The latest NBC/WSJ polling from June 6-9 has come in with some positive news for Barack Obama.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/...
What is especially interesting is what this means for Hillary Clinton on the ticket.
MSNBC's coverage of the Clinton primary campaign has covered the entire spectrum.
From Chris Matthews's hostility toward the Clintons becoming chastened (and downright obnoxious) plaudits and finally snapping back to jaw-dropping disbelief.
And Keith Olbermann's desperate denial turning to righteous indignation.
And David Shuster just being pissed off.
And Tucker Carlson and Joe Scarborough valiantly crusading on her behalf.
And Dan Abrams.
Oh, Dan Abrams....
And through all of this viewers have had their various opinions. Clearly MSNBC, as a network, does not cotton to any one particular candidate. That said, one would think that hard numbers would at least give us some concept of an objective reality. One would think.
I refer to one statistic in particular...
If Hillary Clinton is made VP, how would it affect your vote for Barack Obama?
More Likely: 22%
Less Likely: 21%
No Difference: 55%
(MoE +/-3.1%)
According to NBC's own polling, Hillary Clinton adds nothing to the ticket. Now, one would think Dan Abrams's eagerness to put her on the ticket...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/...
ABRAMS: ...One question hovers over the campaign—after Hillary Clinton unambiguously endorsed Obama on Saturday, will he be able to win over her 18 million—many of them very passionate Clinton voters?
...
It‘s so condescending to Clinton supporters to say—don‘t worry, they‘re going to change their minds, they‘re just very upset right now.
...would have subsided somewhat at facts provided by his own network. Of course, that would require him to refer even once in his entire broadcast on June 11th to those numbers. Instead, he chose to focus on this:
In a possible general election contest:
Obama: 47%
McCain: 41%
Obama/Clinton: 51%
McCain/Romney: 42%
Mitt Romney has not been in the news in months. Mitt Romney came in third place. This is intellectual dishonesty to say the least. But I assumed that MSNBC had developed a narrative for the day that they could not stray from and that the following day they would approach their polling data more directly.
Color me surprised when Andrea Mitchell discusses Hillary Clinton as the best possible candidate on the ticket without even referring to their own polling data showing she adds nothing to it.
True, the poll appeared on the screen independently of the words actually coming out of Andrea Mitchell's mouth for almost a full second and the marquis underneath kept the words "22% more likely to vote with Hillary Clinton on the ticket" through the entire segment, but all Andrea Mitchell could talk about was the Mitt Romney matchup.
It seems like the media is going to force a Clinton onto the ticket no matter what.