What is Digg?11 Comments
- gwayo, on 03/10/2008, -0/+18It's amazing how successful they've been at convincing the media to continue to trumpet the neck-n-neck dead heat race spin. Had Obama lost 11 states in a row or claimed Michigan and Florida as somehow rightly his own just to kinda even up the score, they would have long ago told him to just go home. Instead, they color in those two states in Clinton colors and keep pretending like she has the right to offer him VP-ship.
Honestly, though, I think they've just kept at her spin because it totally profits them. Were they to be more realistic, people would quit being such obsessive news consumers. - diggeradoo, on 03/09/2008, -1/+18You have GOT to be KIDDING me!! Is this the opitome of spin, or what? She LOST .. she came in second out of two contenders. Okay, let's take a look at the stats,
She lost by 23% of the vote - 61% to 38%.
She only got 36% of the delegate - 4 out of 11.
By contrast,
In Ohio, Obama only lost by 10% of the vote - 44% to 54%
and, he received 45% of the delegates - 59 out of 130
In Texas, Obama only lost by 4% of the vote - 47% to 51%
and, he received 48% of the delegates - 61 out of 126. (not even counting the actual win with caucus delegates)
If Clinton can manage to claim Wyoming as some sort of positive thing - losing by 23 points and only getting 1/3 of the delegates, then it looks like Obama wins HUGE in Texas and Ohio. - GeorgeFord, on 03/09/2008, -0/+13Why would anyone be surprised that a Clinton lied?
Just assume she's lying and then when you check it out and she's not, THEN you can act surprised. - amawg9, on 03/10/2008, -0/+3A strong case for Clinton-http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Deanna_Favre_ann ...
- amawg9, on 03/10/2008, -0/+2Trying to push it to the front page
- BigManOnCampus, on 03/10/2008, -1/+3That campaign continues to demonstrate to me exactly why this Bush/Clinton "era" since 1992 has been soo bad for this country. These two families seem to want nothing other than power, I doubt they care about anything other than their own legacies.
Reagan may have been a slick talking deceiver, but at least he demonstrated the willingness to operate on principles and change direction after thought (I'm speaking about his reversal of stance on nuclear war) - martalli, on 03/10/2008, -0/+2Well, now the media is keen not to sound like they are Obama fanbois. Ironically, since he is in the lead, it would not be twisting any facts to point out his lead. It is twisting facts to imply (for instance) that Clinton won in Texas.
- Stonecipher26, on 03/11/2008, -0/+1There is talk now of Hilary Clinton's campaign actually being the campaign that went up to Canada to assure them that she wasn't serious about her anti-NAFTA rhetoric. The Clinton campaign then turned around and accused Obama of doing this.
That is dispicable.
Chris Matthews has also recently been discussing the Clinton's talent for creating a new reality. This is exactly what we have been dealing with for the past six years under the Bush administration.
If there are no weapons of mass destruction, say that there are. If our candidate was a pansy and did not serve honorably in the military, say that your war-hero opponent didn't.
See the pattern here?
You're right madfrogurt, this little incident is not the same as Bush's lies to get us into Iraq, but it is part of the larger pattern in politics today.
The Clinton campaign has made the decision that they will continue with this style of politics. The Obama campaign decided to make a change and not engage in this type of trash.
I understand what you're trying to say, but I stand by my words. - oldhick, on 03/10/2008, -0/+1That was great! Thanks.
- oldhick, on 03/10/2008, -0/+1I wish I had more than one digg to give it. Ah... "so has the pastry chef".
- madfrogurt, on 03/10/2008, -0/+1Look, I know we all like to read news analysis biased towards our own views that informs us as well as takes jabs at the opposition, but this piece is rampant with equating a political spin of "we did well despite losing" into the worst offenses of the Bush administration.
"It goes deep down into my gut and reminds me of the dark days after September 11th, when the USA Patriot Act was somehow written immediately and then passed by a Congress that had little idea of what was actually in it. It reminds me of the build up to war with Iraq, when Dick Cheney repeated lied about links between Saddam and Bin-laden. It reminds me of those dark days when I truly began to fear that our reality might imitate George Orwell's "1984" where inconvenient news was shoved down the memory hole, two plus two equaled five, war was peace and Big Brother was always watching."
This is ridiculous. We all know that the "near loss" idea is spin, but to associate this with deception that lead to a false war and curtailing of our liberties is to do a disservice to legitimate condemnation of the Bush administration. When spin becomes equated with these horrendous crimes, the crimes look more acceptable in comparison.
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is