On the home page of the Washington Post website this morning, the headline for liberal columnist Ruth Marcus is "Ignore the hype." Inside the newspaper, it's "As Virginia goes, not so much." Marcus advises that this GOP landslide is all some meaningless fairy tale:
Advice to readers about the coming orgy of analysis about the New Jersey and Virginia gubernatorial elections: Ignore it. Disquisitions on The Meaning of It All for President Obama or the 2009 results as a harbinger for Congress in 2010 have scant basis in reality.
Over-interpreting election results is an occupational hazard for political reporters. This problem is particularly acute in the year after a presidential contest, when we are suffering from a bad case of electoral withdrawal.
Marcus marshals some numbers to argue that governor's races in Virginia and New Jersey are not always great predictors of midterm and presidential elections to come. Let's stipulate that for a second, but ask: doesn't it also argue that reporters may have over-interpreted the mandate and charisma of Barack Hussein Obama?
Is it possible that Obama's 52.7 percent victory wasn't exactly a political juggernaut, and that his voters might vanish when he's not in the ballot? If that's true, do Democrats really have support for their policies, or just an empty crush on Obama's rhetorical performances?
Marcus seems to be warning her fellow liberals in the press corps to stay away from assigning any momentum to the Republicans, in case it stymies all the liberal "progress" Marcus and her colleagues want. She's trying to marshal facts, but ends up emotional and dismissive: we never really had Virginia anyway.
So it's possible, for example, that Obama's performance has turned off some of the Virginians who voted for him last year and played a role in the race between Democrat R. Creigh Deeds and Republican Bob McDonnell. But Deeds was a lousy candidate, McDonnell a far more adept one. Virginia is a purple state, but purple with a decidedly reddish tinge.
Also left unsaid: if Deeds was a "lousy candidate," why did The Washington Post endorse him over other Democrats?
—Tim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center.




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
I posted the following
November 4, 2009 - 08:55 ET by rockyracoonI posted the following below in the Larry King thread/blog @ 8:16:
The Pravda media will downplay or mute the Dem defeats in VA & NJ and any damage they may pose to 0beyme, while trumpeting the loss of NY 23 and how it affects the Reps, most notably Palin.
I sure wish I could do as well with the ponys, and the NFL!!
Facts are like kryptonite to the liberal.
( ( ^ o ^ ) )
November 4, 2009 - 09:16 ET by vrwc13...she has her hands over her ears singing lalalalalalalala...this means nothing ...lalalalalalala...this means nothing...
...pardon my french but as Dan Akroyd would say "Ruth, you ignorant....!"
v
...an error was made in 2008 and buters remorse has started...
Nassau County, NY
November 4, 2009 - 09:19 ET by Gat New YorkNot part of the media focus, Nassau County on Long Island voted 53% for Barack Obama last year and has been a Democratic stronghold for some time now.
The Nassau County Supervisor is going to a recount with the current Supervisor Tom Suozzi (118,111 votes - 48%) so far winning by about 264 votes over Republican Edward Mangano (117,874 - 48%) who had half the war chest. What the media has not reported is that there was a Conservative candidate, Steven Hansen, who got 9,552 votes.
Also of the other three county wide positions, Republicans won 2 of the 3.
And if the night could not get worse for Democrats, Republicans won control of the Nassau County Legislature which was a big upset.
Tom Brune of Newsday was forced to admit that these elections (including the governor races) were a clear message of rejection to Obama's policies.
We should expect that there will be more ignorant remarks like that of Marcus coming from the White House propaganda corps.
See?
November 4, 2009 - 09:26 ET by KC MulvilleSee? The reporters don't need a phone call from the White House to advance the agenda.
They can do it all by themselves.
ITS BOTH
November 4, 2009 - 09:41 ET by sajc05I think it's a good win for republicans, but some republican pundits are calling this the end of the obama era (if there is an era), which is ridiculous.
Listen, repubs on a local level are usually better then the ones in DC because they act more conservative. But this isn't a come back for repubs on a federal level. too many people out there are turned off from this neo conservative take over of the republican party and this abandonment of conservative principles from these phony conservatives and their allies at fox and talk radio.
the numbers don't lie. most of the country is conservative but not republican, why is that? because the republicans, bush specifically, initiated this tarp fiasco, wars of choice, deregulated certain areas of the markets that spurred on this crash, medicare part D that has crippled tax payers, tried amnesty, and has pandered to the religious right -nothing against christians, i'm catholic myself, but decisions in DC should be about he country not the christian base - expanded federal gov't more than any president since johnson and maybe even roosevelt...
All this turned most conservatives off form bush and the republicans who touted his awesomeness at every corner. turn on hannity at any time and he was praising bush as the greatest pres ever, so real conservatives walked away form republicans. Dems took over unfortunately, but the core reasons why conservatives aren't coming out for republicans are still there. And Palin IS NOT the answer. I want to know my president is smarter than me, she is not too bright but can read talking points very well.
sorry for the long post
No apologies...
November 4, 2009 - 10:05 ET by FranksamI agree. I can't call myself Republican, because they have adopted the strategerie of triangulation popularized by Bill Clinton. (See: Newt Gingrich) We already have a good reader as POTUS, and know how that's working out.
Let's stand up for what's right for a change, and see how many people follow? If it's not enough, we'll just pull the plug on the most successful exercise in human freedon in the short history of the world and admit that entropy is destiny.
Re Reader
November 4, 2009 - 10:39 ET by slickwillie2001" a good reader as POTUS"
How true, perhaps we should call him 'Dear Reader'.
Yes, of course, and Sarah Palin's intelligence
November 4, 2009 - 10:09 ET by WhoIsJohnGalthas been fairly represented in the media. Just like they called Bush an idiot. And Reagan was a old idiot. And, well, just iunsert any Replublican or Conservative's name and the same thing applies.
Sarah Palin's midwestern demeanor doesn't play well in the rest of the country, but it doesn't mean she's dumb, any more than a slow-speaking sourtherner is therefore dumb. Give her a fair shake (not through the set-up interviews a la Katie Couric) and then judge her. It's too early to tell if she's has a future or not, but I've heard her speak, when she's spoken for herself and she's NOT dumb. She's very smart.
Otherwise you'd have to believe that an idiot hornswaggled the oil companies in Alaska into a bad deal.
"" too many people out
November 4, 2009 - 16:23 ET by ckc1227"" too many people out there are turned off from this neo conservative take over of the republican party"
Yes....they're called Democrats. Something I'm sure you know all about.
I've got another plan...
November 4, 2009 - 09:43 ET by Patrick MichaelI think I will just ignore Ruth Marcus.
Stay Free!!!
Rocky spot on
November 4, 2009 - 09:44 ET by TomoramaThe cluster bleep in NY is giving the liberal media something to hang their lying hat on, THAT was PALIN'S fault and she is too blame, but the Dems losses were all the bad Dems candidates fault and NOT the annointed ones as they didn't listen to him ANYONE else hear this BS?
This was a special election where the (C) candidate got late momentum but it was not enough to overcome the actual decent Democrat and the horrible RINO in the race that syphoned off votes.
Next election will be a little different where maybe an actual Republican will be the nominee and not selected by a small group of people.
To say that the woman was a MODERATE Republican is a joke, my dog is more Republican than she is/was and she proved it by picking the Democrat.
A great man once said, YOU only get out of life what YOU put into it, he obviously wasn't a liberal.
Yes, please. By all means ignore
November 4, 2009 - 09:59 ET by WhoIsJohnGaltthe results and continue to believe that the leftist agenda is what Americans want. The more these people ignore our demands for fiscal restraint, the more they'll get their ass handed to them next November. Good for us.
Here is 1 guarantee to add to "death and taxes
November 4, 2009 - 10:04 ET by holeinthehullHoleinthehull
Ignore it, and the voters will kick your sorry ass in 2010.
"Ignore they hype"?
November 4, 2009 - 10:14 ET by CO2MakerDoes that refer to all the articles WaPo ran supporting Deeds and denouncing McDonnell?And then this: "Over-interpreting election results is an occupational hazard for political reporters." That sounds like "over-interpreting" is an unexpected event that happens to the reporter, like a tree falling on them. But in reality, it's almost always a self-inflicted case of over-indulgence, like getting carpal-tunnel syndrome for too much self-love.
If she want's to stop the orgy then why
November 4, 2009 - 10:16 ET by JTPis she engaging in the foreplay? I recommend keeping her words on file until after the 2010 races.
"Live for yourself...there's no one else more worth living for.
Begging hands and bleeding hearts will only cry out for more"- Rush--Anthem
didn't mean anything?
November 4, 2009 - 10:27 ET by spepperWow, there surely was a whole lot of jet fuel burned in this election campaign, for it to "not mean anything"-- what with Obama criss crossing the skies in the process of campaigning for his guys-- paid for by your and my tax dollars by the way-- hmmm shouldn't the EPA step in to restrict the use of Air Force One to limit the huge carbon footprint it makes when it's used for such purposes? Oh wait, checkmate-- he is their boss too-- never mind
lot of jet fuel burned in this election campaign, for it to "not
November 4, 2009 - 10:38 ET by vrwc13lot of jet fuel burned in this election campaign, for it to "not mean anything
from Drudge: White House: Obama 'not watching returns'...
..my read:
Men stumble over the truth from time to time, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing happened. -Winston Churchill.
v
Nothing new under the
November 4, 2009 - 10:43 ET by mattmNothing new under the sun.
When Reagan got elected it was an abberation. When the GOP took congress in the '94 elections, it was a temper tantrum. When Bush got elected twice it was a theft and a fraud.
It's never a rejection of leftist ideology, no matter what happens.
Nothing new---
November 4, 2009 - 14:25 ET by matthewdeanShort, sweet, to the point.
Nicely said, mattm.
MD
"There is no distinctly American criminal class - except Congress."
Mark Twain (1835-1910)
Don’t you just love how
November 4, 2009 - 10:47 ET by Tom PaineDon’t you just love how the press and this Whitehouse likes to have it both ways. Had the results gone the other way do you think they would be saying they were meaningless? How can they keep a straight face that they are not worried about what happened in New Jersey. Here we have the bluest of blue states that Obama carried by 15 points in 2008. Corzine outspent Christy by $12 million and Obama, Biden and Bill Clinton should have rented an apartment there for their numerous campaign appearances. The independents are deserting the Democrats’ empty promises in droves, Obama could not mobilize his base and not even Acorn was able to rig the polling with more absentee ballots than were cast in the 2008 election with a significantly lower voter turnout. The meteor of their extinction has just crashed and these dinosaurs are still pretending they didn’t hear it.
Entry for Ripley's Believe
November 4, 2009 - 10:48 ET by celatorEntry for Ripley's Believe It Or Not:
Forty years after having sold their soul to radical socialist causes, WAPO publishers, editors and reporters still believed they were an newspaper to be taken seriously.
No citizen's right to life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, or property is safe as long as Obama is President of the United States.
The media is also
November 4, 2009 - 11:24 ET by 10ksnookerTelling everyone to ignore the tea parties ... Of course the ginned up hatred in the media for GW Bush was real, wasn't it? So why then is Obama doing most everything that Bush was doing ... Including that deadly civil rights killing patriot bill spy stuff.
The lame stream media is so predictable, we don't even need Rush to do it any more.
sour grapes make sour faces
November 4, 2009 - 11:54 ET by Candance MooreTranslation: well it doesn't matter because we didn't want that dumb old state of Virginia, and we knew Deeds would lose but we were just playing along.
So WaPo endorses Deeds (twice) as the best choice for Virginians, spends gallons of ink on a smear campaign against McDonnell, and encourages Obama to travel to Virginia to help Deeds. But as soon as he loses, they call him a lousy candidate.
Either Marcus is lying to cover her tracks, or the Post endorses lousy Democrats for the fun of it. Has to be one or the other.
This is proof positive that
November 4, 2009 - 12:07 ET by G. MayThis is proof positive that the WaPo is officially irrelevant. After months of shilling for Deeds and trying to smear his opponent, the WaPo's candidate fails. Looks like market share isn't the only indicator of the WaPo's loss of influence.
Means nothing but
November 4, 2009 - 12:10 ET by John53It says that the Washington Compost could not fix this election like it has done in past.
It further proves the Compost bias in the political arena.
It provides evidence of the Compost propaganda media status (lapdog).
It proves the lack of honesty, integrity or justice at the Compost.
It provides a warning to the DNC and RNC that America is getting pissed.
It provides evidence that American are paying attention and looking at 2010.
It proves America wants less government and less spending.
It provides warning that 2010 elections are going to be brutal if the spending continues.
It proves the continued love affair with Mr. Obama.
It continues to provide cover and distraction for Mr. Obama.
It continues to prove the worthlessness of the media reporting capability in the greater Washington area.
Plugging up the memory hole
November 4, 2009 - 13:55 ET by acumenThis post will come in as a handy flashback after the 2010 election results....contingent of course on the WaPo remaining in business that long.
Not that arrogant Marcus, obiously dwelling in deep denial, would get it even after a Republican landslide in 2010.
And as for; "But Deeds was a lousy candidate, McDonnell a far more adept one." That observation seems overwhelmingly more applicable to Hoffman vs Owens in NY. Still Hoffman almost pulled it out in spite of his own Party running adds against him and Dede endorsing Hoffman's opponent. That point obviously couldn't penetrate Marcus' biased tunnelvision.