Tuesday, February 5, 2008

SUPER TUESDAY!

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/05/intl.supertuesdayvote/index.html
This is the article I read. This article sums up where every candidate stands in the election. They share who is the lead, who isn't, and who can hope to win. CNN shares their opinion a lot, and when you read it you just assume it to be fact. EX: "While last-minute polls on the Republican race indicated Romney has gained ground against McCain in California, Romney was expected to split races with Huckabee in the South, Republican strategist John Feehery said." they put in the words "expected" and "indicated". It never actually says that it happened. They try and plan out the whole election, and predict the outcome, when really it could go ten different ways. They don’t share anything bad about any particular candidate directly, but they use their own quotes to show their character, or the character the media wants to give them. They are not out to promote one side, but the whole election. They say good things about everybody. The only thing they don’t have that isn’t exactly positive is when they share a bit about Huckabee not be able to hang on, and they put in a quote about how he says he is going to stay in as long as he can, and never back out. This quote shows his determination, but it also sort of shows his losing position. They also have a bit about Romney; he said he was going to go all the way to the white house. It showed some determination, but also some overconfidence. The article also has videos you can watch to see the entire candidates vote on Super Tuesday.

1 comments:

Mrs. Schmitz said...

What do you feel they are trying to accomplish in this article? Just give an overall picture?
I sometimes find in elections that what the media says and "projects" is too influential in some peoples' decisions to go out and vote. If their candidate is expected to win, or lose, they may feel like, "what's the point?"