Look at this LA Times article yesterday, overstating the opposition's election chances in Venezuela

Yesterday I posted a thread showing predictions by different pollsters in connection to today's Venezuelan legislative elections. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9199133

In short, the most historically accurate pollsters have Chavez' party winning by 8% and 5%, while an even an opposition pollster (Datanalisis) has Chavez' party winning by 4%. On the other hand, the extremely inaccurate pollsters (Hinterlaces and Keller y Asociados) have the opposition beating Chavez' party.


But this is all LA Times had to say about the polls in Venezuela:



That's it. No mention whatsoever of the pollsters who show Chavez' party ahead. No reference to the atrocious predictive history of pollsters who claim that opposition will win. Do you guys think this is serious journalism or biased BS?

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/sep/25/world/la-fg-venezuela-elections-20100925

You can be sure that no matter what the results this time, the LA Times and its ilk will cover it as "historic gains" for the opposition. That's the best case scenario. (Claims of fraud for anything other than an opposition victory, which ain't happening, are on the likely side.)

that it doesn't matter what the polls say.

Chavez and his party will win handily regardless.