Seriously. I mean it. They are idiots. I listened to CNN and MSNBC (and occasionally FOX) kvetch about Tuesday nights Obama v. Clinton, rumble in the Granite State action yesterday where they all pretended to live in this vacuum where everything they said about Clinton and Obama pre-Iowa no longer existed or mattered.
I heard people explaining Hillary's win and the lopsidedness of the poles as Clinton gaining "sympathy" votes for her NOTcrying at a New Hampshire event. People floated the Bradley Effect around, that notion that white voters will tell pollsters they'll vote for a black candidate, but then not vote for them once they get in a booth. Maybe, but even that rational is lacking, especially since Barack isn't running on a civil rights platform. Some suggested it was a "girl power" factor, which made me cringe. Others said it was because Obama was resting on his laurels from his Iowa win, which also sound crazy since neither him nor Hillary nor anyone who had a chance at winning New Hampshire had any sleep in five days. (I recall Mike Huckabee being the only candidate mentioning getting a nap in.) I was worried that between Obama, Mitt Romney, John McCain, Bill Clinton and Hillary someone was just going to flat black out and take out a podium.
I feel like these pundits/reporters, some of whom were understandably a tad blinded by the Obama win in Iowa, forgot all the research, all the fund raising, all the work by both the Obama and Clinton campaigns and all the things they said pre-Obama winning the Iowa caucus. That A) there is little difference between Hillary and Barack's actual political platforms, hence voters are basing their decisions on the on different factors, like temperament, history, favoritism, niche issues and the like AND B) the Iowa caucus is NOT a straight up and down vote. It involves people casting their votes face to face with other voters, discussing their votes, then arm twisting people who's candidates didn't meant the 15 percent "viability" threshold to join their sides. The pundits pre-caucus results pointed out that for most voters for Kucinich, Dodd, Biden and Richardson were strongly leaning towards Obama as a second choice. Kucinich even straight up told his supporters if they didn't meet the 15 percent viability threshold at their precinct to swing over to the Obama camp. So we've got a system where in all likelihood Obama cleaned up as the second choice of the fringe candidate's supporters.
But do ANY of the pundits remember that? Do any of them remember that even as Obama's incredible win was coming in on MSNBC Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann tossed around the notion that without that secondary vote Obama would have still won, but by a much narrower margin, like how Hillary just won New Hampshire by a narrow margin?
But no one! No one remembers what actually happened in Iowa! No one remembers the facts! What the hizzell, people! This was, is and has always been a close race. I too basked in the after glow of history being made last week, but I woke up and smelled the reality and reminded myself that this is going to be the most batshit presidential campaign ever and Obama, Hillary and the gang were going to have to run the gauntlet in ways no candidate has had to run the gauntlet before.
So I just irritates me that these pundits, these pollsters and these alleged journalists, who watch the presidential race with one part no sleep and two parts crazy obsessive, who get so caught up in the minutia that they can no longer see the big picture. Where they say things that make it sound like they think all voters are morons. Anyone who voted for Hillary because she NOTcried at an event, anyone who voted for Obama because he's "hip," is a tragically weak and poorly informed voter. I'm not saying that some people didn't do this, but I'm saying those people are the minority. People vote for a candidate either based on the issues that candidate represents OR they want to vote against an opposing candidate who they think will make things worse. That's it. That's the basis of voting. So Obama and Hillary took their show, money and supporters to New Hampshire, made the best case they could to the voters and worked their asses off to get people to the poles and the people did come in droves.
I'm just sick of these fake "events" the press keeps trying to ram down our throats. Report on some fucking issues. I do not CARE if an exasperated Bill Clinton said he couldn't make his wife younger and male. I do not CARE that Hilary said it "hurts" her feelings when people insinuate that she is not likable. Nixon almost beat Kennedy in 1960 and Nixon was EXTREMELY less likable than the younger and handsome Kennedy. And frankly if it weren't for some voter shenanigans by Mayor Richard Daley of Chicago, Kennedy might not have won.
My point is, these things are not issues. And I have my own mixed feelings regarding the Clintons, but I seriously wish these morons would stop covering every burp and fart coming out of that campaign like its Monicagate all over again. It's a disservice to the other candidates running, because the more time they WASTE on the non-story of Hillary's voice getting a little shakey for two seconds we're missing out on meaningful coverage on the other candidates who, I don't know, might be actually doing stuff.
So I'm blowing the whistle and throwing the flag on this play. Flagrant Clinton Pimping on the news media. Don't make me have to start throwing people out of game. And yes, Chris Matthews, you schadenfruede-loving, hater of Hillary to the point of insanity, I am talking about you. If you mention, with venom, Bill Clinton's 1992 "comeback kid" gambit ONE MORE TIME, or accuse Hilary of losing her marbles for one voice crackle while Mitt Romney has blubbered not once, not twice, but THRICE, on television nonetheless, you're getting a one-way ticket to the bench. Enough with the double standard where everything Hillary Clinton does gets put under the microscope why everyone else gets a pass. If she got anything resembling a "sympathy vote," dude, it was partially your fault.
Even though I'm pro-Obama I seriously don't want want anyone to go easy on him because it is assured that if he becomes the Democratic nominee the Republicans will NOT go easy on him. If Republican supporters would whip out Willy Horton, spread rumors that John McCain fathered "black" child out of wedlock, "Swift Boat" John Kerry, push for the presidential impeachment of Bill Clinton over perjury charges in a shoddy sexual harassment case propped up by partisan supports who dumped the female plaintiff the minute Clinton wasn't president anymore, who would insinuate miscegenation in a TV ad against Tennessee senatorial nominee Harold Ford Jr., make up illusions of hoards of"welfare queens" and "race hustling poverty pimps," dude, does anyone think they're going to got after Obama with kid gloves? And Republicans and their partisan supporters did all this while working from positions of strength in many cases. Right now their backs are against the wall and the in-fighting between that three headed hydra of religious conservatives, ex-libertarians and neo-cons who make up the party are threatening to tear them apart. Heck, last night on "The Daily Show," former Bush speech writer and author David Frum called Mike Huckabee a "suicide pill" while discussing the fractures in the party.
They are not going to roll over for any Democrat. They are going to fight to the last man standing.
And as much as I don't like them, that's what they should do dammit.
That's just the nature of Democracy. There are winners and losers. And the winners don't like losing. And the losers swear that someday "the south shall rise again." If we didn't have the system of free elections and following the Constitution as the rule of law, we'd be Lebanon on a good day. Iraq on a bad one. I do not, repeat, DO NOT want the Democrats to start doing whack-a-mole on Obama or start manufacturing fictions about his life, but it's for everyone's benefit that all the candidates get the run through so the voters can make the best decisions. We cannot have a coronation. His record has to be examined and if there's stuff that needs to come out, better now than after the nomination. And the media really needs to stop reading tea leaves and do their jobs and REPORT ... ON ... THE ... ISSUES!
That's all. I just had to vent. And now I feel better.
And I don't always agree with CNN Lou Dobbs, apparently we agree on the news media's shoddy job at covering this election. Mind you, he's part of that same news media, screaming about "Communist" China when the country's current political religion is "money" and is nominally Communist but, well, this is Lou Dobbs.
You know what you're getting into.