Why did the media get it so wrong?

Hi there, Chloe here sitting in for Ros today. 

Yesterday we seemed to be bombarded with predictions that Barack Obama would secure a narrow victory in the New Hampshire Primary, a prediction we made ourselves here at the BBC. People were writing off Hillary Clinton and some commentators even questioned whether she would drop out of the running altogether. Seems ridiculous now in hindsight. So how was it called so wrong?

Are the media both inside and outside the US in love with Barack Obama? Did the pollsters and commentators speak to the wrong people? Did voters simply say one thing in public but in the privacy of their voting booth changing their minds? Or is it an impossible job to predict winners in an election that is the most wide open for 50 years?

Polls apart

Picking up from Karnie’s post i am struck by how badly everyone seemed to have got it wrong in New Hampshire. And before i carry on, the BBC did too- our opening line on our flagship bulletin last night was something like “Barrack Obama is just hours away from a convincing win over Hillary Clinton” and he wasn’t.

A Surprise win in New Hampshire and a curious debate on Revirgination…

Hi everybody it’s Karnie… 

Hillary Clinton wins New Hampshire’s primary..beating rival Barack Obama.  This makes the race for the US presidency “exciting and unpredictable”….On Monday she appeared close to tears as she talked about what public service meant to her.

She’s never publicly shown emotion to this extent before.  Has this made her more humane and personable?  Do tears work?  It certainly seemed to have an impact in New Hampshire..OR was this just simply, a rebellion by women voters against the media?