This new determination by the networks to not call anything until you can bet the house on it strkies me as very odd. The main problem is that this was applied evenly across the board, regardless of state. Must be affraid to be seen as discriminatory. That's not responsible reporting, that's just stupid. There are at least 2 dozen states in the US you can safely call before the polls even open. It was amusing to watch CNN as the pundits wring their hands because the electors are so close, all the while California (and the rest of the west coast) is still marked gray, when it's obvious to anyone with half a brain cell where it'll be going. I guess some people get their panties tied in a knot when you tell them their vote really does not count.
As for the exit polls, shame on anyone who believes anything any polls say. They may be good for gauging people's opinions on some things, sometimes, if they're done right. Should the country be run on polls? What was the exit poll margin of error? Confidence interval? How do they know they have a representative sample? What people say in public, to friends, to random strangers (ie, pollsters), and what they do in the privacy of the voting booth, may be completely different things.
The blatant ways in which Americans show their political and religious affiliations in all affairs frankly offends me, I just don't understand it. Which of course makes any promise by any president to be 'a uniter not a divider' completely laughable. The political climate, the rhetoric, the nearly even split, mixing in religion... it just means there'll be no middle ground, no debate, no compromise. Bush's attitude seems to be 'you're either with me or against me. If you're with me, god bless, we're united. If you're against me, you must be an evil unpatriotic terrorist.' If Bush was acting as if he had a 80% madate last term, just watch him this time around.
|