One characteristic of Presidential campaigns involves breaking the nation down to specific demographics to figure out where different chunks of voters will most likely swing in the voting booth. McCain could be said to resonate with military voters, Obama with African-Americans, Clinton with women, and so on. Polls and statistics are helpful and they give news reporters something to talk about, but during this election it has become absolutely ridiculous how many absurd demographics people are being broken down into.
A recent CNN post demonstrates this point very well. A survey was conducted to determine how drinking preferences relate to voting preferences. The post says,
A recent CNN post demonstrates this point very well. A survey was conducted to determine how drinking preferences relate to voting preferences. The post says,
"Beer drinkers appear more likely to vote for Sen. John McCain in November, while those who enjoy wine say they’re more likely to vote Democratic in the fall. Among registered voters who prefer beer to wine, McCain has a 53 percent-46 percent edge over Sen. Hillary Clinton while McCain winds up in a virtual tie with Sen. Barack Obama among beer drinkers."
I think it is safe to say the media has run out of political topics to discuss. Who in the world cares whether voters prefer wine or beer? Is McCain going to start doing keg stands during his speeches? Articles like this accomplish absolutely nothing, and there are a lot of them. I’m sick of it. I’m ready for this election to be over.
I think it is safe to say the media has run out of political topics to discuss. Who in the world cares whether voters prefer wine or beer? Is McCain going to start doing keg stands during his speeches? Articles like this accomplish absolutely nothing, and there are a lot of them. I’m sick of it. I’m ready for this election to be over.
3 comments:
That is an odd and totally useless statistic. And the margin isn't even enough to even matter. I find Canada's election system pretty intriquing...you're probably familiar, but the shortened time frame allows the media to focus on the real issues without having to stretch out coverage to include the dumb stuff our media outlets do.
I agree with Matt. This statistic is completely useless. It seemes to me that this election has gotten a little out of hand with these polls about identifying yourself with a candidate by your drink of choice or by what you buy at the grocery store. Obviously the media is fighting to find something to talk about rather thatn concentrating on the important issues.
I agree with you. It seems like in this election more than past elections, the press is trying to narrow people down into the tiniest boxes possible. And other people in the media spotlight are not really helping with this. It seems like if you fit into a demographic box, say African-American, and you dare to be against Obama, then there's something wrong with you. Same goes if you are a woman and don't like Hillary; it's the assumption that by disagreeing with the candidate in your "box," you're doing something that goes against everyone else in the box, too. And I think that -really- makes trying to break the boxes down to who drinks which alcoholic beverage even more ludicrous. Will we be brawling in the bars now?
"What?! You're a beer drinker and you don't like McCain?! HOW COULD YOU?!"
"Oh my gosh! You're a wine drinker and you don't like the democrats?!"
I think Cassie may have nailed it on the head when she said that "the media is fighting to find something to talk about rather than concentrating on the important issues."
Post a Comment