Posted on 03/24/2008 7:29:34 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
While Chris Matthews was waxing so rhapsodic about Barack Obama over on MSNBC this morning that he made Mika Brzezinksi ask if the Hardball host had endorsed him, Matt Lauer was doing his bit on NBC, wondering whether Hillary would be seen as having stolen the nomination if she managed to get it.
The Today co-anchor interviewed Bill Richardson, who's been getting maximum media mileage out of his Obama endorsement. Lauer's suggestion came toward the end of the segment.
MATT LAUER: Let's talk about political reality. Right now as we stand, with the delegate count, the popular vote count, the state-by-state count. Do you see any scenario under which Senator Clinton could win this nomination where it will not appear to large numbers of Democrats as if the nomination were stolen?
View video.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
This is exactly the dilemma the Dems are in.
Of course it will appear that Hillary stole it, especially to blacks. There may not be a “blood bath” in Denver, but it could get very ugly.
Either way, it hurts Hillary with a vital constituency. Obama, at best a very weak candidate, has already been dealt the death blow.
1st off, this Chris Matthews is a wh*re. His coverage of this is despicable. I’ve never seen or heard of shoddier journalism. He’s such a light weight. His idea of playing “hardball” is more like badminton.
2nd, Richardson is illiterate and obviously cruizing for a VP slot which I hope he gets as he can’t put together a coherent thought in a sentence with a noun and verb.
3rd, I would love to see Hillary steal this from Obama, who looks like the true winner...
did you capture MSNBC’s Morning Joe, Chris Matthews’ professorial, arrogant, lecture to Mika that she was asking all the wrong questions of Richardson?
Matthews’ down & dirty insults of Carville seemed heartfelt to me.
The progressives have a real dilemma here; one candidate who can't tell the truth and one candidate who has extremely poor judgment in the people surrounding him. Both are slick politicians who are not about to worry their little heads about Americans in general.....same old rhetoric from both the nappy headed one and the bleached headed one. Just sixty’s radicals who want to over throw America…..they haven’t learned a thing except how to work the system in their favor.
No matter what she does, above board or not, she will have been said to “steal” the nomination from it’s rightful, “it’s our time” owner, Obama. She’s in a no-win situation. If PA does not fall into her camp with at least 60%, then the calls for her withdrawal will be deafening. Wil she? I doubt it. You don’t plan something for 30-40 years and then just hang up your saddle. She will fight tooth and nail for it. No matter the cost to the party or whoever gets in her way. NEVER underestimate the KKKlintoons........
Also, it's not like Obama's lead over the witch is that great. Neither candidate has run away with the nomination. However, I am delighted that it is perceived as stealing.
But that was not the question, would Hillary be 'seen' as stealing the election. Bush won by the rules, but most Democrats saw Bush as stealing the election.
It will be interesting to see how the ‘rats justify the use of the super-delegates following their calls for the disbanding of the electoral college following Fla 2000.
Of course, they’ll be able to justify it in their minds, being illogical beings comfortable with logical contradictions.
Hearing the explanations will be entertaining, though.
See, that is Obama's problem. Obama tried to explain the issue. Instead he should have said this was just a swift-boat attack by the VRWC media to undermine his campaign. With those buzz words, leftist would have just nodded their heads and moved on. Obama is not that slick though.
Nothing about her, her statements, her ‘experience’, her candidacy, etc. is legitimate. NOTHING!
Egad, it looks as if the frothing-at-the-mouth Matthews will be the last Clinton sycophant who goes down with the ship.
Oh please...
A tied DNC convention just makes it easy for Edwards to endorse Al Gore, and the DraftGore ‘08 team to knock out both Hillary and Obama.
The news emdia will *love* it.
2nd. Glad someone else noticed this.
Now is the perfect time for Al Gore to enter from stage left and really muck things up.
I agree.
It’s probably easy for people who believe the government infects people with AIDS — all the while knowing AIDS is based on their own sexual behavior — to believe whatever they are told.
If Lauer and Matthews tell them it’s Hillary’s fault, then that’s what they’ll believe.
That didn't stop the democrats from claiming an election was stolen in 2k. : )
While that's a funny scenario to ponder, I don't think it would matter much. Liberalis is the cult of personality, and Obama is their new personality. He trumps Gore.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.