Comments on: Obama’s Poll Numbers: Look Beyond the MSM

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 03:07:00 +0000

Will all the “SUBURBAN WHITE WOMEN: please stand up and be counted! Who are these people? Who determined that they were a SIGNIFICANT voting block? Do they have to have a specific IQ/educational level/income or is their “suburbaness” simply related to the street address that they occupy with their working [maybe blue-collar] husbands/significant others? Are there “suburban Black women”? Has any one polled US?
“These are the questions which the media and the American people want to know” – to use a MC71ism.

By: Bronze Trinity

Bronze Trinity — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 02:38:00 +0000

Good lesson! Whenever they mention polls they should ALWAYS mention where previous candidates have fared on the same polls. But then I don’t think the commentators will have much to talk about. They love the conflict and want it to seem like a tight race the whole time.They are also trying to make it seem like Obama has many barriers to overcome because he is Black and they are attributing his poll numbers to the fact he is Black. It is really disgusting.

By: Ms.Martin

Ms.Martin — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 02:14:00 +0000

“Maybe it’s just me, but have they’ve really done that before – suburban White women as a category?”

I thought this was a new category too. Are they the same as affluent white women, are they part of hard-working, white, are they all over 50?

I never pay attention to the polls or a lot of the reporting. Maybe I’m cynical, but it seems to me they’ve been working against him since the beginnnig.

By: NillaWaif

NillaWaif — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 01:50:00 +0000

Craig,
Michelle seemed kind of cagey on Q&A as if she wasn’t prepared. Admittedly, some of the questions were minor league for someone of her stature. Brian Lamb, host of Q&A, sounded inpatient with the way she skirted around and glossed over some topics. It seemed that he was trying to flesh her out to get a robust interview going but she remained rather shallow and unthoughtful in some of her responses.
Many of her replies rang hollow and sounded canned and Party line.

I’m not sure that she’s looking to be appointed as an Obama cabinet member but his coattails are so anointed that anyone would be well served by clinging to them.

By: Craig Hickman

Craig Hickman — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 01:31:00 +0000

I hardly take seriously anyone who says “trust me” in the blogosphere.

I’m not defending Michelle, because I haven’t developed an opinion of her yet. I think I like her. I often disagree with her. But she gets it. I don’t know what kind of appointment from Barack she’s seeking in her role as a talking head on TV. If she had some prominent role in his campaign, that would be different, but I can’t imagine she’s on Barack’s radar as an administration appointment.

By: nillawaif

nillawaif — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 01:23:00 +0000

OT: Michelle Bernard, President and CEO of The Independent Women's Forum and a political analyst on MSNBC, was tonight's guest on C-SPAN's Q&A. She considers herself right of center and politically independent but some of her expressed viewpoints sounded extremist (she referred to certain feminists as "silly women"). I was struck by her lack of candor and her broad brush approach and lack of clarity or depth on some topics raised in the interview.
She sees herself as a feminist of the Sojourner Truth era. It was a fairly vacuous, yet revealing, interview.

When asked if she read blogs, specifically if she was aware of the following comment posted on "Conversations with an Unapologetic Black Liberal," Michelle dismissed all blogs w/"I don't read any of them" and poo-pooed the commenter's cowardice for hammering out what she (Michelle) called a lie on a blog vs. calling her (Michelle) up. Michelle claimed to not know who the commenter is but did admit to being very close friends with Mr. Vernon Parker. Strangely enough, when the discussion moved to her family, although she mentioned her two children, she did not mention her reported husband, Joe Johns of CNN, nor was she wearing a wedding ring.
I went to law school with Michelle and was a member of her wedding party (her first wedding). The reason why Michelle is a supporter of Obama is that she is an opportunist. In law school she was a liberal democratic and supported the party. A black male friend of ours Vernon Parker, changed his party to become a Republican. He got a political appointment and shot up through the administration. Michelle thought this was a great way to move up the ranks in politics…fewer black conservatives gives her higher visibility. So she went for it. She is supporting Obama because she wants a political appointment and this is the easiest and fastest way to get there now that she sees that the Republicans have no shot at regaining the White House.

Trust me, I know Michelle.

By: Kat

Kat — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 00:37:00 +0000

Anon,

Al had a falling out with the owner of ruralvotes.com. He is going to tell the whole story on Monday. Here is The Field’s new home: http://narcosphere.narconews.com/thefield/

And about the post, the way the media has decided to shape the narrative for ratings, rather than tell the truth, is criminal.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 00:31:00 +0000

what happened to the field? i go straight to the back forty.

By: Craig Hickman

Craig Hickman — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 00:17:00 +0000

Right on, rikyrah.

This was also fleshed out over at Daily Kos:

Reality Check on the NBC-WSJ Poll