‘Embarrassing defeat for Sarah Palin will happen at any moment (fingers crossed)’
From Alexandra Gutierrez at Slate, posted on August 23 at 5:54 PM:
On Tuesday, in her home state, Sarah Palin’s favorite will probably get trounced. Joe Miller is widely expected to lose by a large margin to incumbent Sen. Lisa Murkowski in the Republican primary—an embarrassing defeat for the former governor, who has endorsed Miller, but also to Miller’s other major backer, the Tea Party Express.
From a no-doubt-bewildered Becky Bohrer at the Associated Press, just minutes ago:
Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski trailed her lesser-known conservative opponent Tuesday in a surprisingly tight race that was seen as a test of the political power of Sarah Palin and the tea party movement.
Joe Miller held a nearly 2,900-vote lead with two-thirds of precincts reporting as he looked to pull off one of the biggest political upsets of the year. Miller had 51.7 percent of the vote, compared with 48.2 percent for Murkowski.
Note to self: No matter what you think you know about an upcoming election and how much you want one candidate or the other to lose, avoid making factual statements about “embarrassing defeats” until people actually start voting. At least the Chicago Tribune had the excuse of a typesetters’ strike when they ran with “DEWEY DEFEATS TRUMAN.”
It remains to be seen whether Miller will win, but Ace nailed it on this dumb Slate piece:
This was an article written to describe what the author wished to happen, and what the intended audience joined him [sic] in wishing with all their hearts would happen…
I don’t even think it’s spin. Spin is when you know you’re lying. These guys aren’t lying.
They’re wish-casting. They are not telling you any sort of objective reasonable assessment of likelihood; they are just telling you what their shriveled black hearts wish would happen.
Yep. It’s one thing to say, “Miller is not expected to win.” It’s another to say, “Miller is not expected to win, and it will be an embarrassing defeat for Sarah Palin because I don’t like her.” But then, according to her Twitter bio, Gutierrez is a “Grizzly woman not mama grizzly.” I guess that’s supposed to indicate her impartiality.
Of course, it’s only Slate.
P.S. “When Joe Miller loses the primary today, hardly anyone in Alaska will be surprised that Palin’s chosen candidate did poorly.” Guess we’ll see what the new definition of “poorly” is.
P.P.S. Miller edges closer to defeating Murkowski in Alaska, and credits Palin for success.
P.P.P.S. Looks like somebody still hasn’t learned the difference between reporting and wishing. Maybe “everyone got this one wrong,” as claimed by Dave Weigel — oh, sorry, just “Weigel” — but almost everyone could control their drooling.
P.P.P.P.S. Question for Weigel. I’ve been pointed to this “Yeas & Nays” item from the Washington Examiner last June 15:
Conservative movement blogger David Weigel was spotted dancing by himself to swing music and 1980s jams at Megan McArdle and Peter Suderman’s wedding reception last weekend. McArdle is the business and economics editor for The Atlantic and Suderman is the associate editor at Reason magazine…
Weigel told Yeas & Nays he danced alone because his girlfriend, Alexandra Gutierrez, couldn’t attend. She recently accepted an offer to work at a radio station in Alaska.
Is this the same Alex Gutierrez you’re defending now? If so, I’m not blaming you, but it seems like a relevant detail to disclose.