Election Coverage

I find the media coverage of the election results to be discouraging.

I understand why people want to analyze when an election did not go as they expected or hoped. For example, President Obama seemed to believe the results were because not enough democrats got out to vote. Well that certainly is one way of looking at it. I disagree with his perception though, elections should be more than one party showing up in sufficient numbers to suppress the other.

A number of news sources pulled apart the election results very carefully. Classifying how people voted based on ethnicity, gender, region, age and more. They came to the conclusion that the campaigns were aimed at the wrong voters, and different strategies could have been used to woo the voters who actually showed up. I dislike this approach because it divides American’s into hundreds of niches, then seeks to tell the important niches what they want to hear. Elections should be about something other than catering to the right groups.

A final point of coverage absurdity was news stories discussing how this election will impact Hillary Clinton’s bid for the presidency in 2016. One story I saw proclaimed her to be the real winner in this year’s midterms. Another decried how disastrous it was for her. Both revealed the bias, that they were more interested in her presidential run than the races in the midterm elections.

All of these discussions are more interested in the manipulation of the voters rather than the will of the voters. Wasn’t the will of the voters, what elections were supposed to be about?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s