The analysts on TV get it fundamentally wrong

[johnnydrama]

I watched a bit of MSNBC & CNN right now. And all of them, especially Pat Buchanan get so much wrong.

PA is a good demographic state for Hillary. It favors her quite a bit.

Her winning PA by 8.5% doesn't mean anything more than that.

Just like next week, NC is a state that is good for Obama. When he wins NC by quite a bit, it won't be that
Hillary tanked in the last 2 weeks, it'll mean NC is a good state for Obama.

This notion that in something is different now than in February when Obama won all those contests is baloney.

He had good states in February. People were predicting he'd win all of those contest 3 weeks before they started.

These aren't contests in the same state with the same people over and over. These are totally different people in totally different states, and if Hillary loses NC by 15 points, it doesn't mean she lost 23 points in 2 weeks like these analysts want to pretend it is.

Like I said before. If Ohio & Pennsylvania were 2 months ago, and Wisconsin & Maryland were tonight, people would be saying that Obama has huge momentum, and what's wrong with Hillary.

These people don't seem to get it.

[davidpdx]

1. In a way I'm glad I am not able to watch any of the networks

we had CNN at our last place across town, but aren't able to get it here. I'd probably be more negative if I were sitting there watching the endless kiss ass going on.

[TTUBatfan2008]

2. I do agree with you...

but Wisconsin had favorable demographics for Clinton, not Obama. But he blew her out by 17 there, which seemed pretty unbelievable at the time. Just a flash in the pan obviously, based on the results of other midwestern states.