CNN Focus Group -- all thought Edwards won, but most voting for Obama because he "can win"

[Yael]

apparently because that is what the media has told them.

:grr:

[sunonmars]

1. lol CNN say what they want

but christ Obama stunk tonight, that was a bad performance

[JackORoses]

46. yes, yes everyone is wrong except you and the other Hillarites

do you ever wonder why that is?

[proud patriot]

2. confounding

:crazy: :think:

[ursi]

3. jeez.

[stravu9]

This is OUTRAGROUS!

WTF???

[dorkulon]

56. LOL -- I am also OUTRAGRED!

:rofl:

[Occam Bandage]

4. Or rather, what the voters in every previous state have told them,

and what the polling in every upcoming state is telling them.

[midlife_mo_Jo]

12. I'm a news junkie

and Edwards gets a tiny fraction of time that the other two candidates get. He's being treated as if he's inconsequential, so that's how the voters are going to vote.

MSNBC, CNN, Fox....he's practically the invisible candidate, and it's been like that before the first primary.

[Occam Bandage]

17. There's a reason he's treated as if he's inconsequential.

He's been dead in the water in every state but Iowa throughout the entire campaign. Once he failed to win Iowa, it was over.

[Yael]

23. Of course. Thats what happens when you don't have a level playing field

And I blame the causus events as much as the media.

They pulled Biden and Dodd (and all intents Kucinich and Richardson) out of play in Iowa for cryin' out loud.

[Occam Bandage]

28. While I was a Bidenite, he was out of play from the get-go.

Dodd and Kooch were as well, and Richardson was dead by August.

[AndyA]

31. Are you still here?

What bullshit. Still.

You are the typical American. You have allowed money and the media to elect your President for you (again) and you're proud of it.

The media has made Edwards inconsequential. And if you listened to him, you would realize how foolish your posts are.

[Occam Bandage]

36. "You are the typical American."

The fact that you use that is an insult is exactly why the netroots are inconsequential. The media don't marginalize them; they self-marginalize and then blame the media when nobody listens to them.

[OneGrassRoot]

33. He came in second and, right out of the Iowa gate, viewers only heard...

about Obama and Clinton. Right after the results were in, they treated it like a two-person race. I watched - it was immediate! Actually unbelievable for him not to get any time when he was very much in the race in Iowa. He was NOT a distant third in Iowa. It doesn't matter if he didn't do as well as he wanted, he was RELEVANT and for whatever reason (we all have ideas as to why) he was intentionally portrayed as irrelevant and many primarily Obama supporters have picked up that meme and ran with it this entire time.

[Occam Bandage]

38. Edwards was leading Iowa from the start. He collapsed, despite spending all his time there.

He spent all his time there and got tons of coverage there. But he was absolutely nowhere everywhere else. Without money and without infrastructure, he needed a win to build momentum. He got a disappointing 2nd.

[OneGrassRoot]

42. Since when does placing second equate to irrelevance?

Think about what you're saying. And I thought we've all come to see these polls are dicey at best.

Forget graphs and looking ahead, etc.

Focus on the fact that in Iowa he placed second and got NO ATTENTION. In what logical, democratic situation should the first race, and placing second in the first race, spell no coverage and therefore essential invisibility since most people follow MSM?

[Occam Bandage]

44. When you're a distant third in every other state, it does.

[OneGrassRoot]

45. Yep, I have to agree with Andy on this, you let "them" decide for you...

months ago. That's certainly the way it comes across to me. But, believe me, I fully realize my opinion isn't worth a shit here. ;-)

Continue with regular programming...

[Occam Bandage]

54. People of small minds

find it necessary to ascribe a human cause to irreducibly complex phenomena.

[Beaverhausen]

48. you are aware that Bill Clinton lost the first 7 primaries in 1992, are you not?

I didn't think so...

[Occam Bandage]

53. Of course I am. I am also aware that the 2004 race is completely different from the 1992.

[Cabcere]

32. INVISIBLE CANDIDATE

(Sorry, I'm in a bit of a weird mood tonight. :shrug: )

[avaistheone1]

61. Most of the primaries haven't been held yet. It's early.

[Captain Hilts]

5. People think if they vote for the 'loser', they're wasting their votes. Really, they think that. n

[Liz7]

6. yeah, that was my wtf moment of the night.

Frustration.

[MadBadger]

7. They probably mean he can win the primary.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

8. Ouch. That's painful to read/hear.

But, like the "audience meter" everyone wants to back the "winner." Why do they bother to watch debates? :shrug: MKJ

[Colobo]

9. They are right. Obama will be Our Next President.

[krabigirl]

24. ok, whatever

[never_get_over_it]

50. No

Barack Hussein Osama will not be our next Presient....oh the swiftboaters must be licking their chops.....

[amborin]

10. Obama is a radical right-wing Republican

don't people get it?

of course CNN wants to say he won

[calmblueocean]

16. Oh, please. Sell that crap somewhere else. nt

[rucky]

34. Of course he is!

:eyes:

[Chomskyite]

47. What planet are you from?

All three Democrats represent a big departure from George W. Bush's policies.

[calmblueocean]

11. These focus groups are always always always full of shit. On every channel.

I don't think the kind of "undecided" voter that volunteers for these focus groups is anything like the average undecided voter. They're generally weirdos who can't make a decision. Or plants, in the case of Fox.

[bartholomewjohn]

13. gasp! The media didn't think Hillary won n/t

[OzarkDem]

14. Media brainwashing

A huge disconnect between what people believe and what someone is telling them they should do.

[AmBlue]

15. Truly sad.

And they are right. Edwards did win.

[saracat]

18. Weel, I guess John has to pound home that he is a winner!

I think he has to make a point that he took down a 3 term incumbant in a red state and both his opponents ran against nobodies in blue states.Obama ran against Alan Keyes for gods sake! That isn't an opponent,that is a joke. John's statements about beating McCain were well received.He needs to state that more.He has to state Winner! Winner! constantly and send out people to say it for him!

[Yael]

20. Not to mention, John has been through this before.

He has seen the good, the bad and the ugly of a GE.

Obama is going to get creamed trying to "nice" them to death.

The republican nominee isn't going to be looking for a group hug...

[OzarkDem]

27. Very true

Obama will melt under the pressure. He likes Republicans too much to fight them in the GE.

[Critters2]

57. The election race he won to get to the Senate

was against an opponent who never had a chance. He's never had to really fight out an election. I agree with you. He'll melt under pressure.

[Yael]

19. The same thing happened with the Nevada focus group -- HUGE marjority, but you see how

that worked out.

[asdjrocky]

21. The best argument against Democracy-

Is five minutes with the average voter. (Or something like that.)

[krabigirl]

22. That's horrible! They should vote their conscience!

[Renew Deal]

25. It's what we talk about here all the time. One candidate did great, another won.

It's normal.

[OzarkDem]

29. Not normal, that's why we haven't won the WH since 1996

We have to stop letting the news media choose our candidates.

[Renew Deal]

35. Forget the media.

It's not about them at all. Candidates win and lose debates mostly by serving their purposes. It's not always about the best debator or the best orator. It's about who best serves themself. So people say Edwards had the best debate. But there's no way he won, because it didn't do anything to change his standing in the race.

[ellisonz]

26. ABC- Anybody but Clinton.

[rucky]

30. That about sums it up.

Now Edwards folks know what it's like to support Dennis Kucinich.

[Critters2]

58. Or Howard Dean.

I'm getting tired of being treated this way by my own party!

[debbierlus]

37. Lemmings

The media makes the reality.

[iris5426]

39. F-ing ridiculous...of course he can't win if no one votes for him, even if they do think

he did the best in the debate and want to vote for him...people are idiots. I can't believe how much the media is shaping this race. It makes me nauseous.

:puke:

[Triana]

40. A couple people I know are voting Obama - but they can't say why..

....or won't.

They're very nasty and snivelling about it. Regardless of Obama or his policies, I'm not very impressed IRL with some of his supporters.

[Yael]

43. Don't blame them -- he has yet to tell ANYONE why they should vote for him

other than he can stand and give a great speech.

[Critters2]

59. He can stand and give a great speech

once or twice.

[Monty__]

62. That's my family

or at least my wife's side. They're voting for Obama because we all live in and around Chicago. I'm voting for Edwards because I actually know where he stands on the issues and he appeals to me as a candidate. I think I've won my wife over but my in-laws and sisters-in-law are still Obama supporters despite the fact that they change the subject whenever I ask them why they're supporting Obama.

[RestoreGore]

41. Wow, what a crock

Nuff said.

[Cha]

49. I'm sorry they didn't vote for

Edwards cause they didn't think he would win..I want my guy to win fair and square!

[BenDavid]

51. what else did one expect from cnn....you watch cnn and count

how many times in an hour wolf will go negative on hrc in the Situation Room. It is not just the first hour but the second hour and the third is a repeat of what was ran in hours one and two.....CNN is not a good indicator, but if you are an obama or edwards supporter then cnn is your cup of tea.

To be honest, I have seen more postive stories on msnbc and fox about the hrc campaign then on cnn which they might as well put a disclamier and say we CNN support obama.....just like they might as well put a disclaimer up and say we CNN supports john mccain

[Tatiana]

52. That's the story of this primary.

I've been surprised at how the voters who don't want another Clinton in the WH have not gravitated towards Edwards' campaign. He has, outside of Kucinich, the better health care coverage plan of the "big three." I wonder if the issue of foreign policy isn't playing more heavily upon the minds of Dem voters. Both Clinton and Obama seem to poll higher in that area than Edwards.

If this trend continues, I don't see much hope for Edwards, other than joining forces with Obama. Edwards will need a strong showing on Super Tuesday, and even then, the delegates may be split to the point where Clinton emerges the winner.

[uncertainty1999]

55. OBAMA "CAN WIN" JUST LIKE JOHN KERRY DID???

[Critters2]

60. Exactly. I'm having a really scary deja vu attack. nt

[mzmolly]

63. I have to say that even as an Edwards supporter I find this a positive overall.

When our media asserts/the public perception is that a black man or a woman is more electable than a typical "Southern White Male," it's a form of progress. ;)