Survey: Media Coverage Of Palin Too Tough?

A new survey conducted by the Pew Research Center shows that 60 percent of Americans believe that the media's treatment of John McCain and Barack Obama has been fair. And 66 percent say the coverage of Joe Biden has been fair as well. But when it comes to Sarah Palin, 38 percent say the coverage has been too tough. An equal 38 percent say it's been fair and 21 percent say the media has been too easy on the Alaska governor.

Republicans are more likely to think Palin has been treated unfairly (68 percent) and Democrats less likely to agree (18 percent). But 41 percent of independents say they think the press has been too tough on her. Opinions of both vice presidential nominees changed after their only televised debate, with both candidates increasing their favorability ratings afterwards. For all those results and more, check out the full survey here.

[kopana]

Just for the record, Palin does not support pro choice for a woman who has been criminally raped, or has had a criminal act committed against her like incest. the bottom line is this is enslavement of a young women body...."you cannot kill babies"...but then you can allow a innocent child who is unwanted, and unloved to suffer through child abuse, and neglect when the young mother cannot afford or is mentally not able to raise a child...Oh please..stop being so hypocritical...most people like you who do not support pro choice also do not support planned parenthood..so young women can have children when the are emotionally and financially able so every child can be brought up in loving home. you do not support a women a pro choice but you will allow a young baby in alot of cases to have their emotional and physical development be killed...Oh please... save your moral judgement for yourself and let others decide what is right for them...

Vote smarter, Vote OBAMA/BIDEN 08

[ipublius]

How can the media be too tough on the Republican? She never talks to reporter. She said she wouldn''t follow the debate format and answer the questions. She investigates herself when there is a question and she is always innocent. She''s only a "stuffed skirt" she can talk to Hannity all day long but the truth has found her out.

If you can''t take the heat, get out of the kitchen. Remember, this ain''t beanbag. It matters that what you say is a falsehood, prevaracation or a lie. We are not all drinking the Kool-Aid that is being served by the Oxycoton King!!

[kopana]

I do not think that the media is too tough on Palin, quite the opposite...This women is unfit to be the VP and just a joke to be President of this great country. Be fair..you know that the media hounded the Clintons too death...and to let an ultra extreme rightest in the White House absurd. Mc Cain needs to do the honorable thing and let his mistake of picking Palin go for his own reputation. HIstory is always watching and recording....

[julez41]

It would be nice if McCain/Palin would have said ANYTHING to those in the crowds who shouted out to kill Obama. The fact that they didn''t speaks not only to their campaign ethics but also to their judgment. Is that really who you want in the oval office? Someone who thinks racial slurs and calling for the death of the opponent is perfectly acceptable? These are not the kind of people who should be running the country.

[cozmot]

Patsy_Owens, the government does not just "now" control the Treasury Department. It always been part of the government. Since 1789.

I too am angry with Bush and the Congress for being asleep at the wheel while this crisis was brewing, but people miss the mark when they claim that government takeovers and bailouts of financial firms is socialism. If it were true, then these institutions would be owned and operated for the public interest. They are not. Is every American a "shareholder" in these corporations? No. If any of these institutions become profitable again, will the profits be shared with every American by going into the U.S. Treasury? No.

What this is is good old patronage. All of these financial institutions got the deregulation they fought so hard for so that they could freely operate in the markets. But when things went south, there they were at the public trough. They got it both ways.

This would not have transpired this way under a socialist system.

[harbinger09]

Puhleese--how can the media be hard on a no show? Then in the interviews she does give--she is shown up to be an airhead?

Finally, she gets to debate and does not even stay on topic--but shows she''s good at acting and reading a script. Would a male candidate acting like that who winks at the audience still be in the running--or run out of town?

You want to see a harsh critic of Palin and the American people see this:


http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2008/oct/03/sarah.palin.debate.feminism

This is pretty much how our election/debates are resonating all over Europe.

[cozmot]

Patsy_Owens, the government does not just "now" control the Treasury Department. It always been part of the government. Since 1789.

I too am angry with Bush and the Congress for being asleep at the wheel while this crisis was brewing, but people miss the mark when they claim that government takeovers and bailouts of financial firms is socialism. If it were true, then these institutions would be owned and operated for the public interest. They are not. Is every American a "shareholder" in these corporations? No. If any of these institutions become profitable again, will the profits be shared with every American by going into the U.S. Treasury? No.

What this is is good old patronage. All of these financial institutions got the deregulation they fought so hard for so that they could freely operate in the markets. But when things went south, there they were at the public trough. They got it both ways.

This would not have transpired this way under a socialist system.

[cozmot]

Patsy_Owens, the government does not just "now" control the Treasury Department. It always been part of the government. Since 1789.

I too am angry with Bush and the Congress for being asleep at the wheel while this crisis was brewing, but people miss the mark when they claim that government takeovers and bailouts of financial firms is socialism. If it were true, then these institutions would be owned and operated for the public interest. They are not. Is every American a "shareholder" in these corporations? No. If any of these institutions become profitable again, will the profits be shared with every American by going into the U.S. Treasury? No.

What this is is good old patronage. All of these financial institutions got the deregulation they fought so hard for so that they could freely operate in the markets. But when things went south, there they were at the public trough. They got it both ways.

This would not have transpired this way under a socialist system.

[cozmot]

Patsy_Owens, the government does not just "now" control the Treasury Department. It always been part of the government. Since 1789.

I too am angry with Bush and the Congress for being asleep at the wheel while this crisis was brewing, but people miss the mark when they claim that government takeovers and bailouts of financial firms is socialism. If it were true, then these institutions would be owned and operated for the public interest. They are not. Is every American a "shareholder" in these corporations? No. If any of these institutions become profitable again, will the profits be shared with every American by going into the U.S. Treasury? No.

What this is is good old patronage. All of these financial institutions got the deregulation they fought so hard for so that they could freely operate in the markets. But when things went south, there they were at the public trough. They got it both ways.

This would not have transpired this way under a socialist system.

[cozmot]

Patsy_Owens, the government does not just "now" control the Treasury Department. It always been part of the government. Since 1789.

I too am angry with Bush and the Congress for being asleep at the wheel while this crisis was brewing, but people miss the mark when they claim that government takeovers and bailouts of financial firms is socialism. If it were true, then these institutions would be owned and operated for the public interest. They are not. Is every American a "shareholder" in these corporations? No. If any of these institutions become profitable again, will the profits be shared with every American by going into the U.S. Treasury? No.

What this is is good old patronage. All of these financial institutions got the deregulation they fought so hard for so that they could freely operate in the markets. But when things went south, there they were at the public trough. They got it both ways.

This would not have transpired this way under a socialist system.