TV Viewers: 37M for Palin. 38M for Obama.

37 million viewers watched Palin on Wednesday, compared to 38 million for Barack Obama. This is incredible in light of the fact that only six major networks covered the speech compared to 10 on Obama’s night.


Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to LinkedIn Post to Reddit

Posted by at 02:05 | Posted in Measure 37 | 23 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • Jerry

    The drive-by media is in the tank for Obama. Her successful speech is killing them. Make no mistake – they are not happy.

  • Rupert in Springfield

    Talking points for Dems:

    Yeah, well there you go, she is the hottest thing in the Republican party and yet Obama still beat her by 1 million.

    Six networks vs. Ten? Oh come on, you are saying that is media bias? Yeah right, slanted towards Palin. The networks carried it on less channels so there would be less surfing between the channels so people would see more of the speech, less time skipping around. The media is totally in the tank for McCain and yet Obama beat her by 1 million, read em and weep Neo-cons.

    And the winner is……..

    1 Million, hmm, why does that figure sound so familiar? Of yeah, that’s right, that’s how many Iraqi’s get killed every second in Bush’s senseless war.

    • Jay Bozievich

      Rupert, You are in the zone today! The Bill/Hill dialogue comment under the A Star is Born post had me rolling, now this.

      • Rupert in Springfield

        Thanks, glad to give you a chuckle.

    • Abraxia

      Bad news. Go take a look at Drudge. She beat him. 40 mil.

      I moon in your general direction.

      • Rupert in Springfield

        Good lord, catch a clue.

        • Abraxia

          I apologize. I didn’t catch the sarcasm. I actually really am sorry. *gulp*


    • eddie

      By all accounts, McCain’s speech had 500k over Obama’s in viewers. So, can we start snarking with: “Yeah, well there you go, he is the hottest thing in the Democrat party and yet McCain still beat him by half a million.”

  • Chris McMullen

    Anyone who believes there’s no liberal bias in the TV Networks is as delusional as Johny Edwards expecting a Husband of the Year award….

  • Alan

    John edwards was hammered just like everyone else.

  • Gullyborg

    I think even more will have watched McCain. The elite pundits didn’t have much good to say about McCain’s speech. Shows how little they understand about real people. McCain will have appeared before over 40 million viewers, most of whom will be in awe of his life history and his positive vision for reforming government.

    I am thinking 1984 level election results here…

    • dean

      Gully…are you taking bets and giving odds?

      • Gullyborg

        well, the ratings are in and McCain broke 40 million viewers, so, yeah.

  • bh

    You mention that only six major networks covered McCain, but ten covered Obama. Exactly which four “major” networks didn’t cover the McCain speech? After NBC, CBS, ABC, Fox, MSNBC, and CNN, my list of “major networks” gets a little thin. I know those six all were there for the McCain and Palin speeches. Can you please fill in the remaining four missing from my list?

    • dean

      bh…you also should mention PBS. THey covered both speeches without commercial break.

      Gully…okay. How do I nail down a bet with you? You say you are “thinking 1984 level election results here.” Reagan carried 49 of 50 states, and won the popular vote by about 17 million. Mondale and Ferraro (the last female VP candidate ironically) won only Minnesota and Washington DC.

      I presume you are saying McCain is going to win by a similar margin. I’ll bet you this. If McCain wins by a blowout, lets say a mere 150 electoral votes and 10 million popular, I’ll buy you a 6 of PBR, in honor of the blue collar image your party insists on representing, even while it mainly looks out for the rich. If he falls short of this mark, you buy me a pint of the silky textured Portland micro brew ale of my choice.

      Are you in? Or do you want to reconsider your prediction? I can’t get Rupert to make even a straight up bet with me on this election.

      • Harry

        Nice spin, dean. 10 million voters? 150 electorals? Wow.

        Up until last week, McCain was going to loose bigger than Jimmy Carter, any win, no matter how slight, was considered statistically impossible for McSame (heh, McSame, yeah, right with Palin on the ticket. Again, I say, Heh!).

        I say that it’ll be a tough fight, and no odds to either side.

        If McCain/Palin win by even 1 electoral, and loose the popular vote ala Gore, the Dems/Progressives/Liberals will go so far off the deep end, there will be mass suicides in LiberalVilles (urbania) across both coastal elite cities everywhere.

        And just cause race car moms, and hockey moms like race cars and hockey, don’t mean that they love PBR and don’t also love microbrews! Beer is beer and white wine is white wine!

        • dean

          Harry…my bet offer was calling Gully’s bluff. He is the one who brought up the 84 landslide. Personally I think he would be a fool to take the bet, but a fool and his beer money are soon parted.

          My PBR vs Micro was an attempt at illustrating the faux populism of the Republican party, now personified by that Thrillah from Wassila…Wailin Palin. I fully agree that an R is as likely, maybe more so, to spend the extra for a Micro simply because Rs have more money than Ds, in part because they skewed tax cuts to the already wealthy, meaning them. That is a statistical fact, though somehow we Ds end up being the elitists. I’m still puzzling that one out.

          I don’t think there will be any mass suicides or Canadian migrations in the scenario you paint, simply because this time around the Democrats are almost certain to have expanded their majorities in the House and Senate, regardless of the presidential race. This means a McCain administration, with Joe Leiberman, not Sarah Palin at his side, will be more like the Y2K McCain and will cut deals all over the place. The Bush tax cuts for example, are time limited. All Congress has to do is let them go bye bye, and McCain can’t and won’t stop them. He will shrug. On global warming they are nearly in synch. The Iraqis are giving us the boot regardless of who wins. And so forth. There will be battles, particularly over the suprme court, but a McCain administration with a strong democratic congress is not going to be a return to the Reagan years, I can assure you.

          Oh…and imagine the debate over earmarks. Alaska is the most earmarked state in the nation, and Palin has played the game. Take away Alaska’s earmarks and the place will decline into poverty. They may even have to levy an actual tax on someone other than the oil companies. I’m eager to see how they sort that one out.

        • bh

          Harry … It’s always nice to lower expectations. Much easier to create a sense of momentum. And, no doubt, the Republicans have gained in the past week … a sense of unity, if nothing else.

          However, you’re wrong about a drastic change in the polling numbers or likely outcome. Even a week ago, showed that Obama didn’t have enough likely electoral votes to win, and that the race was, in fact, fairly uncertain. Their more recent numbers are actually more positive, though we won’t know the real effect of the goings-on of the past two weeks until at least of couple of weeks down the road. (It takes a while to do more accurate polling.)

          The overnight tracking polls, which showed McCain about four points behind two weeks ago, show him about six points down now. (Of course, these don’t mean much; we don’t have one national election, we have 51 separate elections (50 states + D.C.).)

      • Gullyborg

        I prefer the Oregon microbrews. Now, are you going to be brave enough to wager purely on who wins the election, or are you going to insist on a “point spread”? How about this spread:

        McCain/Palin receive a clear majority of the popular vote, and win at least 40 states.

        If I am right, you can deliver to my home a growler of Jeremiah Red Ale from the BJs Brewery of your choice. If I am wrong, I will deliver and equivalent dollar amount of the product of your choice to your home, assuming you are in either Portland, Eugene, or somewhere in between. Naturally, if you are farther away than that, we can consider other arrangements.

        • dean

          Gully…ok. I’ll take that bet. How do you want to define “clear majority” of the popular vote? 10%? 8%?

          40 states to McCain-Palin, and an 8% popular margin OK? I’ll even cut you a break here and give you an either or. If McCain wins EITHER 40 states OR an 8% margin, you get your beer.

          You are totally on. I’ll even accept payment the same Jeremiah Red to make it easy. But….how much is a “growler?” Should I be working up a thirst?

          I live in the Portland area. A fixer-upper Damascus farm.

          • Gullyborg

            A clear majority means greater than 50%. No plurality. No hanging chads. No recounts. Over half. Clearly.

            So you want to go with clear majority OR 40 states?

            I accept that.

          • Gullyborg

            oh and a growler is one of those glass jugs that holds like a gallon or something. they ran around $10 last time I checked (plus deposit).

  • John in Oregon

    I just saw an update. The AP reports that, counting PBS, over 40 million Americans watched Sarah Palin on television last night.

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)