US presidential race - Voters, not polls, decide elections

In THE past week Senator Barrack Obama of Illinois had momentum on his side in the US presidential primaries following his victory in the Iowa caucuses.

Public opinion polls gave him a further boost earlier this week, so much so that Senator Hillary Clintonappeared to show some emotional frailty on the eve of Tuesday’s New Hampshire primary.

Even the early exit polls seemed to indicate that Mr Obama was on course for another victory. A week earlier this would have been categorised as a stunning development. Ms Clinton was being virtually written off by all the media pundits, who were reduced to suggesting that it would be a moral victory if she finished a close second.

Ultimately, she won the election by 2%. This was not a resounding or overwhelming victory, but it did seem decisive against the backdrop of the dire predictions that gave her essentially no chance.

How did the media get it so wrong? Some are already arguing that there was a change of opinion in the final hours of the campaign after she showed signs of emotion. She had been depicted as a cold, calculating politician — the new model of the Iron Lady. Suddenly this cardboard image was replaced by one of humanity.

While politicians and the public frequently overestimate the influence of the media, the events of this week were a magnificent reminder to us all that it is not the polls or the pundits that count in a democracy, but the people who exercise their rights at the ballot box.