[PDMiller]

The ongoing debate in Washington over health care also splits the electorate. A narrow majority (53%) opposes the legislation being developed - while 43% favor it.

Since when is 10% a "narrow majority" on anything?

[infowarrior]

Since when is 10% a "narrow majority" on anything?

In Marxixst "journalist" argot 10% equals a "narrow majority" when it opposes statism. On the other hand that same 10% would be read as "a clear and convincing mandate" if it supported statism...

the infowarrior

[cpdiii]

Since when is 10% a "narrow majority" on anything?

The same paper said that the 7% win in the Presidential Election was a landslide and mandate. It all has to with the new math, 7% is far greater than 10% or so the Washington Post Says.

[cauzneffct]

Its a narrow majority because its 53%, which is only 3% above the bare majority, which is narrow. The key word is majority. For example, if it was 49% against, 39% for, that’s not a majority, even though its 10% more opposed to for.

[luvbach1]

Of course 10@ is a landslide.

[WayneS]

Correct.

Obama beat McCain by about 4% of the popular vote and they called it a “mandate”, which, I’m led to believe, is just shy of a “landslide”.