The smart folks soberly support Barack Obama, while the ridiculous-looking rednecks love Sarah Palin. That's the subtext of the New York Times coverage on Wednesday. Jennifer Steinhauer was watching the second presidential debate with Obama fans at a Mexican restaurant in Des Moines, "Where He First Got Going, Cheering Obama On."
Debate watchers at Dos Rios -- the sort of crowd that can cite chapter and verse of Medicaid waivers without notes -- watched intensely, taking their eyes off the television only to grab a Corona.
Strangely, one of the self-evident geniuses in attendance thinks Barack Obama wants universal health care, despite the Times' desperate insistence that that's just one of the McCain campaign's many lies:
Health care was clearly a big issue in this crowd, and Mr. Obama's statement that health care was a "right" got a big round, too. "I like the fact that he is taking steps toward universal health care," said Mr. Matson, an osteopath.
In contrast, a Republican rally in Florida featuring Sarah Palin is painted in threatening terms by the Times. In her Wednesday story, "Palin Plays to Conservative Base in Florida Rallies," Julie Bosman seems perturbed at the sight of conservative Republicans in their natural element.
Florida is as far as Gov. Sarah Palin could be from Alaska, and still remain in the United States, but she knew home when she saw it.
Standing before a sea of red T-shirts and homemade signs reading "No Communists!" and "Palin's Pitbulls," Ms. Palin on Tuesday nestled in to her Republican base.
Palin crisscrossed Florida, leading five campaign rallies over two days, and appreciative crowds heckled the press corps (wonder why?). One man made inappropriate comments, and Bosman made sure to pick it up.
From Jacksonville in the northeast to Pensacola in the Panhandle, the fiery crowds gathered to jeer at any hint of liberalism, boo loudly at the mere mention of Senator Barack Obama's name and heckle the traveling press corps (at a rally in Clearwater, one man hurled a racial epithet at a television cameraman).
The Times' lead editorial Wednesday blamed Palin's "demagoguery" for inciting such "race-baiting," and claimed that "others shouted epithets at an African-American member of a TV crew" "Others" signifies more than the "one man" cited by Bosman the reporter. Surely the editorial page isn't exaggerating for effect, is it?
Back to Bosman, showing surprise that a Palin rally would be dominated by the kind of people who support Palin:
If there were undecideds, independents or swing voters among them, they were awfully hard to spot.
Florida is still a too-close-to-call battleground state, with most recent polls showing Mr. Obama ahead, but not by much. That Ms. Palin campaigned there in Republican strongholds like Pensacola suggests an effort to increase turnout among the party's base.
Ms. Palin, and the speakers who opened for her, gave the crowds what they came for.
....
Many of those who went to see Ms. Palin -- some dressed in head-to-toe McCain-Palin regalia -- described themselves as staunch Republicans who said they would never consider voting for a Democrat.
Does the Times ask Obama supporters if they would ever consider voting for a Republican?
—Clay Waters is the director of Times Watch, an MRC project tracking the New York Times.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
What did they expect?
October 9, 2008 - 09:08 ET by nkviking75Debate watchers at Dos Rios -- the sort of crowd that can cite chapter
and verse of Medicaid waivers without notes -- watched intensely,
taking their eyes off the television only to grab a Corona.
Since Des Moines is the state capital and Dos Rios is within walking distance of the statehouse and office complexes (not that these government types would ever walk there), I'm not surprised that their clientele would include people who can quote Medicaid rules verbatim. Also, the restaurant is not far from one of the state's largest hospitals, Iowa Methodist. So this bunch was hardly representative of Obama's Iowa supporters, many of whom seem quite clueless to me.
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
Good point, nkv, for those
October 9, 2008 - 09:29 ET by tomnkikiGood point, nkv, for those of us who don't live there. I read that statement to mean that the Godless people(excepting The Obamassiah) of the left view the Medicaid Rulebook as their Bible. I guess Corona is their Holy Water or Communion drink? Glad I'm not one of them. They've probably killed off many brain cells drinking to the "Bible" that they can quote chapter and verse of, and taking Unholy Communion to The Obamassiah. Just check out any spring break destination and it will confirm the above.
Does the Times ask Obama
October 9, 2008 - 09:11 ET by SmartypantsDoes the Times ask Obama supporters if they would ever consider voting for a Republican?
The dirty little secret is that it doesn't really matter. This is why we never see stories about lifetime Democrats who will not be voting for Obama, while stories of so-called Republicans voting for Obama are rampant. Republican supporters are outsiders to the mainstream press; they don't understand them and they do not try to understand them. To these people the Democrats and their agenda represents what the country is all about; everything else is an exception.
Since it's a Times reporter,
October 9, 2008 - 09:38 ET by IamTinmanSince it's a Times reporter, I'd have serious doubts about the veracity of any reports they generated. Truth doesn't seem to be a requirement with them any more.
Even so, Unlike the Obama rallies, usually anyone can come to a Palin speech and it's no surprise that the actions of 1 or 2 people in a crowd of tens of thousands would be moronic. In this paranoid era, I wouldn't be shocked if the hecklers were Obama agitators. Judging by the vituperation in Daily Kos and Huffpost it doesn't seem unlikely.
The Times is in the tank for Obama, they've made it clear both in their reportage and on their editorial page. That's made them irrevelent.
NEWS ALERT: Chris Matthews coins term "low information voters"
October 9, 2008 - 09:35 ET by krendlerOn this morning's Morning Joe, Matthews introduced the term "low information voters". It became clear during the 1/2 minute discussion that followed that the term means "ignorant, white, racists that Sarah Palin is trying to appeal to with her 'attacks' on The Exalted One'". The panel went on to express disgust that Palin dared to "squint her eyes" while talking about Barry. A "mildly dangerous" thing to do, I'm sure.
The media is in full-blown Lets-Play-the-Race-Baiting / Bad Whitey card at this point - shades of what happened during the Dem primary when Obama wasn't able to close the deal.
It wasn't a matter of if, but when.
MS-NBC has become a flat-out carniville / freak show.
Chris should know, as he is a "low information commenter"
October 9, 2008 - 09:52 ET by R D HelmChris Matthews is an stuck-up, elitist snob.
-And a not-very-bright one at that.
-Dave
AlinTzu
October 9, 2008 - 11:32 ET by retroconThat's another standard tactic that i'll say is from the book of AlinTzu (Saul Alinsky meets Sun Tzu)... know your enemy, as you know yourself, and lay all your faults on them... as long as you control the message, you shall never face defeat.
Chris is just trying to protect the thrill up his leg.
October 9, 2008 - 12:31 ET by allamericangirlSo now these ignorant white racists are renamed "low information voters". I recall Chris refering to them as "Archie Bunker voters". I'm sure we will hear all his colleges parrot this new insult thinking it sounds clever.
"Liberalism is a mental disorder" -Michael Savage
NYT looking for the wrong things
October 9, 2008 - 10:31 ET by c5thenThe NYT should be looking for more subscribers. Pretty soon they will be the most unread paper in NYC if they keep up their partisan and biased 'reporting'.
You would think that a paper who's circulation is dwindling and falling with every quarterly report would be looking for ways to EXPAND it's reader base and subscribers, not looking for ways to piss off almost 50% of it's potential clientel.
Losing all Republicans
October 9, 2008 - 10:49 ET by BluegillI have wondered if they are content to go it alone w/ out any Republican support?
why? What is up their sleeve? Do they see a future of a gov't run country, where audience doesn't matter to the bottom line? Do they get enough BHO campaign ads to make up for the loss of audience? Do they look at the Fairness Doctrine as a savior? Something is brewing in the backrooms, I smell it
Nothing like being sterotyped.
October 9, 2008 - 10:43 ET by TexasDrifterInteresting. At a Republican rally they boo all Liberal/Democrat ideas and the mention of the opponents names. That is unusual? Commenting about the racial epithets, were they provoked? Either way, I agree they shouldn't be used. I've known a few people who have used words I wouldn't, but are not racist by the way they treat people those words might offend. Of course how would we know if it was offensive if it is used as a friendly greating. That one continues to boggle my mind.
Does this mean I can be offended about being seen as stupid because of the way I dress or what I drive? I drive an F350 dually, live in a rural area in a manufactured home with a few horses. I dress like one of those "rednecks, which means Wrangler jeans, t-shirts or polos with boots. Does that mean I'm stupid?
Apparently someone didn't think so since I have an Engineering degree, graduated with membership in two honor societies and now make over 100k/year. Of course I wear khakis and button downs or nicer polos at work.
In my experience smart
October 9, 2008 - 10:55 ET by DarkCurrentIn my experience smart people don't drink much Corona
This is a variation on the
October 9, 2008 - 11:43 ET by maggieqpublicThis is a variation on the story of some months ago…. The ivy league intellectuals, members of the nation’s enlightened ruling class, support Obama and other collectivists. The bitter clingers (now they’re adding ‘racist’) from backwater America support conservative social values and individual rights.
Another Winning Political Tactic from the New York Times
October 9, 2008 - 14:59 ET by allanfThe NASCAR hating New York Times staff believe with all the vigour they can muster that only the stupid and ignorant will vote for John McCain.
I am not sure calling voters stupid is a good vote getting tactic.