The thing that really annoys me about the whole process though is all the polling they do. I think they place FAR too much emphasis on all these "poll results". There are so many polls and the results are reported and rehashed so much that they take on a life of their own and actually have an influence on the outcome.
Here is why I think that. While watching the news yesterday, I heard what I believe to be one of the most monumentally stupid statements made by a voter. This person said that she thought the candidate she really liked wasn't doing well enough to get the nomination so she voted for someone else. I wish I was hearing that in person instead of on TV so I could tell her, "HELLOOOOO!!! Did you ever think that your attitude is the REASON your candidate isn't doing well??? If everyone is thinking like you, it's no wonder he's not getting votes.
Now, this was an exit poll and no actual results of the day were being reported yet so what I really would have liked to ask her is what is she basing her opinion on? It's still very early on in the primaries and I don't think the average person would give up on their guy so early based on results alone without all the media hype and constant dissection and endless analysis by myriad political pundits that are so anxious to weigh in with their opinions. People listen to all this drivel and then believe what they say like they are some sort of mystical seer that knows what's going to happen before it does. When did it become the job of the media to MAKE the news instead of report it? If the news agencies make the statement that "Joe Republican isn't expected to do well in tomorrow's primary" often enough, people will start believing it and it will influence the way they vote.
People don't really realize the power that the news media has to exert influence in this way. They are supposed to report what happens in an unbiased fashion but if you really watch and listen to what they are saying, you will see that a lot of times they are putting their own slant on things. If they don't really like a candidate and want to show him in a bad light, they will use terms like "he and his cohorts" or “he and his cronies” to refer to him and his team. If it’s the candidate they like they use much more respectable terms like “he and his associates, aides or assistants.” Just simple things like that can make someone they don’t like sound bad and make their favorite sound better. Subtle influence.
They can also affect the candidates simply by giving them air time or not. For instance, even when Ron Paul came in second in one of the debates, he hardly got mentioned in the news at all. He collected more campaign funds than some of the other candidates but it was downplayed or ignored by the media. He has won more delegates than Rudy Giuliani but who gets all the attention in the news? What’s going on here? The liberal media do not like Ron Paul. It’s that simple.
Pay attention people. Be independent. Think for yourself and look for the real story and not just what they are telling you because much of the time they are only telling you what they want you to hear. Do a little research to find out what these candidates really stand for and what their beliefs are. Then vote for who you really believe in no matter what these media morons say.
