MSNBC Trying To Make It A Horserace, But Their Guests Tend To Differ

[stopbush]

Lester Dolt was just on in a segment that was supposed to show slight R gains in the polls. It didn't work.

Their latest poll had Harold Ford down by only 3 points. Cardin was still ahead of Steele by 3. Chaffee was
ahead of Whitehouse by 1. Santorum was down 39-52. McCaskill, Tester and Webb all in dead heats where
they're slightly ahead.

The guy they had on from the McClatchy papers basically shot down any ray of hope.

I have the feeling that the MSM wants a nail biter for ratings and nothing else.

On edit: Dolt & Buchanan now on trying to say the Dems won't be able to do much even if they win. Pat says the Ds
should be happy Rs are totally in charge now because all of the blame goes to them. Ds will have to share the blame
on Iraq if they win. How idiotic is that? Rs will take all the blame if they get to have all the power and Ds should like
it?

[Coexist]

1. spot on analysis. n/t

[aquart]

2. Dolt? His name is Dolt? For real?

[stopbush]

3. Lester Holt. I couldn't resist.

[yellowcanine]

5. Oh crap, that would have been the most "appropriate" name for a politico since

Perot had a campaign manager named Orson Swindall.

[WinkyDink]

11. His last name was actually "Swindle". For real.

[Eurobabe]

4. Of course, to the press it is BORING.

They think they need to have a close race to make it interesting for themselves.

Screw that noise, we need to purge the CONS and get some sensibility into the govt. again!

[Uncle Joe]

24. Yes if they can't spend 90% of their time

talking about a close horse race, they might actually be required to cover the issues in depth and this might have the undesired effect of educating the American People.

[bigwillq]

6. I think the races will be close.

I'm trying to be confident but no way Casey wins by 13%.
I think he will win but it'll be a lot closer than that.

[Demit]

7. What are you basing your prediction on?

[bigwillq]

8. Just trends in voting.

I have no specific link or poll to offer to you but usually the gap tigthens in races pre-election polls have at a wide margin.

Take for example the CT primary race back in August that had Lamont up double-digits then Lieberman closed to within 8 and Lamont won by 4%.

It seems like it goes that way most times and in a state like PA, I think the gap will close.

Casey will win but I feel he will win by more like 6-8% not 13%.

[WinkyDink]

12. I'll take that bet. Swannie loses BIG-TIME, and so does Ricky S.

Dems will RULE my state!

[bigwillq]

13. I agree

Swann loses big time.

[OzarkDem]

9. Its not, its been breaking towards Dems for at least 3 weeks now

The trend doesn't change this late in the process.

[treestar]

20. And Bush's low approval rating has been consistent for months

The repukes are going to keep the house with that approval rating for their fuhrer? LOL, the media is so pathetic. This ought to shut up all claims it is "librul" from the morans.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

10. The Close Races Were Always Close...

But they look like jackassses and insult the intelligence of their viewers by cherry picking polls...

[azmouse]

14. ABC was trying the same thing this morning...

talking about Rep gains in the polls. The Dems are still far ahead in the polls but the news networks just can't stand saying that. They're afraid people may not tune in tomorrow night to see the results if it looks like the Dems are running away with the election.
It makes me sick that the networks can't stand to see the Democrats ahead. Librul media my ass! :banghead:

[gratuitous]

15. Yeah, leave the Rs in charge so they get blamed

Tell me, Mr. Buchanan, when does the blame ever attach to the Republicans? Are you planning to start any time soon? Maybe at KIA number 3,000? Or when we've flushed the 750 billionth Treasury dollar down the toilet? When does this fiasco actually start getting called a fiasco, and when do its architects actually get blamed for it?

Retire, Mr. Buchanan.

[fhqwhgads]

22. just wondering...

...did buchanan say the dems SHOULD get blamed on iraq if they win back the house and/or senate, or that they WOULD get blamed? assuming he's saying the latter, i actually think he's got a point. if we win back one or more houses of congress, and the situation in iraq doesn't show much improvement over the next two years (i really don't anticipate that the war will end before 2008), then i do think it could hurt us, not because we'll actually be to blame, but because the repugs will paint a picture. let's face it - they're pretty good at manipulation.

of course i want us to take control of congress, but i also recognize that we could end up with their albatross around our necks, and i just hope it never comes to that. maybe the way to do that is to force the white house to look obstructionist on iraq over the next couple of years. push legislation that moves toward complete pullout, knowing the president will veto, so at least we can say "we tried to end this thing, but the white house, and ergo the republicans, wouldn't let us."

just a thought.

[gratuitous]

23. It's not as if Democrats aren't being blamed already

From the president on down, the mighty Republican Wurlitzer is blaming Democrats left and right for the administration's failures in Iraq. The usual amen chorus on the networks and the talking head shows all agree that if it weren't for the Democrats, why everything would be as right as rain in Iraq.

Which is just to say that Democrats are going to be blamed for every policy failure of the last six years regardless of where they are in terms of minority or majority representation in either house of Congress. At least with a majority in the House or the Senate, the Democrats will be in a position to convene hearings, issue subpoenas, and do a little investigating as to some actual, you know, facts.

Because for all that's going wrong with the country right now, I see very little blame being apportioned to the one party that's currently ruling every branch of government. I'll be more than happy to worry about tactics once the Democrats have a majority again.

[bullwinkle428]

16. Please, everyone, realize this about the MSM: "Horserace" = RATINGS!!

They're just trying to maximize their viewing audience, which won't be as likely if everyone assumes that the results are going to be a *"boat race"

* From the Jim Rome Show: "Boat Race" To become a sure winner during a competion. Comes from comparison to America's Cup where once one boat gets a lead the race is over.

[Beelzebud]

17. 24/7 news is all about ratings.

[Hubert Flottz]

18. The MSM is afraid that they too will pay for their part in the GOP's

shameful, selfish, wrecking of our country. And the Rove propagandists should pay, because they are guilty as hell and they know it.

[Cameron27]

19. Andrea Mitchell's on now

maybe it will imrpove? ...or notx(

[stopbush]

21. She's a cipher.

MSNBC doesn't improve til after noon (3pm est).