Double Standards Abound In The Political Media
Today is the first day of the Democratic National Convention, but I've decided I'm going to report on each day's events the day after they happen, rather than typing furiously into the night with my snap reactions. So today's convention round-up will run tomorrow, and we will likely have to pre-empt the Friday Talking Points column for the final day's review (which of course will be the biggest night, when Kamala Harris gives her acceptance speech).
Instead, I have a few random comments about the news media and how they are currently exhibiting a massive double standard towards Harris and her campaign, in more ways than one.
The Washington Post, together with ABC News and Ipsos, recently released a new poll. As most polls do, it showed more than one result. You could choose from "all adults," or "registered voters," or "likely voters." Now, "all adults" is a very useful category when figuring out the president's job approval ratings with the public. After all, people are entitled to their own opinions about the president even if they don't bother voting, right?
But when it comes to predicting elections, the other two categories are (obviously) more important. If you're not registered to vote yet then you probably won't, so we want to instead hear the opinions of those who at least have the possibility of easily casting a ballot. And even better, the sample of those who are likely to vote is the best indicator of all. Pollsters try to identify these "likely voters" by asking whether the person has voted in the last few elections, how enthusiastic they are about voting this year, and how committed they are to actually filling out and turning in their ballots. In fact, at some point during the horserace reporting (usually around Labor Day), most pundits start ignoring the "registered voters" numbers and focus solely on "likely voters."
So, having said all of that, here were the numbers from the Ipsos poll: among all adults, Kamala Harris leads Donald Trump by a margin of five points, 50 percent to 45 percent. Among registered voters, she leads by four points, 49-45. Among likely voters she leads by an impressive six points, 51-45. Any way you look at it, that's a pretty great poll (especially considering where Democrats were with Biden on the ticket).
The Post ran the poll results under a headline which only begrudgingly admitted: "Harris Holds Slight National Lead." Its first sentence calls it "a narrow lead." They took pains to point out: "Harris's lead among registered voters is not considered statistically significant." They reported on the "registered voters" margin, and failed to even mention the larger "likely voters" margin (even though it is a long and detailed article about various things the poll measured). They put their spotlight on the worst number for Harris, and even though they had a better predictive measure, they completely ignored the much-better number their poll reported.
Six points -- in this race, with all that has happened previously -- is a pretty whopping-big margin. It is a breathtaking turnaround from where Biden was. And Harris even cracks the 50 percent barrier, which is considered statistically important. But not a word about any of it was included in the Post article. All of their subsequent articles that mentioned the poll used almost-identical language, calling it merely a "narrow" or "slight" lead, often without even bothering to point out that in the number they chose to focus on she leads Trump by four points. To me, "narrow" or "slight" would make me think she was ahead by one point, maybe two at best. When she's really up by six, mind you.
The second bit of the mainstream media showing an enormous double standard came after Harris gave a speech which outlined her economic agenda. Harris unveiled a fairly progressive, fairly populist economic platform -- and the media pounced. "Where are the wonky details?" they whined. "She's endorsing price controls!" they hyperventilated. Donald Trump leaned into calling the whole thing a "communist" plan, likening Harris to Nicolas Maduro. The media didn't go quite that far, but they certainly veered towards it by trotting out many experts who had nothing but bad things to say about it (restraining themselves by only likening Harris to Richard Nixon). It was dangerous and counterproductive, they darkly warned. Imagine! The very idea of holding food companies responsible for price-gouging! The pearl-clutching was rampant.
But you know what? I saw it completely differently. Harris is indeed calling for anti-price-gouging legislation, but the chances of her getting it through even a Democratically-controlled Congress aren't all that great. As president, Harris could also direct the federal regulators to be more aggressive in their investigations of industries that seem to be colluding to drive prices up, since that could be done without any new legislation. But nobody seems to have considered that this could be a political feint -- maybe with a bit of pandering to the voters thrown in.
Think about it. Harris and Biden have specifically pointed to the meat-packing industry, which is controlled by only a handful of companies, for driving prices far above where they should have been, in response to the crisis of the pandemic. Meat prices are still rather high. So Kamala Harris might be sending this as a "shot across the bow" of the meat-packers. She could campaign on the issue right up until November, using the meat-packers as a worst-of-the-worst bad example.
Mightn't they, perhaps, decide that now would be a dandy time to cut their profit margins a wee bit and relieve the costs consumers pay in the grocery store? Industries like this generally don't like being in the spotlight -- they are much more content to lie low in the background, so the public doesn't figure out what an oligopoly they have built for themselves. So Harris's plan could achieve results not in a year or so (if/when Congress acts) and not after she becomes president, but now. Think falling meat prices might help Harris get elected? I do. The whole thing may in fact be designed to produce this outcome -- which Harris can fall back on if Congress doesn't act: "Well, the big corporations saw we were serious and have gotten their greed under control, so perhaps new legislation wasn't even necessary."
Also, as mentioned, it is definitely pandering to the voters, telling them what they want to hear. Which is par for the course in political campaigns, especially presidential ones. Joe Biden never successfully got out the message that he realized consumers were hurting at the grocery store, so if this does the trick then it could help more Americans pull the lever for Harris in the end.
But going beyond this one specific agenda item -- where is all this intense analysis for Trump's economic plans (such as they are)? Where is the outrage at Trump's plans not having enough detail? Where are some experts explaining why his plans would seriously drive up inflation and make things worse for consumers? Why the unequal treatment from the pundits and the rest of the press?
When the Democratic candidate does what presidential candidates are supposed to do -- release their political agenda, explain it, and defend it -- the press falls into their normal response. Question things, pick them apart, find some opposing voices, and generally treat it with the seriousness it deserves. When Trump rolls out some moronic (and oversimplified) economic idea, however, the press just collectively shrugs, says: "Oh, that's just Trump being Trump," and doesn't subject it to any analysis at all.
That's a double standard if I ever saw one.
In any case, all this will likely soon be forgotten. As I write this, the convention is about to get underway in earnest. Tonight will see President Joe Biden officially living up to his "bridge to a new generation" ideal as he passes the torch to his own vice president, in front of an adoring crowd.
The excitement will begin tonight and build all week long, as the Democratic Party showcases its very-popular past leaders. Both Bill and Hillary Clinton will speak. So will Barack and Michelle Obama. This is a stark contrast to the Republicans, who couldn't do the same thing since so many of their past leaders are so horrified at what Donald Trump has done to their party.
If Harris is polling six points up among likely voters before the convention, where might she be when she gets her "convention bounce"? This week could be the pivotal one for the entire campaign, in fact. Harris could build up a lead that Trump just won't be able to catch. With less than three months to go before Election Day, the only thing that could reset the race in a huge way is the upcoming presidential debate between Harris and Trump. If Harris is way up in the polls heading into that debate, Trump is going to be downright desperate.
So let the convention begin! Let's see what Democrats can do with their own four-day party in Chicago....
-- Chris Weigant
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
Even a well-designed poll is just anecdotal information.
I recently spoke to my former wife who had just talked to her brother. They were raised in Milwaukee and he currently lives in the very conservative area north of Green Bay. He is mid 70s, white, former military, biker/gearhead and long time Repub who voted for the Felon twice. He told her that he is voting for Kamala because he is sick of the Felon and thinks she has a vision for the future that is hopeful. And many people he knows feels the same way.
If THIS guy votes for Kamala the groundswell is larger than anybody suspects. Kind of fun to think about.
@steedo,
i think you have representative sampling and anecdotal evidence backward.
(2)Poet- My intent was to compare polling results from unknown respondents to someone I have known for decades and whose political habits and history are well known to me. Your comments always welcome, I appreciate your desire for clarity.
Steedo[1],
That was very interesting. Polls have proven to not always be very reliable. And, these anecdotal bits are definitely more fun!
I'm watching parts of the DNC livestream Kamala Harris spoke well, it seemed to me, just very briefly.
AOC was competent, but the timbre of her voice was a bit like what I use when I need to make myself heard through a lot of noise. Probably works for her too, same as it does for me, but she would need to remember to switch to microphone voice in order to match Kamala's effectiveness as an orator.
Now Hillary is on. I don't think she'll do any harm in front of a friendly audience like this. The crowd likes her.
Hillary made a reference to "enemies, foreign and domestic." Not ok. Fellow citizens, even when we disagree on matters of dire importance, are fellow citizens. We must not let ourselves become enemies.
When we as Democratic partisans see our political opponents slide toward regarding us as enemies, toward speaking of us as enemies, that increases our obligation to assert the role we share with them as fellow citizens.
Americans became each other's enemies once. In what followed, more Americans died than in any foreign war. We cannot let that happen again. That danger is remote, if less so than it should be. But even in the small ways that are plausible, we must not be enemies. The repercussions would not be 655,000 dead. But they would be bad enough.
Jasmin Crockett is speaking well. Not ougta-been-her-instead-of-Kamala well, but well enough that someone should be scheduling her to speak at stadium-sized rallies.
Ok, I nominate Representative Crockett for MIDOTW.
Governor Beshear is speaking well, but having to follow Representative Crockett isn't fair.
Senator Warnock should also be booked to fire up stadium-sized audiences every weekend from here to November. I'm still keeping my MIDOTW endorsement on Representative Crockett, but I would not mind if Warnock wins the trophy instead.
Senator Coons gets a thumbs-up too. He should speak as opening act for Crockett or Warnock.
Dr. Biden gave a perfectly respectable address. In other company it might have stood out, but not tonight.
Ashley Biden gave a satisfactory but unremarkable introduction for her father.
The president has been standing there for about five minutes, wishing the crowd would stop cheering for him and let him speak. But he's gracious about it.
His delivery is very good, but his fundamental strategy is wrong. Trump is both a barely coherent buffoon and a genuine threat to our political institutions. We need to let the first be seen more. People have heard enough about the second.
Manufacturing will never again be massively labor-intensive the way it was in the era of Henry Ford. We have better ways of making stuff now. In the eighteenth century it took most people's labor just for everyone to have food. In the twentieth, the amount of labor needed in agriculture fell to a few percent of the population. The same thing is happening with manufacturing. Telling people that we're going back to an economy where jobs are mostly in manufacturing is a way to get them to be cynical, get them to see you as just a liar, no better than the other liar.
dsws
6
Hillary made a reference to "enemies, foreign and domestic." Not ok. Fellow citizens, even when we disagree on matters of dire importance, are fellow citizens. We must not let ourselves become enemies.
You're kidding, right? Hillary was referring to the sworn oath that many servants of America are required by law to affirm, including Vice President Harris.
She's simply saying that Harris will keep her sworn oath to the Constitution.
When we as Democratic partisans see our political opponents slide toward regarding us as enemies, toward speaking of us as enemies, that increases our obligation to assert the role we share with them as fellow citizens.
Those who take the oath serve all Americans without regard to political affiliation and swear to protect the Constitution from all enemies.
It's language contained in the Oath Administration Act pursuant to Article VI of the United States Constitution passed by the 1st United States Congress. The President of the Senate (Vice President) takes the following oath:
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.
It's the law.
"Price-gouging" is a pretty ridiculous, not to mention disingenuous, thing to highlight in a Democratic effort to beat the Republicans on the economy. Of course, it's not surprising that Dems and their allies would approach this issue in this way.
Wait a second ... no commentary from anyone on Biden's speech? Did it just run too late for everyone or what?
Didn't watch. Was he all amped up on Mountain Dew?
That's just the sort of sentiment that Trump taps into so successfully.
Hillary was referring to the sworn oath that many servants of America are required by law to affirm
And I've said it as a census enumerator. Of course I recognized the source, and it doesn't matter. In context, it was absolutely clear that it was a dig at the MAGAts.
no commentary from anyone on Biden's speech?
[10] and [11]. Very good delivery means, among other things, that he didn't come across as too old.
Sorry Dan, I missed your comment. Maybe we'll hear from the rest today.
[16]
LizM,
Chill out!
That was just a little joke. I was mocking the orangutan, not Sleepy Joe. Just FYI, Mountain Dew does not cure dementia.
Regardless, how many people will see my comment? 15? I don't think much damage will be done if it's misinterpreted.
It will be fun to watch Harris fill the RNC's Milwaukee convention hall to the brim tonight. It'll surely trigger the 78 year old demented snowflake.
Which will he use in public first? The N word or the B word?
Today's edition of the JD Weirdo Report
Three years ago JD expressed his weird, extreme anti-abortion position like this: “It’s not whether a woman should be forced to bring a child to term, it’s whether a child should be allowed to live, even though the circumstances of that child’s birth are somehow inconvenient"
At the DNC, KY Governor Andy Beshear addressed JD's knuckle-dragging: "Inconvenience is traffic. I mean it is a — make him go through this. It is someone being violated, someone being harmed and then telling them that they don’t have options after that.”
The sectional predator posted this half-assed, bad-faith, faux outrage on racist hellscape Twitter: “What the hell is this? Why is @AndyBeshearKY wishing that a member of my family would get raped?!? What a disgusting person.”
Beshear is an up-right decent guy. Please note that scummy dipshit JD does not defend his outrageous extremism. He just wants to shoot the messenger. Look over there!
Dems need to keep the heat on because the opposition's got nothing.
dsws
17
And I've said it as a census enumerator. Of course I recognized the source, and it doesn't matter. In context, it was absolutely clear that it was a dig at the MAGAts.
Maybe review that "context" because it was inarguably multiple sentences regarding Donald Trump's actions and comparing and contrasting Harris with her current political opponent, same old Donald Trump.
It's a comment about the sworn oath that civil servants take in service to their country and how Harris has kept and will continue to keep that affirmation versus her opponent, still Trump, who did not, has not, and never will.
Thousands of civil servants take this oath every year to "defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic." The oath is to the Constitution/our laws and not to a person and has nothing whatsoever to do with the political affiliation of anyone seeking to undermine it.
Those who take the oath to the Constitution aren't generally conditioned to concern themselves with the political affiliation of those enemies who would seek to attack or undermine it. I know because I helped to train that bullshit out of thousands of them. :)
The media has also done a pretty good job of obscuring that super-weird RFK Jr is one of Fat Donny's operatives, but the jig is up now thanks to his VP Nicole Shanahan.
Shanahan said this out loud to the Impact Theory podcast:
“There’s two options that we're looking at and one is staying in, forming that new party, but we run the risk of a Kamala Harris and Walz presidency because we draw more votes from Trump, somehow draw more votes from Trump. Or we walk away right now and join forces with with Donald Trump and explain to our base why we're making this decision.”
We already know about the worm that ate his brain, Nicole. Money seems to have rotted yours.
Elizabeth Miller
13
"Price-gouging" is a pretty ridiculous, not to mention disingenuous, thing to highlight in a Democratic effort to beat the Republicans on the economy.
It's ridiculous that it's happening more frequently and unabated in America, primarily in connection with the interruption of supply chains due to the fallout from the global pandemic. It's not a secret that Americans pay exponentially more for a wide range of goods and services simply by virtue of living in the United States, a so-called "rich" country, with pharmaceuticals/medications/durable medical equipment being the foremost example.
Of course, it's not surprising that Dems and their allies would approach this issue in this way.
What's really not surprising is a Canadian referring to a practice that has been prevalent in America for decades -- now exacerbated by recent events -- as "disingenuous." What Biden/Harris have done to help curb the price gouging Americans have been experiencing for decades in exorbitant costs of pharmaceuticals could simply be applied to other industries wherein our citizens are being ripped off.
It's an antitrust issue. If "Big Pharma" can finally be somewhat addressed, albeit slowly, then I don't see why we shouldn't endeavor to take aim at those countless other industries who are taking advantage of "rich" Americans, starting with "Big Beef," wherein (only) four big companies control the U.S. beef industry.
John From Censornati
21
Diet Mountain Dew ;)
It will be fun to watch Harris fill the RNC's Milwaukee convention hall to the brim tonight. It'll surely trigger the 78 year old demented snowflake.
'Nother snowflake meltdown, and they say no two are alike. Heh.
Which will he use in public first? The N word or the B word?
Well, yesterday he claimed her father was a Marxist professor and that she learned everything she knows from him. So it appears Trump has decided Harris is Black after all, and thus I would wager it'll be a twofer: NB, preceded, of course, by the word "Marxist."
It's a comment about the sworn oath that civil servants take
Apparently you didn't watch the same speech as I did. In the one I saw, it was unambiguously a use of the oath to comment about Trump and his fans.
Facing merger opposition, Kroger released this statement last week regarding ridiculous grocery store price gouging:
After the merger closes, Kroger will invest $1 billion to lower Albertsons’ prices, consistent with Kroger’s track record of fighting inflation and providing value to customers.
More than 100% of readers should not believe them.
Fat Donny is droning on in front of cameras again it what was billed as a law and order speech. You know, policy. He's obsessing about the unfairness of having to run against the Democratic Party's candidate of choice.
They told her don't laugh please, but I'll bet she was laughing inside last night when she saw the way Joe Biden left because that was a coup. That was a coup. And I'm no fan of his at all and it started with the debate and from that point on it got worse and worse, but that was a coup. It was a vicious, violent overthrow of a president of the United States.
He threw in the word violent so that he could trick those egghead campaign managers and spineless congress critters into believing that he can stay on topic, but I do have one question.
Hasn't he trained his cult to believe that he is the current president? He's glitching.
Today Dipshit JD made this statement about debate prep:
I have a friend who embellishes and lies a lot, I’m having him stand in for Tim Walz.
Who could it be?
dsws
27
Apparently you didn't watch the same speech as I did. In the one I saw, it was unambiguously a use of the oath to comment about Trump and his fans.
Nah. Same speech. I already provided part of the transcript. If anyone's interested, the entire transcript is readily available:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/full-transcript-hillary-clinton-s-2024-dnc-speech/ar-AA1p5FNI?ocid=BingNewsSerp
Hillary was simply contrasting VP Harris with Old Man Trump and how they've each handled their sworn duty to the Constitution, their oath.
Obviously, you're entitled to your opinion, but the part of the speech you're disparaging is simply a contrast between Harris and Trump and who will fulfill their oath to defend the Constitution and who obviously has not and will not. The words "enemies foreign and domestic" isn't a reference to MAGA, but apparently you heard it that way for whatever reason. :)
John From Censornati
29
Do my eyes deceive me that John has used italics!? It's gorgeous. ;)
Somebody needs to tell Fat Donny that Biden is still the President and that the only person who could have relieved him of his sworn duty to America is -- in fact -- Joe Biden... well, and Death, but that isn't a person, it's a spiritual entity.
The only "vicious, violent overthrow of a president of the United States" was Trump's failed coups attempt in January 2021 after Trump lost to Joe Biden, who remains undefeated in general elections for over 50 years and henceforth shall remain ever thus.
Hasn't he trained his cult to believe that he is the current president? He's glitching.
Yes... but he's also trained his cult to believe that Barack Hussein Obama is the current president and it's all part and parcel of Fat Donny and his propensity to take all sides of every issue and flip-flop on a dime if he can make some money on the flipside. :)
John From Censornati
30
Heh.
Who could it be?
It's probably his couch that lies like a rug.
Or it's his running mate who will have him hung if he cannot or will not assist in his violent overthrow of Joe Biden... the sequel.
JFC[20],
Chill out!
Hehehehehe. Indeed!