November, 05 2008, 05:25pm EDT
Fox News Nailbiter!
Conservative channel pushed notion of a tightening election
NEW YORK
One of the most glaring peculiarities about the Fox News Channel's
campaign coverage in the run-up to the November 4 election was the
channel's frequent insistence, in the waning days of the campaign, that
the election was remarkably close, with Republican John McCain surging.
In reality, few polls suggested this was happening (see PollingReport.com; Pollster.com), but Fox
chose to give a handful of outlying, unrepresentative surveys
considerable attention. It was as if the channel were less interested
in accurately reporting the state of the campaign than in presenting an
alternate reality that would be pleasing to partisan viewers.
Here's a sampling of that coverage, day by day:
October 27:
FOX NEWS ANALYST DICK MORRIS: I think that we have to understand that redistribution of income is liberal euphemism for socialism. And you know.
FOX NEWS HOST SEAN HANNITY: Well, I -- and I agree. But let me
move the ball a little bit here.... This is, obviously, a very sensitive
issue for the Obama campaign. They feel like they've been exposed. It
started with Joe the Plumber.
MORRIS: And they're hemorrhaging votes.... Zogby, Rasmussen, and
Gallup, all have this race five points apart.... Zogby down from 12,
Rasmussen down from eight, and Gallup down from six. And Investors
Business Daily has it to 2.8, and Zogby had a one-night finding of
three. The averages that over three nights.
October 28:
"Let me put up on the screen the latest polls,
because we've had a tightening in many of them. Likely voters, Gallup,
it's a two-point race. Zogby, now four-point. AP,
it's dead even. IDP, another close race. Obviously spread the wealth,
socialism, Obama's welfare plan is not going over well with the
American people."
--Sean Hannity
FOX NEWS ANALYST NEWT GINGRICH: "I got a
report earlier this evening that in the very, very close states that,
in fact, McCain has closed the gap substantially, and that internal
polling now shows him within pretty good striking distance in every
single close state.
HANNITY: Well, we're going to go over some of these polls. The likely voter poll, Gallup, now has a two-point race.
October 29:
FOX NEWS ANCHOR MARTHA MacCALLUM: McCain
is blasting Obama, saying his rival doesn't have what it takes to
protect America from terrorists. And that kind of tough talk may be
helping him a bit. Here's a look at new Rasmussen Poll showing McCain
gaining ground with Obama at 50 to McCain's 47. That's the first time
in this particular poll that McCain has been within three points of
Barack Obama in more than a month. Fox's Carl Cameron is with the McCain camp live in Riviera Beach, Florida tonight....
FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT CARL CAMERON: Well, for the last several
weeks, Senator McCain has been focusing on economic issues. And if
anything sort of to be credited with his apparent surge and the
tightening in the national polls, it would be presumably be his
emphasis on Barack Obama's economic policies, which McCain has sort of
tattooed as tax-and-spend liberalism.
***
NATIONAL REVIEW CONTRIBUTOR MARK STEYN:
Clearly, something is working. Because I think whatever one makes of
these polls, there is a general tightening direction. So, clearly,
people are taking a second look at Obama and taking a second look at
McCain.
HANNITY: Let me jump on that, Mark.... Look, it's Scott Rasmussen.
It's Gallup, likely voters. It's Investor's Business Daily and that
poll that's out. It's AP. It's Battleground. This is a two- or three-point race.
October 29:
"Fear is in the air. And while it initially
helped Barack Obama, fear is now beginning to hurt him. Both the
Rasmussen and Gallup daily tracking polls have the race getting
tighter. And in a remarkable turnabout, Rasmussen will release a poll
tomorrow that says Americans now trust McCain more on the economy than
Obama. So NBC News will have to tone down the victory dance.
A series of Obama issues regarding spreading the wealth around have
hurt him. Joe the Plumber and other expositions have caused some fear
among undecided voters that an Obama administration will harm the
economy more than help it. The USA remains a strong capitalist country,
much to the chagrin of the far left. And deviation from capitalism
isn't going to play well here, especially among older voters. And it is
here where the swings are taking place, especially in places like
Florida and Ohio."
--Fox News host Bill O'Reilly
October 30:
"But first--it is close, even closer than it was last night. It is now a three-point race for the White House. A new Fox News poll shows the race tightening, with Senator Obama at 47 percent and Senator McCain at 44 percent."
-- Fox News host Greta van Susteren
"Well, he [Obama] ought to be nervous because
of the margin of error, and he also ought to be nervous because,
clearly, the national race is tightening.... He's not a good closer. I
mean, there is a resistance to him, a doubt about whether or not he's
experienced and qualified enough to be president that causes people at
the tail end of the race not to end up in his column, and I suspect
we're seeing that again.... It's because of this persistent doubt that
people have about Senator Obama."
-- Fox News analyst Karl Rove
* * *
"Now the polling, the Fox News
poll, which shows Obama closing the gap from -- McCain closing it from
9 to 3 shows two completely different trends at work. Young people are
turning away from Obama and toward McCain, driven by the tax issue."
--Dick Morris
MORRIS: My bet is McCain wins all of the undecided in this race.
HANNITY: Well, if that happens, he wins the race.
MORRIS: Right now it's tied.
HANNITY: If that.
MORRIS: No, right now it's about tied.
"Brand new Fox polls are in and this race is tightening."
--Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly
"The latest Fox News/Opinion
Dynamics Poll of likely voters nationwide, which Major Garrett was just
mentioning, shows that the race is tightening considerably from last
week, with Barack Obama's overall lead over John McCain is shrinking
from nine points to three; that's within the margin of error."
--Fox News correspondent James Rosen
October 31:
"We are down to the wire. And guess what? The race is far from over. The Associated Press
is reporting that a study shows one in seven are persuadable. That
means this isn't over. And if you don't believe that, how about this
news? The polls are tightening. A new Fox News poll shows Senator Obama at 47 percent and Senator McCain at 44 percent."
--Greta van Susteren
HANNITY: One of the more amazing things is the numbers of
undecided, anywhere between eight and 14. You know Dick Morris
interprets that that is -- that means Obama can't close the deal and
that people have doubts about him and it appears by the tightening
that's going on that those voters are moving toward Senator McCain. Do
you share that analysis?
ROVE: I think Dick is largely right. There has been a persistent
nagging concern on the part of the American people about whether or not
Barack Obama is qualified to be president.
HANNITY: Are you looking at the polls? There's a real tightening
going on. Very interesting to me, as it's happening. Seems Barack Obama
cannot close. Why?
FOX NEWS ANALYST MIKE HUCKABEE: I think there is the lingering
doubt as to what he's going to do to people's personal income. This is
not about -- you know, right now it's not about even terrorism or
international affairs. Joe the plumber hit the reset button on this
entire election.
"Apparently, for our audience's sake, apparently, big move in the
polls. McCain up by one, Drudge is reporting, in the latest Zogby poll.
It's going to come out tomorrow."
--Sean Hannity
"In a surprise turnaround, get this, a brand new Fox News
poll find that John McCain is surging among younger voters, those under
30 years old. He is catching up to Barack Obama's 48 percent, McCain
has 43 percent. I think those numbers are wrong - 48 to 58 percent
among voters under the age of 30."
--Fox News host Heather Nauert
NAUERT: ... McCain has gained 10 points with the youth vote within the last week?
MORRIS: Yes. In the last week, among voters 18 to 30, McCain has vis-a- vis Obama has closed the gap by 20 points.
November 2:
"Two days and counting until you decide our next president. With the
polls tightening, is John McCain about to pull off one more remarkable
comeback?"
--Fox News Sunday anchor Chris Wallace
November 3:
SEAN HANNITY: Investors Business Daily, which was the most
accurate poll in the last presidential election, now has it down to a
two-point race.... You know, Colorado was just, you know -- a week and a
half two weeks ago, it was supposed to be a blowout. It's now right
there at the margin of error. The same with the state of Virginia.
Again, that was, you know, supposed to be a blowout. And then we look,
for example, we've got Senator McCain is up in Florida. He's tied in
Missouri. He's now up in North Carolina, which was supposed to be a
blowout for Senator Obama. There--something has happened here fairly
dramatic. And do you think that this could even go further by the time
people vote tomorrow?
NEWT GINGRICH: Well, I think, first of all, that the mistake of
Senator Obama telling Joe the Plumber that he wanted to spread the
wealth has clearly slowed down all the momentum for the Obama campaign,
because it turns out most Americans are not very interested in having
politicians decide to take their money out of their wallet and spread
to it the politicians' friends. That may turn out, in retrospect, to
have been the biggest single mistake of the campaign by Senator Obama.
"I think that -- I don't believe these polls. I do not believe any, but
I agree with Dick Morris. Who knows what's going to happen tomorrow
night."
--Sean Hannity
For more information on the obvious and rather dramatic differences in the way Fox News Channel and MSNBC were covering the presidential race see the FAIR Blog. (11/2/02.)
ACTION: Ask Fox News Channel
why it failed to provide its viewers with an accurate picture of
presidential election polls in the lead-up to the November 4 election.
FAIR, the national media watch group, has been offering well-documented criticism of media bias and censorship since 1986. We work to invigorate the First Amendment by advocating for greater diversity in the press and by scrutinizing media practices that marginalize public interest, minority and dissenting viewpoints.
LATEST NEWS
Critics Blast 'Reckless and Impossible' Bid to Start Operating Mountain Valley Pipeline
"The time to build more dirty and dangerous pipelines is over," said one environmental campaigner.
Apr 23, 2024
Environmental defenders on Tuesday ripped the company behind the Mountain Valley Pipeline for asking the federal government—on Earth Day—for permission to start sending methane gas through the 303-mile conduit despite a worsening climate emergency caused largely by burning fossil fuels.
Mountain Valley Pipeline LLC sent a letter Monday to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Acting Secretary Debbie-Anne Reese seeking final permission to begin operation on the MVP next month, even while acknowledging that much of the Virginia portion of the pipeline route remains unfinished and developers have yet to fully comply with safety requirements.
"In a manner typical of its ongoing disrespect for the environment, Mountain Valley Pipeline marked Earth Day by asking FERC for authorization to place its dangerous, unnecessary pipeline into service in late May," said Jessica Sims, the Virginia field coordinator for Appalachian Voices.
"MVP brazenly asks for this authorization while simultaneously notifying FERC that the company has completed less than two-thirds of the project to final restoration and with the mere promise that it will notify the commission when it fully complies with the requirements of a consent decree it entered into with the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration last fall," she continued.
"Requesting an in-service decision by May 23 leaves the company very little time to implement the safety measures required by its agreement with PHMSA," Sims added. "There is no rush, other than to satisfy MVP's capacity customers' contracts—a situation of the company's own making. We remain deeply concerned about the construction methods and the safety of communities along the route of MVP."
Russell Chisholm, co-director of the Protect Our Water, Heritage, Rights (POWHR) Coalition—which called MVP's request "reckless and impossible"—said in a statement that "we are watching our worst nightmare unfold in real-time: The reckless MVP is barreling towards completion."
"During construction, MVP has contaminated our water sources, destroyed our streams, and split the earth beneath our homes. Now they want to run methane gas through their degraded pipes and shoddy work," Chisholm added. "The MVP is a glaring human rights violation that is indicative of the widespread failures of our government to act on the climate crisis in service of the fossil fuel industry."
POWHR and activists representing frontline communities affected by the pipeline are set to take part in a May 8 demonstration outside project financier Bank of America's headquarters in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Appalachian Voices noted that MVP's request comes days before pipeline developer Equitrans Midstream is set to release its 2024 first-quarter earnings information on April 30.
MVP is set to traverse much of Virginia and West Virginia, with the Southgate extension running into North Carolina. Outgoing U.S. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and other pipeline proponents fought to include expedited construction of the project in the debt ceiling deal negotiated between President Joe Biden and congressional Republicans last year.
On Monday, climate and environmental defenders also petitioned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, challenging FERC's approval of the MVP's planned Southgate extension, contending that the project is so different from original plans that the government's previous assent is now irrelevant.
"Federal, state, and local elected officials have spoken out against this unneeded proposal to ship more methane gas into North Carolina," said Sierra Club senior field organizer Caroline Hansley. "The time to build more dirty and dangerous pipelines is over. After MVP Southgate requested a time extension for a project that it no longer plans to construct, it should be sent back to the drawing board for this newly proposed project."
David Sligh, conservation director at Wild Virginia, said: "Approving the Southgate project is irresponsible. This project will pose the same kinds of threats of damage to the environment and the people along its path as we have seen caused by the Mountain Valley Pipeline during the last six years."
"FERC has again failed to protect the public interest, instead favoring a profit-making corporation," Sligh added.
Others renewed warnings about the dangers MVP poses to wildlife.
"The endangered bats, fish, mussels, and plants in this boondoggle's path of destruction deserve to be protected from killing and habitat destruction by a project that never received proper approvals in the first place," Center for Biological Diversity attorney Perrin de Jong said. "Our organization will continue fighting this terrible idea to the bitter end."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Seismic Win for Workers': FTC Bans Noncompete Clauses
Advocates praised the FTC "for taking a strong stance against this egregious use of corporate power, thereby empowering workers to switch jobs and launch new ventures, and unlocking billions of dollars in worker earnings."
Apr 23, 2024
U.S. workers' rights advocates and groups celebrated on Tuesday after the Federal Trade Commission voted 3-2 along party lines to approve a ban on most noncompete clauses, which Democratic FTC Chair Lina Khansaid "keep wages low, suppress new ideas, and rob the American economy of dynamism."
"The FTC's final rule to ban noncompetes will ensure Americans have the freedom to pursue a new job, start a new business, or bring a new idea to market," Khan added, pointing to the commission's estimates that the policy could mean another $524 for the average worker, over 8,500 new startups, and 17,000 to 29,000 more patents each year.
As Economic Policy Institute (EPI) president Heidi Shierholz explained, "Noncompete agreements are employment provisions that ban workers at one company from working for, or starting, a competing business within a certain period of time after leaving a job."
"These agreements are ubiquitous," she noted, applauding the ban. "EPI research finds that more than 1 out of every 4 private-sector workers—including low-wage workers—are required to enter noncompete agreements as a condition of employment."
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has suggested it plans to file a lawsuit that, as The American Prospectdetailed, "could more broadly threaten the rulemaking authority the FTC cited when proposing to ban noncompetes."
Already, the tax services and software provider Ryan has filed a legal challenge in federal court in Texas, arguing that the FTC is unconstitutionally structured.
Still, the Democratic commissioners' vote was still heralded as a "seismic win for workers." Echoing Khan's critiques of such noncompetes, Public Citizen executive vice president Lisa Gilbert declared that such clauses "inflict devastating harms on tens of millions of workers across the economy."
"The pervasive use of noncompete clauses limits worker mobility, drives down wages, keeps Americans from pursuing entrepreneurial dreams and creating new businesses, causes more concentrated markets, and keeps workers stuck in unsafe or hostile workplaces," she said. "Noncompete clauses are both an unfair method of competition and aggressively harmful to regular people. The FTC was right to tackle this issue and to finalize this strong rule."
Morgan Harper, director of policy and advocacy at the American Economic Liberties Project, praised the FTC for "listening to the comments of thousands of entrepreneurs and workers of all income levels across industries" and finalizing a rule that "is a clear-cut win."
Demand Progress' Emily Peterson-Cassin similarly commended the commission "for taking a strong stance against this egregious use of corporate power, thereby empowering workers to switch jobs and launch new ventures, and unlocking billions of dollars in worker earnings."
While such agreements are common across various industries, Teófilo Reyes, chief of staff at the Restaurant Opportunities Centers United, said that "many restaurant workers have been stuck at their job, earning as low as $2.13 per hour, because of the noncompete clause that they agreed to have in their contract."
"They didn't know that it would affect their wages and livelihood," Reyes stressed. "Most workers cannot negotiate their way out of a noncompete clause because noncompetes are buried in the fine print of employment contracts. A full third of noncompete clauses are presented after a worker has accepted a job."
Student Borrower Protection Center (SBPC) executive director Mike Pierce pointed out that the FTC on Tuesday "recognized the harmful role debt plays in the workplace, including the growing use of training repayment agreement provisions, or TRAPs, and took action to outlaw TRAPs and all other employer-driven debt that serve the same functions as noncompete agreements."
Sandeep Vaheesan, legal director at Open Markets Institute, highlighted that the addition came after his group, SBPC, and others submitted comments on the "significant gap" in the commission's initial January 2023 proposal, and also welcomed that "the final rule prohibits both conventional noncompete clauses and newfangled versions like TRAPs."
Jonathan Harris, a Loyola Marymount University law professor and SBPC senior fellow, said that "by also banning functional noncompetes, the rule stays one step ahead of employers who use 'stay-or-pay' contracts as workarounds to existing restrictions on traditional noncompetes. The FTC has decided to try to avoid a game of whack-a-mole with employers and their creative attorneys, which worker advocates will applaud."
Among those applauding was Jean Ross, president of National Nurses United, who said that "the new FTC rule will limit the ability of employers to use debt to lock nurses into unsafe jobs and will protect their role as patient advocates."
Angela Huffman, president of Farm Action, also cheered the effort to stop corporations from holding employees "hostage," saying that "this rule is a critical step for protecting our nation's workers and making labor markets fairer and more competitive."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Discriminatory' North Carolina Law Criminalizing Felon Voting Struck Down
One plaintiffs' attorney said the ruling "makes our democracy better and ensures that North Carolina is not able to unjustly criminalize innocent individuals with felony convictions who are valued members of our society."
Apr 23, 2024
Democracy defenders on Tuesday hailed a ruling from a U.S. federal judge striking down a 19th-century North Carolina law criminalizing people who vote while on parole, probation, or post-release supervision due to a felony conviction.
In Monday's decision, U.S. District Judge Loretta C. Biggs—an appointee of former Democratic President Barack Obama—sided with the North Carolina A. Philip Randolph Institute and Action NC, who argued that the 1877 law discriminated against Black people.
"The challenged statute was enacted with discriminatory intent, has not been cleansed of its discriminatory taint, and continues to disproportionately impact Black voters," Biggs wrote in her 25-page ruling.
Therefore, according to the judge, the 1877 law violates the U.S. Constitution's equal protection clause.
"We are ecstatic that the court found in our favor and struck down this racially discriminatory law that has been arbitrarily enforced over time," Action NC executive director Pat McCoy said in a statement. "We will now be able to help more people become civically engaged without fear of prosecution for innocent mistakes. Democracy truly won today!"
Voting rights tracker Democracy Docket noted that Monday's ruling "does not have any bearing on North Carolina's strict felony disenfranchisement law, which denies the right to vote for those with felony convictions who remain on probation, parole, or a suspended sentence—often leaving individuals without voting rights for many years after release from incarceration."
However, Mitchell Brown, an attorney for one of the plaintiffs, said that "Judge Biggs' decision will help ensure that voters who mistakenly think they are eligible to cast a ballot will not be criminalized for simply trying to reengage in the political process and perform their civic duty."
"It also makes our democracy better and ensures that North Carolina is not able to unjustly criminalize innocent individuals with felony convictions who are valued members of our society, specifically Black voters who were the target of this law," Brown added.
North Carolina officials have not said whether they will appeal Biggs' ruling. The state Department of Justice said it was reviewing the decision.
According to Forward Justice—a nonpartisan law, policy, and strategy center dedicated to advancing racial, social, and economic justice in the U.S. South, "Although Black people constitute 21% of the voting-age population in North Carolina, they represent 42% of the people disenfranchised while on probation, parole, or post-release supervision."
The group notes that in 44 North Carolina counties, "the disenfranchisement rate for Black people is more than three times the rate of the white population."
"Judge Biggs' decision will help ensure that voters who mistakenly think they are eligible to cast a ballot will not be criminalized for simply trying to re-engage in the political process and perform their civic duty."
In what one civil rights leader called "the largest expansion of voting rights in this state since the 1965 Voting Rights Act," a three-judge state court panel voted 2-1 in 2021 to restore voting rights to approximately 55,000 formerly incarcerated felons. The decision made North Carolina the only Southern state to automatically restore former felons' voting rights.
Republican state legislators appealed that ruling to the North Carolina Court of Appeals, which in 2022 granted their request for a stay—but only temporarily, as the court allowed a previous injunction against any felony disenfranchisement based on fees or fines to stand.
However, last April the North Carolina Supreme Court reversed the three-judge panel decision, stripping voting rights from thousands of North Carolinians previously convicted of felonies. Dissenting Justice Anita Earls opined that "the majority's decision in this case will one day be repudiated on two grounds."
"First, because it seeks to justify the denial of a basic human right to citizens and thereby perpetuates a vestige of slavery, and second, because the majority violates a basic tenant of appellate review by ignoring the facts as found by the trial court and substituting its own," she wrote.
As similar battles play out in other states, Democratic U.S. lawmakers led by Rep. Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts and Sen. Peter Welch of Vermont in December introduced legislation to end former felon disenfranchisement in federal elections and guarantee incarcerated people the right to vote.
Currently, only Maine, Vermont, and the District of Columbia allow all incarcerated people to vote behind bars.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular