Washington Post, please define "moderate"
December 08, 2009 11:56 am ET by Jamison Foser
Washington Post reporter Ed O'Keefe defends the inclusion of two Arkansas Senators in the so-called "Gang of 10" health care negotiations:
Washington, D.C.: Is it just me, or is Arkansas a bit overrepresented in the "Gang of 10"?
Ed O'Keefe: It's a moderate state with moderate lawmakers, so it makes sense to me!
Arkansas is a "moderate state"? Really?
Let's use the 2008 presidential election returns as a proxy, shall we?
Nationally, Barack Obama won about 53 percent of the vote, to John McCain's 46 percent.
In Arkansas, Obama won 39 percent to McCain's 59 percent. Wow, that sure looks like Arkansas was pretty far out of the mainstream, doesn't it?
Let's compare that to a few other states, shall we? In California, Obama took 61 percent of the vote to McCain's 37 percent. In New York, Obama won 63 percent to McCain's 36 percent. And in Massachusetts, Obama won 62 percent to McCain's 36 percent. All of those totals are closer to the national totals than Arkansas' results are. Now: How often do you see reporters refer to California, New York and Massachusetts as "moderate states"? Not very often.
So what states did deviate from the national results by roughly the same amount as Arkansas? In Alabama, Obama won 39 percent of the vote to McCain's 60 percent. In Mississippi, Obama won 43 percent and McCain 56 percent. So Arkansas was more anti-Obama than Mississippi, and about the same as Alabama.
Are Alabama and Mississippi your idea of "moderate" states?
Previously:
Look who Politico calls "Centrist"
Define "most liberal," please ...
It's true that Arkansas isn't moderate. However, the fact that they voted Republican doesn't illustrate that truth.
If you want to see examples of Alabaman non-moderation, you might look at <a href="http://www.politicsalabama.org/~site/scripts_webpoll/webpoll.dll?CMD=CMDViewSponsoredResults&ht=index.xpf&s=political&tp=http://track.homestead.com/~site/Scripts_Track/track.dll&ID=15550112">this poll result</a>. Clearly non-scientific, but nevertheless.... "What path to economic stimulus do you support for President Obama and Congress? (Choose all that apply)".... "Pray" comes in 4th, only 8 points behind #1 ("Lower taxes").
I think that you may be confusing the terms "moderate" and "centrist." The electon results of 2006 and 2008 would indicate that the majority of the electorate prefer the left, and a moderate vote would reflect that.
Also, you undermine your argument by stating that California and New York are not described as 'moderate,' having just proclaimed their moderate-ness, given that they went for Obama.
No, what Foser said is that reporters don't refer to those three states as "moderate." Further, as mentioned earlier, the fact that since their voting patterns were not that much different than those of the rest of the country, that does mean they can be labeled "moderate," certainly far more so than Arkansas.
It's true that Arkansas isn't moderate. However, the fact that they voted Republican doesn't illustrate that truth.
I've already shot that down twice, so I won't bother doing it again. I wonder if you ever saw the map showing the results of the 2008 election, compared to 2004? Ah, here it is:
www.bobcesca.com/blog-archives/2008/11/the_centerright.html
It shows that Arkansas was virtually the only state in the country that went substantially more for the Republicans in 2008 than in 2004. This would arguably make Arkansas the least moderate, most out-of-the-mainstream state we have.
I didn't say it did. I showed how far away from the national results Arkansas was.
Well, no.
First, I didn't call CA or NY "moderate," and didn't suggest Obama carrying them was evidence of moderation. Again, I pointed to how close/far away from the national results the results in those states were.
And pointing out that, despite being much closer to the national results than Arkansas, CA and NY aren't described as "moderate" doesn't "undermine" my argument; it supports it.
Again: I didn't say it did. DC voted for Obama, but I wouldn't the media should describe DC as "moderate." Just like Arkansas, DC's results were far from the national average.
And its two Senators are Democrats - very conservative Democrats, but Democrats, not Republicans.
I disagree with O'Keefe's description of Arkansas, but I think that Foser's failure to mention the fact that our last Democratic President came from Arkansas and that the current Senators are both Democrats was done because it would undermine his argument. Again, I don't think the state is what I would call "moderate", but I think that Foser overstates his case.
You know our thinking has been moved, like the window, too far right when the teabaggers are described in the traditional press as populist and middle class voters.
riiiiiiiiiight.
Pryor and Lincoln are both in the middle 10 Senators