Why, To The Mainstream Media, Does Hillary's 9.4 Victory Margin Equal "Double Digits"?

by Steve Brant |4/23/08

The official results for last night's debate as of 12 noon Eastern time are:

Hillary Clinton - 1,258,278 (54.7 percent)
Barack Obama - 1,042,573 (45.3 percent)

99 percent of all votes have been counted.

When you subtract 45.3 from 54.7 you get 9.4.

The last time I checked my use of statistical analysis, 9.4 isn't 10. It's not "double digits". To call something "double digits", a number has to be at least a little bit more than half way beyond "9" heading for "10".

Senator Clinton's margin of victory fell below that halfway point.

So, why is the mainstream media reporting that Hillary won by "double digits"? Even the AP is using that expression. Why?

Statistically speaking, she really won by 9 points.

Everyone knows that "double digits" is a psychological breakthrough point. "Double digits" is short hand for "big".

Hillary won last night. I respect that. But I am as concerned about accuracy in media reporting as I am in about other issues related to the health of our democracy. I'll write more about larger election integrity issues in the future. But for now, I just want to mainstream media to prove that it knows how to count.

9.4 does not equal "double digits".

Those are the facts.

Please, mainstream media, stop playing around with the psychological aspects of this race. Even though I'm sure it's fun and feels cool to say "double digits", there is way too much at stake for you to be doing that.

Please, mainstream media, prove that you know how to count... prove that you know the difference between facts and emotions.

And if you can't do that, then get out of the game. Because you are hurting America.