The Mainstream Media is engaged in a massive vote suppression effort.

Their goal is to depress Republican turnout by claiming that Romney is “sure to lose.” Obama is so far ahead, they claim, because Americans liked what they heard from the Democrats at their convention … and didn’t buy Romney at the Republican convention.

They are selling Obama’s bounce in the polls as though it were permanent. Wrong, as Scott Rasmussen pointed out. Jay Cost put it even more bluntly, calling the MSM take a “phony narrative of a runaway Obama lead.”

Data suggests that even claiming the conventions were the cause of the Obama bounce may well be wrong.

These efforts can work, however, if we let them. In 2004, exit polls said an equal number of Republicans and Democrats turned out nationally. In 2008, Democrats led in turnout by 7% … because a lot of Republicans stayed home thinking “McCain’s a sure loser; why bother?” That’s what the MSM wants for 2012.

Read on for facts on why MSM is (duh) wrong. It’s a long read, so here’s the summary


  1. Obama led in polls because he spent more money on TV than Romney, not because Americans agreed with Democrats’ convention messages.
  2. Obama hopes to repeat his 2008 TV dominance – and get a 6% boost in votes from it. Hopes will be dashed. Hopey-changey fails again.
  3. Colorado polls match national polls for Obama, and his TV buys in Colorado were twice the size of Romney’s.
  4. The two campaigns have different TV strategies. Obama: cripple Romney early. Romney: save the cash for the final dash.
  5. Romney plus his allies will almost certainly have many tens of millions more to spend on fall TV than will Obama plus his allies.
  6. Neither Obama’s grassroots campaigning nor his huge attack on Romney from April to September has worked (at least so far).
  7. Once Obama runs out of TV bucks, his lead will evaporate … and Romney will win.

 You will note this analysis is NOT what MSM is telling you.

Why Obama Was Ahead in the Polls

Obama’s post-convention lead was TV ad driven, not the conventions. So suggests the Wesleyan Media Project. They see a national Obama ad lead of 40,000 to 18,000 Romney ads in the two weeks of the conventions.

All the fluff from the MSM about Obama’s convention bounce? One more proof of Sasha Issenberg’s theorem that reporters are so far below campaigns’ expertise levels that their reporting almost always misses the target. (Are reporters happier being thought intellectually challenged or in the tank for Obama?)

Beyond doubt, TV dominance shifts voters’ intentions, turnout and even election results in close states. Obama paid, massively, for TV ads to create a temporary shift in the polls – and then shilled the story that Americans rejected Romney and loved Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.