Why do the "media" call losers "winners"?

Letter to the Editor, Reader Weekly, 2012-05-17 (not published online)

Jim Hightower's comment about Newt Gingrich's "repeated humiliation at the polls" ("A sham for Wal-Mart's Scam: Newt's denouement", Reader Weekly, May 10), reminded me that even his one "victory" was a humiliation.  Unfortunately, in the horse race mentality of election reporting, few noted that Gingrich came in far behind a de facto "none of the above".

Several news sources pointed out that turnout was low in the 2012 Presidential Primary in Georgia, but few if any reported a context of Gingrich's "win".

According to The United States Elections Project of George Mason University, Georgia's turnout was 15.8% (see http://elections.gmu.edu/Turnout_2012P.html).  According to the US Election Atlas, Gingrich received 47.19% of the votes cast in the Republican primary (see http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?year=2012&off=0&elect=2&fips=13&f=0).  That means he received the support of about 7.5% of the eligible voters.  I would not consider that a "win"; Gingrich came in a really distant second to a de facto "none of the above".  In horse racing terms, he didn't even make the first turn!