If you read the mainstream media, Clinton won a decisive, double-digit victory tonight in Pennsylvania, giving her campaign a much needed boost for the
nomination.
Full results on msnbc show a 10-point margin for Clinton:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21229229
Same thing over at CNN:
http://www.cnn.com/
Only thing... IT'S NOT TRUE!!!
According to the PA elections site, it's not 55-45, but 54-46:
http://www.electionreturns.state.pa.us/
What's more, you can't chalk it up to the media not updating their totals. Look really carefully, and you'll see that the media is reporting fewer
votes for Obama than the PA secretary of state, and MORE votes for Clinton than the secretary of state! Where the hell did
those voters come from?
Spin from Clinton's camp I can understand. The way Clinton math works, as someone on Kos explained it, is this: 8.6% gets rounded up to 9, and 9 as we all
know gets rounded up to 10. And 10 points is double digits, and therefore a mandate.
But what I find most shameful is the media complicity in the Clinton spin. And no, this is not an "honest mistake." The media has a narrative for
this story. That narrative is that the Clinton campaign has gotten a psychological boost, and therefore gets to go on. It's a good narrative for them,
because they get to cover it for as long as it drags on. But that narrative needs a "double-digit" win in order to work, so they'll massage the
data to pull a 10-point win out of their asses if they have to. Truth be damned! Why let the facts get in the way of a perfectly good narrative?








