Snap polls render pundits obsolete

[ProSense]

Snap polls render pundits obsolete

by kos
Wed Oct 15, 2008 at 08:22:28 PM PDT

If it wasn't for the snap polls, the pundits would be proclaiming this night a glorious victory for McCain. John King, who gave McCain an 18-15 victory in his debate scorecard, was just on ranting against the snap polls, saying they were bunk because people are answering just after watching the dabate, while being too "emotional" ... unlike the pundits who are all about reason and logic.

Whatever.

I love how the American people don't give a shit what John King thinks. They can decide for themselves who won.

And that's why John King hates them.

Update by MissLaura: I was about to post just about the same point Markos makes here. The two examples that stood out to me were David Gregory and Andrea Mitchell.

David Gregory repeatedly proclaimed McCain's "I'm not Bush. If you wanted to run against him, you should have run 4 years ago" to be The Line Of The Night. He clearly wanted it to be a defining moment of the campaign.

But something held Gregory and his colleagues back. That was the knowledge that snap polls were coming, and the likelihood that those polls would show Obama to be the winner.

Andrea Mitchell articulated it directly -- and sniffily -- saying that McCain had won on points, whether the polls would reflect that or not.

They didn't like it, but polling technology is one more way their role as gatekeepers has been diminished.

On edit:

Dear Pundits, best moment of the night.

Screw you.

[Omnibus]

1. As I said on Kos, a dehorned cow is "polled".

What we have here are polled pundits.

[featherman]

2. High comedy indeed! they so desparately wanted to do the 2000/2004 spin again

[Thrill]

3. The problem with Pundits is they think throwing insults and being condesending

wins debates. But regular people don't. They want to hear who is going to help them make it

[nyhuskyfan]

4. PBS had a great comeback to that one

They said that it was a good line, but it should have been used weeks ago - in the first debate or all along. It's too late now.

[Jersey Devil]

5. This is the 2nd time CNN pundits called it for McCain immediately and then

after the polling results came in had to take it back. Shows you just how in tune they are (aren't) with what voters are actually thinking.

[wanpete]

6. the snap polls may mysteriously disappear in the next election...they seem to

make these talking heads look like the stooges and tools that they are. Either that or they may actually make them tell the truth about what they really witnessed in the debates.

[TlalocW]

7. This makes me wonder why they even do these polls

And I guess the answer is that the market demands them, but I also think that another thing hopefully rendering pundits more useless is the internet and sites like these. Not only can we bypass the pundits completely and talk to real Joe Sixpacks and Plumbers, which essentially most of us are, and get exposed to real people's analysis, concerns and cheering points which we may not have considered before, but we can also take the pundits to task for spreading the bullshit too much. I think, even though it's a cliche, that the internet at this point in its development is coming of age in its promise to foster a true informational revolution, and the old guard isn't happy about it.

TlalocW

[Arugula Latte]

8. Yep. I'll never forget the frustration I felt after Gore so obviously cleaned Dumbass's clock

in a debate, and then afterwards the pundits all spoke about how masterful their hero Bush was. It was so obvious they were just whoring for the guy wanted by their corporate overlords. The Internet has changed everything.

[ecstatic]

9. I love it! nt