The wave of Republican victories in yesterday's election have the New York Times, particularly its "Upshot" team of liberal-leaning opinion disguised as news, looking pretty foolish.
October 30: "Why Polls Tend to Undercount Democrats": "As Election Day nears, Democratic hopes increasingly hinge on the possibility that the polls will simply prove wrong. But that possibility is not far-fetched. The polls have generally underestimated Democrats in recent years, and there are reasons to think it could happen again."
October 31: "Early Voting Numbers Look Good For Democrats": "The turnout among black voters is particularly encouraging for Democrats...The figures are still good news for Democrats. The early-voting surge gives them a chance to pull off upsets in crucial states."
November 4: "Why the Time Is Now to Predict (Loudly) a Democratic Victory." This last piece, unlike the other two, seems to be at least partly intentionally humorous. But still.
Meanwhile, today's Times front page lead headline is "G.O.P. Takes Senate/Riding Voter Anger to Take Control of Congress." Yesterday's Wall Street Journal front page had "Sullen Voters Set to Deliver Another Demand for Change." Why is it that when Americans vote for Republicans the press describes them as angry or sullen? It seems to me that if anyone seems angry or sullen here it is not the voters, but the journalists.