5 Ways the Media Is Gravely Misreading South Carolina's Democratic Primary Results

[Nanjeanne]

Interesting analysis of the SC results and how it impacts the general election.

Bernie Sanders, having just finished two rallies in Texas with crowds larger than Hillary Clinton could ever dream of -- a 10,000-person rally in Austin and an 8,000-person one in Dallas -- called Clinton to concede the South Carolina primary and got on a plane bound for Minnesota, a state whose Super Tuesday vote the media hasn't bothered to poll, but which Bernie Sanders is likely to win. If he listened to any of the coverage of his dramatic defeat in the Palmetto State while en-route to Rochester, he probably wondered at its accuracy and cogency. Here's five reasons he'd be right:

1. In South Carolina, Sanders won many of the groups that will matter in the general election, making it puzzling that the media would declare Saturday's primary results solid proof of Clinton's viability in November.

<SNIP>

2. Among voters who decided who they wanted to support over the last four weeks, Sanders significantly outperformed his statewide totals, losing that demographic by less than half what he lost South Carolina by.

<SNIP>

3. CNN consistently misstated the composition of the Super Tuesday electorate in a way that dramatically misled viewers about Clinton's prospects.

<SNIP>

4. John King's "Magic Wall" has dazed him into -- frankly -- incoherence.

<SNIP>

5. Almost no one has voted yet. No, really -- almost no one has voted.

READ THE ARTICLE TO SEE THE DETAILS ON EACH OF THESE POINTS. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-abramson/5-ways-the-media-is-grave_b_9340218.html

The one that really stood out for me was under Point 1:

Specifically, Sanders won independents in South Carolina by 7 points, voters under 30 by 8 points, first-time primary voters by 26 points, white men by 12 points, and -- while losing the total vote by a staggering 47.5% -- managed to lose on the question of honesty and trustworthiness by only 2%.

[fun n serious]

1. I don't count chickens before they hatch. No one should

I am a Clinton supporter but if the pundits can say Rubio can still beat Trump?!! Why couldn't Bernie beat Hillary?

[Merryland]

2. As South Carolina goes

So goes the nation (not).

[Thav]

3. First-time primary voters is a great tell.

There's enough people who want to make a difference that they're coming out for the first time.

[asuhornets]

4. Hillary Clinton..

won in ALL categories. And if no one trust her, then why did she win by 50%?

[Nanjeanne]

5. Because the media tells us she is inevitable. Her surrogates are out there lying about Sanders

on every tv show. Many people don't have time or inclination to actually research their candidates so they listen to soundbites and believe that's the truth, some people vote based on name recognition, some people vote because they want to see a woman President before they die, some people vote because the think the Clinton years were great and want to go back to them . . . many many many reasons. Doesn't make her the best candidate for this country - but sure does make her strong within the Democratic Party.

Unfortunately being strong with mainstream Democrats will not win her the election.

[asuhornets]

6. I only hear Hillary

is inevitable from Bernie and his supporters. And she is qualified that's what you are missing. I hear the media talking about her trust issues and emails all the time. The media is against Hillary. No one really knows what Bernie will do if elected - that's the problem. The race is not over by a long shot. He still has a chance. But I am hoping in the end, Hillary will prevail. Bernie problem is that he tried to out-Democrat, the Democrat. But he is a Independent.