Say what you will about CNN but . . .

[fleur-de-lisa]

their election coverage is amazing. I just went to their website to check the results of the presidential race in Florida (they haven't called it yet, still processing results) . . . so much data, and in very easy to read graphics! Check out this website . . .


http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/results/state/FL

[jenw2]

1. But they claimed there was no gender gap

Their coverage is as biased and wrong as ever.

[fleur-de-lisa]

2. Who cares?

The election is over, we won, and CNN's post-election results page is freaking awesome!

[libdem4life]

5. Just like a Liberal ... move on, it's another day. :) Thanks for the tip.

[fleur-de-lisa]

7. I'm too happy today to let anyone get to me!

Yes, let's move on!

[marezdotes]

8. I don't have cable so I watched CNN since for the life of me

I couldn't figure out how to watch MSNBC live. I also thought it was very good.

[tweeternik]

3. Agreed! n/t

[sadbear]

4. But how'd they get everyone to watch in the first place?

Their ratings would have been shit if people believed the actual poll results.

[fleur-de-lisa]

6. Yes, their pre-election coverage was crap . . .

and their polls sucked. But this website is great!

[Lasher]

9. I couldn't agree more

And they didn't shut down their front page on the most important political day in four years.

[brush]

10. I don't know about that

Satellite Radio was way ahead of CNN TV in their projections. My wife and I traveled across Las Vegas to a watch party and listened to the "Talk Left" station on Sirius and by the time we got to the party they were projecting that the president had 243 electoral votes versus Romney's 183. When we got in the party at 6:45 pm they had CNN on (ugh) because they "wanted real, straight, unbiased reporting." I thought to myself at the time that these folks were living in the past when CNN was still owned by Ted Turner and Bernard Shaw was still the anchor. Anyway, their projections were so far behind the radio. They had Romney at 72 electoral votes and the President at 62. And those figures stayed the same for a long time as they drew out their telecast to keep the suspense going I guess. I mentioned to the host and a few people what the radio had reported and to maybe change the channel to MCNBC but to no avail until later in the evening when a TV in the another room was switched to MSNBC. Funny they were also still behind the radio but better than CNN. MSNBC did call the election for the President way before CNN did though at about 8:20 PM. We all started cheering in the one room and rushed to tell the stubborn CNN watchers what they were missing. And CNN didn't declare the President the winner for another few minutes. Even FOX beat them by a couple of minutes. So, as we all know here at DU, CNN is wack.

[fleur-de-lisa]

12. My post was not about projections . . .

it was about CNN's post election website . . .

"CNN's post-election results page is freaking awesome"

[brush]

13. Okay . . .

. . . but they're TV coverage, which most people mean when they criticize CNN, was late. And even beaten by FOX in declaring the President the winner.

[EmeraldCityGrl]

11. Lot's of CNN cheerleader and apologist posts lately. n/t