About us Login Get email updates
County Fair
Print

WSJ walks back its recent election headline

November 03, 2009 3:28 pm ET by Eric Boehlert

Here was the weekend headline, which we criticized as being monumentally dumb for suggesting a statewide race in VA. would indicate whether Obama wins a second term three years from now:

Virginia Race Tests Obama's Staying Power

Here's the Journal's election headline today [emphasis added]:

Republicans Are Poised for Gains in Key Elections: Outcomes in New York, New Jersey and Virginia Are Unlikely to Forecast Much About National Races in 2010, History Shows

That's the good news. The bad news? For the second time in several days, the Journal's only interest in Tuesday's election is pondering the possibilities of Democratic losses:

A Republican sweep in Tuesday's key contests would at minimum show that Democrats face much tougher political terrain than they did a year ago. GOP victories would also help the party's fundraising and candidate recruitment for 2010, providing backing for arguments that Republicans have the momentum, and that voters are turning against the Obama agenda.

There's nothing inaccurate in that paragraph. The astonishing thing is that today's elections feature two close races (according to most polling data), yet the daily only examines the political implications of Democrats losing.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by rwmacdonald2091 (November 03, 2009 3:40 pm ET)
      1  
      yet the daily only examines the political implications of Democrats losing.

      If the Democrats win it's voter fraud. Geez, is it that hard to understand?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by rwmacdonald2091 (November 03, 2009 3:41 pm ET)
         
      yet the daily only examines the political implications of Democrats losing.

      If the Democrats win it's voter fraud. Geez, is it that hard to understand?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by DellDolly (November 03, 2009 3:54 pm ET)
      1  
      I'm willing to admit that 3 victories in these three races will help the GOP propaganda efforts, but contrary to the assertion that there's nothing inaccurate in that cited paragraph, I think saying "A Republican sweep in Tuesday's key contests would at minimum show that Democrats face much tougher political terrain than they did a year ago" is a conclusion that may or may not be true.

      I don't think it's true that at a minimum it shows that.

      Obama losing Alabama (or other southern states) didn't show us that, did it? Obama wasn't expected to win Alabama - his loss didn't tell us that he was facing a tough political terrain.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by truthseeker77 (November 03, 2009 5:26 pm ET)
      5  
      Virginians don't like to elect governors that belong to the same party as the US President. The last 9 VA governors have been members of the party not in power. Look it up. Kaine won when Bush was President, Macaca Allen won in 1998 in the Clinton era, Reagan saw two VA Democrats win the governor seat, etc.

      The lat 9. Yet the media pretends this is some sort of anomaly that makes Obama look bad.
      Report Abuse