The New York Times
The New York Times kept there focus on Senator Clinton and placed most of the emphasis on how important this primary win is for her survival in the race for the democratic nomination.
The Times next spoke of the importance of Indiana and North Carolina- the two following primaries. They predicted that Sen. Clinton would loose both Indiana and North Carolina and be pressured by high ranking members of the party to drop out of the campaign.
The report ended with a huge section dedicated to the amount of money spent by each candidate. It was said repeatedly that Sen. Obama outspent 3 to 1 in Pennsylvania- almost to the point where it seemed the story was writing in favor of Sen. Clinton.
The Times next spoke of the importance of Indiana and North Carolina- the two following primaries. They predicted that Sen. Clinton would loose both Indiana and North Carolina and be pressured by high ranking members of the party to drop out of the campaign.
The report ended with a huge section dedicated to the amount of money spent by each candidate. It was said repeatedly that Sen. Obama outspent 3 to 1 in Pennsylvania- almost to the point where it seemed the story was writing in favor of Sen. Clinton.
The Los Angles Times
The Los Angels Times concentrated primarily on three different issues of the Pennsylvania Primary: demographics, campaign spending, and negative advertising.
The article stated that the Pennsylvania demographic was strongly favorable towards Sen. Clinton. It emphasized how women made up 60% of the vote, the turn out was overwhelmingly white and that half the electorate came out from families earning $50,000 or less.
Like the two other publications, the LA Times focused on both candidates disparate attempts to win over last-second votes.
The Washington Post
The article stated that the Pennsylvania demographic was strongly favorable towards Sen. Clinton. It emphasized how women made up 60% of the vote, the turn out was overwhelmingly white and that half the electorate came out from families earning $50,000 or less.
Like the two other publications, the LA Times focused on both candidates disparate attempts to win over last-second votes.
The Washington Post
The Washington Post focused on Senator Clinton's Pennsylvania win. One of the advantages of publishing on the internet is that new stories can be posted as they unfold. Enough time had passed as a result of this being my last blog and the majority of precincts had been counted to announce Sen. Clinton as the victor.
In an attempted to gain momentum, the Clinton campaign made a number of statements boasting about the victory coming despite a large financial deficit in spending.
Sen. Obama countered by pointing out the margin of support Clinton had entering Pennsylvania, compared to the final day.
Like the Los Angels Times, the Post ended the story by examining the demographics of the voters and concluded that the state heavily favored Sen. Clinton.
In an attempted to gain momentum, the Clinton campaign made a number of statements boasting about the victory coming despite a large financial deficit in spending.
Sen. Obama countered by pointing out the margin of support Clinton had entering Pennsylvania, compared to the final day.
Like the Los Angels Times, the Post ended the story by examining the demographics of the voters and concluded that the state heavily favored Sen. Clinton.
No comments:
Post a Comment