General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMSM: 286 EC Votes = Mandate for Bush .......332 EC Votes Not A Mandate for Obama
When Is a Mandate Not a Mandate?
Different standards for different elections--and parties
When it comes to explaining election results, there's no precise way to determine whether voters gave the winner a "mandate"--defined by Oxford as "the authority to carry out a policy, regarded as given by the electorate to a party or candidate that wins an election." That makes it interesting to see how media use the expression--and which presidents they think earned one.
286 electoral votes = a mandate.
In 2004, George W. Bush won 50.7 percent of the popular vote over Democrat John Kerry, and had a 286-251 edge in electoral votes.
As FAIR noted (Media Advisory, 11/5/04), many outlets proclaimed that to be a "mandate." "Clear Mandate Will Boost Bush's Authority, Reach," read a USA Today headline (11/4/04); NPR's Renee Montaigne said (11/3/04), "By any definition, I think you could call this a mandate."
snip
303 to 332 electoral votes = not a mandate.
On CBS Evening News (11/7/12), Bob Schieffer declared, "In the hard world of American politics, the president did not get a mandate yesterday."
On the NPR website (11/7/12), a headline was "For Obama, Vindication, But Not a Mandate." The Washington Post's Dan Balz (11/7/12) called it "an uncertain mandate, although Obama will attempt to claim one."
While USA Today declared Bush's 2004 victory a mandate, the front-page of the paper the day after the election bore the headline "A Nation Moving Further Apart."
CNN pundit Gloria Borger (11/7/12) put it this way: "So what kind of a mandate does he have? His mandate is to fix things. And I think that's about as far as it really goes."
And Time magazine's Joe Klein (11/7/12) declared that "the election was a mandate for moderation," adding:
As Washington Post columnist Kathleen Parker (11/7/12) put it, "If this election provided any mandate at all, it is that we set aside our special interests and work together before it's too late."
snip
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=4648
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it." - Upton Sinclair
amborin
(16,631 posts)RomneyLies
(3,333 posts)Look at the post under this one.
RomneyLies
(3,333 posts)when they were predicting that for Romney:
msongs
(67,421 posts)amborin
(16,631 posts)progressives also have to get organized and pressure Obama
pa28
(6,145 posts)The clear double standard and bias toward conservative viewpoints is the reason I just avoid corporate news now. Too aggravating.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)and rightwing pundits disguised as journalists who are now out in force attempting to claim that President Obama doesn't have a mandate (in order to weaken him) when each and every Rightwing pundit claimed a mandate for Romney should he win above and beyond 300 EC votes.
I guess it *is* true, that a black person has to work three times as hard for the same recognition because this fallacy permeates each and every corporate media bobble-heads' idiotic declarations hoping to convince the unwashed masses.
Sorry, corporate bobble-heads, but what's good for the White Republican is equally good for the Black Democrat.
amborin
(16,631 posts)madrchsod
(58,162 posts)the majority of people in the usa could care less about what they have to say.
although it seems as if an awful lot of people imbibe and parrot everything faux, rush, etc. say.....
vaberella
(24,634 posts)Last edited Sun Nov 11, 2012, 05:16 PM - Edit history (1)
Everyone else listed is to be expected.
amborin
(16,631 posts)bongbong
(5,436 posts)You don't think all those corporate donations to NPR come without strings, do you?
democrattotheend
(11,605 posts)Because the whole point of evaluating whether an election is a mandate is to determine whether the election served as validation of a candidate's principles by garnering popular support. Even if non-swing state voters don't get to determine the outcome of the election, our votes certainly count in determining whether a president won a mandate.
I think Obama won a mandate but not a sweeping mandate like he did in 2008. What is sad is that Bush cannot possibly be said to have won a mandate in 2000, yet he governed like he won in a landslide. Obama actually did win in a landslide in 2008 but governed as if someone had let him in by accident during his first couple years.
Ruby the Liberal
(26,219 posts)I would call that an iron clad mandate.
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)No matter what some old crusty white guy like Bob Schieffer says about it.
krkaufman
(13,435 posts)Here's an alternative graphic I threw together, highlighting the much larger electoral victories by Obama in BOTH his elections, versus the 2000/2004 results...
The media EITHER has to declare that they mischaracterized the Bush elections (putting aside... you know) or that Obama's 2008 mandate has been reinforced and reaffirmed by the voters. Well, they WOULD have to declare such, if there was a trace of integrity remaining....