr X
Wed 11/4/2009 1:51a | Seriously. That's on their main web page right now, top headline. "GOP Sweep".
Um, the Democrats increased their majority in Congress. How does that constitute a "sweep" of any kind?
Funny, that.
Liars.
By the way, right UNDER the headline lie, they actually print "McDonnell cruises to victory in Virginia gubernatorial race and Christie upsets incumbent governor in New Jersey; Democrat Owens takes closely watched N.Y. congressional election."
Um, that's not a sweep. Liars. (the Dems also retained their Congressional seat in California, the Repubs got nothin nationally)
http://www.foxnews.com/ |
2
| Sport Goofy
Wed 11/4/2009 5:19a | You don't think that's a fair and balanced approach to writing headlines? |
3
| wahooskipper
Wed 11/4/2009 6:16a | Did they not "sweep" the gubenatorial races? Yes, there were only the two...but I'm just sayin'. |
4
| DAR
Wed 11/4/2009 6:28a | Had this been any Republican in the White House and two Democrats won gubenatorial races most of the headlines would have considered the gubenatorial races to be a "referendum" against the Republicans. |
5
| Sport Goofy
Wed 11/4/2009 6:33a | << Had this been any Republican in the White House and two Democrats won gubenatorial races most of the headlines would have considered the gubenatorial races to be a "referendum" against the Republicans. >>
Nice to speculate, but give an example to back this up.
The facts are that nearly all of the exit polling showed these races to be a referendum on the economy. Voters chose to oust the incumbents during bad economic times. By offering headlines that don't present this factual representation of the election, readers are left to come to any number of partisan conclusions that aren't supported by the facts. News organizations shouldn't be fueling partisan propaganda. |
6
| wahooskipper
Wed 11/4/2009 6:50a | To be fair, CNNs headline was:
"GOP scores big on election night."
I actually happen to agree with Sport that this was a referendum on incumbents...regardless of their affiliation. And, that has to have the Democrats worried as they look toward 2010 simply because they are the majority. |
7
| Kar2oonMan
Wed 11/4/2009 7:23a | "GOP scores big on election night."
That's more accurate than a "sweep." The fact is, the GOP had that seat in upstate NY for 150 years. And it shifted to the Democrat side.
The GOP better get some brand names other than Beck, Hannity, Limbaugh, Palin and quick. Because consistently, they've been bad news for elections. In spite of their noise, it's pretty clear that a majority of Republicans are more moderate than that bunch, and it's showing up in election results. |
8
| utahjosh
Wed 11/4/2009 8:20a | Two different headlines from two separate news organizations last night -- one from FoxNews; the other from CNN: guess which is which:
1. Obama Dealt a Blow as Dems Face Voter Backlash at Polls
2. Analysis: Elections not a referendum on Obama
|
9
| Spyderman
Wed 11/4/2009 1:29p | Mr.X dont worry about it. What will happen is anti-obama people will read that and fall into a false sense of security while more democrates hold the important seats and do the work that needs to be done.
Just like in any great story, the villian will end up caushing there own doom. |
10
| WilliamK99
Wed 11/4/2009 1:36p | Mr.X dont worry about it. What will happen is anti-obama people will read that and fall into a false sense of security while more democrates hold the important seats and do the work that needs to be done.
Just like in any great story, the villian will end up caushing there own doom.<<
Genius, politics is not about good(Democrats) vs bad (Republicans), there are bad people on both sides, it just seems recently it has been more Republicans being involved in some questionable ethical situations and making some stupid decisions...
If you believe all Democrats are good and all Republicans are evil, then I feel sorry for you... |
