How ironic - the press plays the race card to cover their miscalculations!

[EffieBlack]

This morning, the pundits who got it so wrong before last night - predicting Obama's coronation and digging Clinton's grave - are now all wringing their hands crying crocodile tears because, as Chris Matthews said this morning, "Paleface speak with forked tongue." (Yes, he actually said that!)

The same people who trash black and female politicians for playing the race or gender card if they even suggest that racism or sexism might still exist are now using race as a fig leaf to cover their own errors.

In other words, they're blaming THEIR screwup on the New Hampshire voters - in essence, calling them a bunch of racists.

It's fascinating to see these people - who never once acknowledged or even mentioned the possibility of such an occurrence - are now vigorously insisting that the reason they got it so wrong is NOT that they or the highly-paid pollsters screwed up, but because a significant number of white people in New Hampshire are so racist that they refused to vote for Obama because he's black but were too scared to tell the pollsters.

Yes, certainly, there was probably some element of this. There always is because we still have racism in America. But this doesn't explain the up to 17-point disparity between the pollsters' predictions and the actual outcome.

Before anyone falls into this trap - which of course will lay the groundwork for the bull "Obama is unelectable because America is too racist" claim - consider this:

1. If such a large number of white voters are so prejudiced that they just couldn't bring themselves to vote for a black man, wouldn't a substantial portion of them also have trouble voting for a woman? Especially Hillary Clinton?

2. If so many white voters decided to vote against Obama because he's black, wouldn't more of them have switched to John Edwards? Edwards, the logical beneficiary, doesn't seem to have benefitted at all from this supposed bigotry against blacks in the race.

3. If there is such a large number of bigots voting in the race, wouldn't that have affected Clinton's numbers as well? Why did so many people lie about voting for an African-American but NO ONE seemed to lie about voting for a woman?

4. Given that Obama substantially outpolled Clinton among men and Clinton substantially outpolled Obama among women, doesn't it stand to reason that the switch had much more to do with gender than race?

5. If the Bradley effect IS a factor, shouldn't the pollsters have accounted for that in their polling? That certainly could have been controlled for in their sampling. Obviously, they didn't think it was an issue until they got egg all over their faces.

Based on what I've seen so far, I believe that:

1. Much of the switch from Obama to Clinton was not based on race but was a result of enormously hard work by Clinton and her team (everyone seems to have forgotten how impressed they were with the Clinton "machine" prior to Iowa), helped along by a backlash against the media for the over-the-top and blatantly sexist attacks against her in the final days. Ironically, the attacks and her reaction to them made Clinton seem much more empathetic, which helped overcome one of the few shortcomings of her campaign. But instead of giving her the credit she deserves for winning New Hampshire, they're trying to find all kinds of reasons to undercut her victory.

2. While there will certainly be some "Bradley effect" impact on any race involving an African-American or woman and Obama will have a consistent fight to overcome the racism that still exists in American politics and the public at large, this did not have substantial impact on this particular race and is NOT the primary reason that Hillary Clinton did so much better than expected.

3. The bottom line is that the press and pollsters got it wrong. Way wrong. And now they're trying to blame their shortcomings on the voters in New Hampshire by suggesting that Obama is a hapless victim of the racism of New Hampshire voters.

In other words, the press messed up and are now trying to camouflage their errors with "the race card."

I urge everyone not to fall for it!

[acmavm]

1. We've got one cluck here who's screaming racism too. It ain't

just the pundits.

[midlife_mo_Jo]

5. You're missing the point

They want people to believe it's racism. They're not just covering their asses, they're planting ideas in peoples' minds that Obama can't win. Corporate America believes the repugs can beat Hillary.

I happen to think they're wrong, by the way.

[Donnachaidh]

2. Chris Matthews is a PIG.

And I'd have to agree -- Washington Journal this morning is trying to stir the very same shit pot. I think all these jerks should lose their jobs over this.

[rodeodance]

7. ha--more likely they will be rewarded--

[Rock_Garden]

3. I stayed up way too late last night and heard all that, too.

And my eyes were rolling from the strain of hearing that much bs.

[EffieBlack]

8. Not once during their hyperventilating reporting that Obama would beat Clinton by 700 points

did any of these brilliant pundits who are such experts on all things political mention that "Oh, by the way, we should take some of these numbers with a grain of salt because white voters are so racist that they're probably lying to the pollsters about voting for Obama."

It seems to me that, even if they are now right (which they aren't) that the Bradley effect came into play, this STILL doesn't let the press off the hook since if the Bradley effect was possible, they should have been reporting it. Instead, they never even mentioned it. They didn't mention it because there was no evidence that it was there. And there still isn't.

Huckabee kicked Romney's butt in Iowa. McCain kicked Romney's butt in New Hampshire. In both instances, they defied the polls. THOSE victories are chalked up to hard work by the candidate and the fact that their messages resonated with the voters. Hillary wins a big victory, and HER win is blamed on racism and crocodile tears.

Interesting.

[Rock_Garden]

10. While we're on this subject, I did notice one big difference in coverage.

CNN's pundits had been every bit as rabid as MSNBC about stoning Hillary. But last night every one of the pundits on CNN kicked themselves in their collective arses and took their medicine about it. Not so on MSNBC. If not for the efforts of Rachel Maddow, it would have been a complete mysoginistic stonewall.

[EffieBlack]

11. That's really interesting

[wilt the stilt]

4. Women won it for Hilary

I believe Rachel Maddow had it correct. Women(my wife included) were peeved how the MSM was beating up Hilary.. They voted for Hilary.

[Frances]

6. As I read the statistics, New Hampshire was about gender

not race.

[EffieBlack]

9. Exactly!

Race had very little to do with it.

[RoadRage]

12. The Media needs to shut up and accept some responsibility..

First of all.. Hillary has a TON of supporters, ran a great campaign, and her voters stayed focused on the goal.. winning the NH primary for her. She did a great job.. exhasted and all.

The media needs to get off of the racial crap. Actually.. they are right.. there are A LOT of racist pigs in NH.. and they were deciding between Romney or McCain. It's not like they were telling the pollsters they were going to Obama, and then at the last second realized that Romney was the best way to keep the White man in power. Give me a break.

However.. there is a risk with calling someone "Inevitable" and "The almost assured winner" before the race is run. Hillary found that out in Iowa.. and Obama found it out in NH.

How many Obama voters got to their polling station to vote, saw lines around the block and thought to themselves... "Hey, he's gonna win by 7 - 13% anyway, let's just go get some dinner".. and didn't bother to vote, because the media pretty much assured a victory.

Now to Clinton fans - I'm NOT saying that this was THE reason she won and he lost.. not at all. But, it's a possibility, and i'm sure a small contributer to the "shock & awe" in NH yesterday. Along with women voters coming out for their "girl" and the splitting of the young vote.

[EffieBlack]

13. Chris Matthews has devoted most of his show to this

Can you imagine the reaction if Obama had raised this issue as an excuse for losing to Hillary? He would have been trashed for "playing the race card."