lies

oh what a tangled web we weave ...
Now that the election is over, I'm dipping my toes back into the news of the world. I can even listen to political news without throwing up.

As I do this, I'm reading the analysis of why Obama won and why Romney lost. One of the surface level explanations being tossed around is Hurricane Sandy. I'm sure that had a small bit to do with it, however, how many people were honestly sitting without power and thinking, "That's it! I'm not voting for Romney because of this!" I don't know. Maybe people are way more fickle than I think.

As the articles dig deeper and deeper into why Romney lost and Obama won, I keep reading how shellshocked Romney and his whole campaign were by his loss. This is true of the "fair and balanced" (tip: when you have to label yourself as such, you're not) folks over at Fox News, too. This article attributes that shellshock, in part, to the Romney campaign's insistence that polls were skewed to show Obama ahead, so they tweaked them. They basically didn't like the outcomes of the polls, so they came up with a reason why the polls were wrong and then crunched the numbers to show what they wanted. Does any of this sound familiar? It's the same denial and self-delusion that the Wall Street folks were displaying before the economy tanked. From that article:

Romney's defenders say he had plausible reasons to believe Obama's turnout would be lower; less charitable commentators say Romney and his aides were stuck in a conservative media echo chamber at odds with reality.

Again, to me this just mirrors the Fox News vs rest of the media saga. Fox News et. al. is always so insistent that the mainstream media is so liberal and skewing everything left. So it staffed itself with blowhards that come up with reasons why this election would be a landslide for Romney. They spout this so often, come up with numbers that support it (even if that's not reality), then they are completely shellshocked when reality shows otherwise.

Why do viewers of Fox News allow themselves to be lied to over and over? I totally get having a conservative view point on politics. I don't have one, but I can respect it. What I cannot respect is allowing yourself to be duped and lied to. The fact is, a liberal and a conservative can hear the same facts, the same information, and each will have a different viewpoint on it. What viewers of Fox News seem to want is for the original facts to be changed to support their viewpoint. For me, this is always a sign of a weak argument. If you have to skew the facts to strengthen your argument, then your argument isn't solid enough.

Some quotes from this article on the shock of the Romney loss:

Indeed, what was striking after Fox News called the race for Obama, at about 11:15 p.m., was how stunned so many of Romney’s supporters were.  Many said they were influenced by the prominent conservatives who predicted a big Romney win, and they fully expected Tuesday night to be a victory celebration.

and

“I am shocked, I am blown away,” said Joe Sweeney, of Milwaukee, Wisconsin.  “I thought I had a pretty good pulse on this stuff.  I thought there was a trend that was going on underground.” 

and

“It makes me wonder who my fellow citizens are,” said Marianne Doherty of Boston.  “I’ve got to be honest, I feel like I’ve lost touch with what the identity of America is right now.  I really do.”

Now, this article doesn't state that the people interviewed are Fox News viewers, but I know I would be shellshocked if that isn't their main news source (and I use the word news loosely).

In the end, it seems Fox News burned even itself with its lies. They all forgot they were skewing the polling numbers, so much so that when Romney lost, they were stunned their own lies didn't become truth.

In case you're wondering, I relish the Obama win more because I am so very happy to see Fox News so utterly devastated. And Karl Rove and Rush Limbaugh. I actually feel kind of bad for Romney and his supporters. It's a bad feeling to lose. But then again, would he have allowed the country to be run the same way? Replacing objective facts with skewed data to support his stance? I'm sure you can guess my answer.