Networks Dismiss Hillary Landslide

[DeepModem Mom]

WP: Networks Dismiss Hillary Landslide
By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, May 14, 2008

When Hillary Clinton wipes the floor with Barack Obama, the pundits have to give her her due, right? I mean, when she just crushes him by a 2-to-1 margin, the talk would immediately turn to why the Democratic front-runner, the man anointed by the media as the party's nominee, can barely manage a third of the vote in West Virginia. Wouldn't it?

Here is how the cable networks reacted when they called the race at 7:30 last night:

On MSNBC, Tim Russert called it an "overwhelming victory" for Hillary. And then said that the 10 delegates she would net were more than offset by the 27 superdelegates Obama has picked up in the past week or so. As for West Virginia, he said, "the Obama campaign believes it's already been discounted, the way they do on Wall Street."

On CNN, John King said that "Barack Obama is the nominee even if he only gets 30 percent of the delegates the rest of the way."

On Fox, Shepard Smith asked his panel: "Anybody have a path to victory for Hillary Clinton, in a word?" The three guests simultaneously said no.

How did Clinton's big night immediately turn into a wake?

Far be it from me to suggest that the commentators didn't want to contradict their own declarations last week that Obama's got the thing wrapped up. Nor am I saying that the math isn't extremely daunting for Clinton. But her West Virginia romp must mean something. If not, why are the cable nets bothering to cover it? Why not just relegate the news to the crawl?...

After Hillary's speech, Chris Matthews said she was trying to set up a contest between her and the pundits, when it was really her versus the inexorable math. (Of course, Terry McAuliffe began the day on MSNBC by calling Chris Matthews "Barack Obama's campaign chairman.")

The only really negative analyses of Obama came during the dissection of exit polls, which showed barely a third of Clinton voters saying they would support Obama in November. Sean Hannity called the exit polls "devastating" for Obama.

By my count, Hillary has won five of the last six states. But it is, of course, too late. The pundits all agree on that....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/14/AR2008051400890_pf.html

[LisaM]

1. I don't normally like Terry McAuliffe

But that was a funny remark.

[Bok_Tukalo]

2. The math is "extremely daunting"?

Talk about understatement. Is this guy British?

[niyad]

3. but there is no sexism.

I was reminded of the headlines the last round of primaries--obama's wins were trumpeted, Sen. Clinton's virtually ignored. same thing this morning in all the papers I saw.

[DJ13]

4. Suppose an NFL team had clinched a playoff berth & used 2nd string in the final game

And (surprise) they lost 68 to 32 in the final game to a team that had a losing record and were using all their regular starters.

Would that be news?

Would it warrant pundits trying to claim that playoff bound team "has problems"?

Mr Kurtz has his own issues if he cant see why the media wasnt impressed with yesterdays "big" win for Clinton.

[YDogg]

5. sean hannity and pat buchanan are reading from the same script, i'm guessing

buchanan spent most of his time on morning joe today trying to write Obama's political obituary.

[mitchtv]

6. KO was in such a snit

couldn't find a nice thing to say about Sen. Clinton. Asked if her campaign wasn't a fraud and then used all the sarcasm he gould think of. He was just a bitch. Watching him is no longer worth it. I am no gtrat Hillary fan , but she won the game last night, try to be decent about it for godsakes.

[rock]

7. The media has made their choice

Now go out and deliver it.