stupid media
Yahoo reports that 'Obama wins Georgia primary' but fails to report what the estimated proportion of votes he received is.
"The 87 delegates at stake in Georgia's primary were divided between the two candidates in rough proportion to the votes."
Given that statement, wouldn't the margin of victory be somewhat more important to report than who 'won' or 'lost' that state? Am I missing something here, or is the media really this stupid (or thinks we're this stupid)?
"The 87 delegates at stake in Georgia's primary were divided between the two candidates in rough proportion to the votes."
Given that statement, wouldn't the margin of victory be somewhat more important to report than who 'won' or 'lost' that state? Am I missing something here, or is the media really this stupid (or thinks we're this stupid)?