WSJ’s Jonathan Weisman Pens False Hit Piece On Electoral Impact Of ‘Loyalty To Obama’

[ProSense]

Think Progress: WSJ’s Jonathan Weisman Pens False Hit Piece On Electoral Impact Of ‘Loyalty To Obama’

<...>

In fact, one of the entries in Weisman’s chart — Rep. Dina Titus (D-NV) — is shown as supporting all of Obama’s agenda and leading in her re-election campaign in a politically contested, economically devastated district:



Even Weisman’s own cherry-picked data refutes the premise of his article. The reality is that there’s just no apparent statistical correlation between these four votes and the re-election chances of Democrats in tough districts. The dominant factor affecting this mid-term election is the stagnant economy, which Republicans correctly calculated would hurt the majority party more than the minority, and thus obstructed a stronger recovery package, a stronger Wall Street reform package, stronger health care legislation, clean energy jobs, ending tax cuts on the rich, closing corporate loopholes, and a host of other policies which would have created more jobs faster.

<...>

These GOP shills are spinning so much that they're confusing themselves.

[JuniperLea]

1. Most of their followers don't get past the headlines anyway...

You can tell by the way they all talk in headlines.

Why am I cursed? Why must I always think of lyrics???




Now you’re talking in headlines
Up to the minute and free
Stop press, hold the front page
Up as a mirror
Are you reading me?
Watch you walking in waltz time
A jigsaw puzzle in tune
Or are you faking a straight line
To suit yourself too soon
Rather nouveau than never
Contemporary ideal
Some natural kind of poet might slow it
But she sells more my speed


Nine ‘til five
The Daily Grind
Made-up lies
Make up my mind
Same machine consuming you
Consuming me…

[ProSense]

4. Calling out RW distortions is no longer popular. n/t

[FBaggins]

2. I don't think TP is reading that right.

Of the five selected examples of democrats who have supported three or more of the four cherry-picked issues... every one of them is endangered. I'm sure that many look at the four-point lead and assume it's good news, but I assure you that Titus is worried. This one is a pure 50/50 tossup.

The better rebuttal to the argument is that there are dozens of House races that could be used here. Some who opposed many of those measures yet are trailing... and MANY who supported them who are leading comfortably.

[ProSense]

3. They're reading it fine.

The chart is from Weisman's piece. It's a big oops to show a chart that refutes his theory.

Also, the claim isn't based on just the chart. Think Progress:

The problem is that Weisman’s claim relies on misleadingly cherry-picked data. As Weisman points out, there are Obama supporters in conservative districts that are expected to lose — Murphy, Rep. Tom Perriello (D-VA), Rep. Steve Driehaus (D-OH), and Rep. Betsy Markey (D-CO). But there are also Democrats in conservative districts who supported all of Obama’s top priorities that are expected to win — such as Rep. Phil Hare (D-IL), Rep. Zack Space (D-OH), Rep. Gary Peters (D-MI), and Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ).

[FBaggins]

5. My point is that it doesn't refute his theory.

There are districts that do, but this isn't one of them.