Tapper Acknowledges in 2008 the Media ‘Tilted on the Scales a Little Bit’ for Obama
In pointing out how Barack Obama only won in 2008 by a slim margin, so this year’s Republican nominee doesn’t have to win over all that many Americans, ABC’s Jake Tapper on Sunday morning listed the media amongst the factors “going” for Obama four years ago: “You had the media, perhaps, tilting on the scales a little bit.”
That’s an understatement, but a noteworthy realization when it comes from the chief White House correspondent for a major network.
From the roundtable on the Sunday, January 8 This Week with George Stephanopoulos produced in Manchester, New Hampshire:
JAKE TAPPER: The fundamental point is that Obama is going to be the referendum. That’s what the election is next year. Does he deserve a re-election or not? If you look at 2008, Barack Obama had everything going for him. His opponent did not run a great campaign, picked a running mate that alienated some key voters, you had an economic crisis as opposed to a national security crisis. Everything going for him. You had the media, perhaps, tilting on the scales a little bit. And still-
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: I think George [Will] agrees with that statement.
TAPPER: And still, 47 percent of the country voted against him. All that Mitt Romney, or whoever the nominee is, needs to do is convince about four to five million Americans-
- Brent Baker's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
A little bit?!
Submitted by Galvanic on Sun, 01/08/2012 - 6:12pm.
He needs to re-watch the MSM coverage of Election Night and Inauguration Day just to get a sampling of it. The MSM was congratulating itself for what it had helped usher in.
Hey Jake?
Submitted by bkeyser on Sun, 01/08/2012 - 6:17pm.
Ya think?
TAPPER: And still, 47 percent
Submitted by rusino on Sun, 01/08/2012 - 6:18pm.
TAPPER: And still, 47 percent of the country voted against him. All that Mitt Romney, or whoever the nominee is, needs to do is convince about four to five million Americans-
Is one of the Republican Contestents 'The Convincer'? 'It remains to be seen.
Well, if by 'tilted slightly' he means 'totally whored'
Submitted by Slyrr on Sun, 01/08/2012 - 6:20pm.
If by 'tilted' he meant 'whored' and 'slightly' he meant 'utterly', then he's accurate.
That is a masterpiece of
Submitted by motherbelt on Sun, 01/08/2012 - 6:23pm.
That is a masterpiece of understatement.
It's like saying Joan Rivers has had "a little work done" on her face.
Or saying Michael Moore could stand to lose "a little" weight.
I just gained a new euphemism
Submitted by dmacleo on Sun, 01/08/2012 - 6:24pm.
I did not know tilted slightly and orgasmic tingling were the same thing.
good to know.
Jake Tapper is a winner
Submitted by Buford on Sun, 01/08/2012 - 6:29pm.
Way to go Captain Obvious, understatement of the year. You are never a "Little Pregnant"!
I'll keep my freedom my money and my guns, you can keep the "CHANGE".
They only 'tilted' while putting on their Obama kneepads
Submitted by Dave. on Sun, 01/08/2012 - 6:29pm.
Then they got down to business.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Well, d'oh - again!
Submitted by Mary Louise Turner on Sun, 01/08/2012 - 6:39pm.
From the Homer Simpson Dept.: D'oh!
Now they tell us when we knew of this garbage five years ago!
ya mean sort of like "a little bit pregnant"?
Submitted by wizardjr on Sun, 01/08/2012 - 6:40pm.
How anyone can say what he did with a straight face is beyond me.
The Democrats are worried about Obama.
Submitted by acaiguana on Sun, 01/08/2012 - 6:46pm.
And if he keeps up with the Hugo Chavez Presidency moves like non-recess, recess appointments and stacking the NLRB again; it will only get worse.
I can't see him making he grade in 2012. I'm going to work hard on the yard signs and literature distribution, even if we run Huntsman. /it was a joke... :-)
ACA
...
Quoted from: 'Acaiguana notes from the Underground' (Soon to be at theaters near you)
Tilted fro far left socialist
Submitted by eaglewingz08 on Sun, 01/08/2012 - 7:15pm.
Tilted fro far left socialist propagand to full on commie propaganda. Jake usually tries to be fair but to consider all the obama messiah storie from 2008 to be a little tilt is untrue and incomprehensible.
hearing footsteps
Submitted by MidAmerica on Sun, 01/08/2012 - 7:20pm.
But Tapper is correct about the small margin of obama's victory.
I doubt many who voted for John McCain are now obama supporters so that means obama has to keep all of his voters to win reelection. A small percentage shift to the Republicans is all that is needed to win.
Actually Jake, 47.3% voted
Submitted by Jack Bauer on Sun, 01/08/2012 - 7:27pm.
Actually Jake, 47.3% voted AGAINST Obama. That means the Republican candidate needs only to swing 2.8% to get a plurality of the popular vote.
The electoral college result was disproportionately skewed to Obama -- which is why we haven't heard much about changing this from the Dims this time around.
The great news is that deep down the Dem establishment and the Obama media really thinks Obama is going to cake-walk it.
They really do look at the man who would be Emperor and see clothes. Crazy huh?
All of the above Mr Obama? --- How about ALL OF THE BELOW, instead.
Obama has already lost more than that
Submitted by pbthinker on Sun, 01/08/2012 - 8:25pm.
I honestly believe Obama has lost more than 2.8%, what he hasn't lost is his adoring media. Right now, the press is doing everything they can to make sure Romney is the Republican nominee. I'm sure they feel that Romney is incapable of taking it to Obama on many issues, due to his record as Governor of Massachusetts. Gingrich would be Obama's worst nightmare, in the election and both Obama and the press know it.
The debates, in New Hampshire, showed the press hasn't changed much. The questions they asked had little to do with Republican politics and everything to do with trying to make Republicans look like they're out of the mainstream. THe fact that Republicans still debate on these networks, when it's obvious their main purpose is to work in the Democrats meme on Republicans, is amazing. The beauty of it is that, in spite of the press, Obama is in tough shape anyway.
True, pbthinker, and the---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sun, 01/08/2012 - 8:57pm.
ugliness of it is; because of the press, Obama and his administration are not presented as the disaster they truly are.
MD
If this is "tilting",
Submitted by drsamherman on Sun, 01/08/2012 - 7:27pm.
I would hate to see what they consider fully "supporting" a candidate.
Disgusting. Tapper may be one of the few less irritating journalists at ABC, but he still cannot fully admit culpability for whoring for that malignant narcissist in the White House.
Little tilted?
Submitted by Boudin on Sun, 01/08/2012 - 7:45pm.
Thats like saying Mikey Moore is a little fat, a little liar, or a little stupid
Bigger question ....
Submitted by BD57 on Sun, 01/08/2012 - 7:46pm.
Did anyone on the panel contest Tapper's statement?
Must be nuance-speak
Submitted by Nonanon on Sun, 01/08/2012 - 8:24pm.
Democrats/liberals/progressives/whatevers have been redefining words for a long time now. Then add the 'nuance' they claim to speak. Tilted a little bit must be code for we would never tell the truth about Democrats and will lie about Republicans if it advances our desires. They kill the truth with almost every report.
They have been on full campaign mode for liberals for the last few years, as opposed to just being biased.
A little bit?
Submitted by Restless Legs on Sun, 01/08/2012 - 9:39pm.
If a "little bit" means a bowling ball on one side of the scale and a speck of dust on the other side, then he's right.
A little bit?
Submitted by Jake6 on Sun, 01/08/2012 - 10:01pm.
In 2007 I remember going by an airport newsstand and thinking I was in Obama's campaign headquarters. They had his face all over the place. "A little bit?" They were in the tank for Obama all the way up to their hairline.
Mr. Tapper speaks differently
Submitted by metaphorsbwithu on Sun, 01/08/2012 - 11:55pm.
Mr. Tapper speaks differently to different people in different situations and "tilts" his comments ("perhaps") in such a way that conservatives think he is being objective and fair ... which he can be, but all too often is not or he pulls his political punches, and he rarely passes up a chance to defend the Obama administration and criticize or mock conservatives.
I was amused this weekend to see him declare in one of his tweets that he is not a "liberal" although very few liberals these days admit to the same.
He loves to point out how he catches Hell from both sides but the difference is the left gets angry when he actually reports the truth while conservatives get upset when he fails to do so. Like the continuing resolution debates and the debt ceiling issue where he refuses to report the truth about the fallacy of "cuts" and actually helps to advance the administration's narrative by his reporting sob stories of people who claim they will be all but destroyed by mean old Republicans who want to prevent them from receiving the benefits and entitlements they deserve and need.
IMHO, of course.
Acknowledging that you have a problem...
Submitted by DumbCanuck on Mon, 01/09/2012 - 1:53am.
...even a little bit...
...is at least a little bit of a step towards finding the solution.
Like the alcoholic who finally admits to himself that he has a little bit of a problem.
Could this be the proverbial pebble flung down the proverbial ski hill?
"There... Are... Four... Lights!"
Many things different this time around
Submitted by gwalt on Mon, 01/09/2012 - 7:56am.
If someone else can recall this I'd appreciate it:
Karl Rove was on Fox a couple of months after the 08 S-election and he noted that 6 million Evangelicals and 2 million Vets had stayed home--- hard core Conservatives. Rove knew how to reach them. The miserable Steve Schmidt was totally inept.
Think those people will come out against Obama? That's 8 million.
Couple that with the polls. How the heck can so many other polls show dismal ratings for Zero yet he is still "popular" in the 40's. Really?
The latest voter registration shows 34-32 Rep to Dem identification. Yet the polls sampling still goes something like 34-27 Dem vs Rep with a heavy Indy sampling. Why?
To make Zero look much better than he is. My guess-timation is he is in low 30's.
The 95% media cheer leading, support, lying and coverup and they can't get him out of the 40's without skewing the sample? Chairman Zero is in trouble.
If we had a correct sampling, my belief is it would show that way.
"A lot of briefing for a 2 hr. special with Dan Rather. Saw the show & wonder why we bothered". Ronald Reagan
Precisely!
Submitted by gordon on Mon, 01/09/2012 - 9:29pm.
And the same thing happened with Carter. He was doing fairly well right up until the time he was blown out of the water by Ronald Reagan.
if that was a little bit
Submitted by ohio granny on Mon, 01/09/2012 - 10:43am.
If the bias for Obama in 08 was a little bit I sure would hate to see a lot..!!!!!!!!!! Is this hateful speech???
Say what?
Submitted by helomech on Mon, 01/09/2012 - 11:09am.
" You had the media, perhaps, tilting on the scales a little bit..."
Oh really? Thanks for the enlightening us, dicktard...you were part of that media and their ugly, embarassing lovefest for The UnQualified One in the first place!
Slightly?
Submitted by NJRightWinger12 on Mon, 01/09/2012 - 2:44pm.
The scales of justice against witches in Salem were more evenly weighed than the MSM does with O'Bozo!
Poor Jake, so deluded, so
Submitted by amyshulk on Mon, 01/09/2012 - 6:18pm.
Poor Jake, so deluded, so unloved. Keep trying to be "fair and balanced" - getting yourself fired for telling the truth would be a good 1st step, instead of eliding and keeping the uninformed uninformed!!!
Ronald Reagan
tilted????
Submitted by gordon on Mon, 01/09/2012 - 9:27pm.
The media tilted the scales for Obama????
Yeah, lets try this instead.
The media SAT on the scales for Obama, holding their interns in their laps.