Scarborough: The media is “blinded by hatred” of Romney
posted at 9:07 am on February 6, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
For breakfast, a smorgasbord of day-after excuses and consolations. Take your pick: The south hates Mormons; the blue states hate conservatives; or the media hates Mitt Romney because they think there’s not much point in a guy pressing on who’s won exactly one big primary among something like 27 races so far despite a furious groundswell of support from right-wing media over the past few weeks.
When you’re done, enjoy a slow scroll through the California district-by-district returns. I count 2 out of 52. Total estimated cost per delegate thus far: $1.16 million. Which can’t possibly be right. Can it? Click the image to watch.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
Amen. I had dinner with the missionaries last night and it was refreshing.
Geronimo on February 6, 2008 at 10:46 AM
Geronimo on February 6, 2008 at 10:43 AM
For McCain to be truly viable in the national, he cannot tack too far right. He’s already laid out his populist position. He’s sent out the platitudes: global warming, anti-corporations, etc. He goes too far off that, he’ll alienate his cobbled coalition. He cannot compete with Huckabee or Romney on the right. The numbers bear that out. From their far left positions, Hillary/Obama have all the room in the world to move to the right. McCain has marginalized himself by choosing the fickle and easily swayed. It’s an unprincipled and unsure foundation.
Cold Steel on February 6, 2008 at 10:51 AM
And that’s bonus hilarity too. All these high-and-mighty self-proclaimed ‘voice of the conservative’ media types sitting on their hands for months lazily whinging about how their candidates were ‘not conservative enough’ and then at the last minute bothering to get in the race and expecting it to have an impact
Yes, might sound snarky, but really I just find the whole thing hilarious. In a dark humour sort of way. Does make one wonder if the average blogger continues to think the big radio pundits are not part of the ‘msm’ and if they treat them far easier than said ‘msm’.. And why they do that, too..
Reaps on February 6, 2008 at 10:52 AM
Good points. I’m learning so much about all this as I go along. There are so many dimensions to it all, I feel mentally exhausted.
Geronimo on February 6, 2008 at 10:54 AM
It’s not virtuous. But it is smart. And I think you give way too much credit to the MSM….their bias is organic and most of them don’t even realize it.
I’m not entirely certain that they will completely turn on McCain when he is the nominee, especially if he runs against Hillary. Most of them are crushing on Obama right now, but that could change too.
Priscilla on February 6, 2008 at 10:59 AM
Geronimo on February 6, 2008 at 10:54 AM
I’m with you on that. It does drain, but I find many good points here while engaging in good debate. With all the adrenaline and hype of the “super races,” we all do engage in some over the top behavior, but by and large I do learn more on these and other sites than I do from watching Leno/Letterman/Couric/Brokaw et. al. I find myself listening and reading a variety of sources, and it has helped me truly flesh out positions.
Cold Steel on February 6, 2008 at 10:59 AM
Multiply that by a factor of twenty or so to win a general election. Romny can gold-plate his own turds with his own money if he wants to. But how many people saw what he did in Iowa and decided to contribute their own money to this black hole?
logis on February 6, 2008 at 11:03 AM
Me too, I was more than psyched when they had open registration in Jan.
As a registered Independant I’m changing to an R as soon as possible. I figured that out a week or so ago.
Geronimo on February 6, 2008 at 11:05 AM
Priscilla on February 6, 2008 at 10:59 AM
The repetition given to certain positions and certain ideas, especially when a candidate cans the sound bytes and repeats them ad nauseum, has a tremendous effect on an ill-informed electorate. Ann Coulter made a good point when she stated “Dear Republicans: Please do one-tenth as much research before casting a vote in a presidential election as you do before buying a new car.” The MSM capitalizes on our laziness. That’s the appeal of the USA Today (the McPaper, it even has colored pictures). That’s the “credit” I give to the MSM.
Cold Steel on February 6, 2008 at 11:06 AM
logis on February 6, 2008 at 11:03 AM
I have contributed twice since then. My wife and her friends have made calls on his behalf. I continue to trumpet his positions and candidacy. I don’t change my principles because of exit polls, election wins and losses, or MSM popularity contests. I don’t need outside validation for my views on governance or politics.
Cold Steel on February 6, 2008 at 11:11 AM
I am so friggin tired of supposed conservatives complaining or sniping about how much of HIS OWN FREAKING MONEY Romney has spent on this campaign. What would we prefer, guys like McCain who court and follow the script of the MSM to get coverage? Or Aw-Shucks-Abee who does nothing but strengthen the stereotypes northerners and the coasts hold about southerners? Does anyone look at Huckabee and think he could have “succeeded” in anything but religion or politics? You wouldn’t hire this guy to run a Waffle House, much less the White House.
So, yeah… Romney is the problem. Okie dokie.
Sugar Land on February 6, 2008 at 11:41 AM
Romney, spending his own money, saves tax-payers from having to fund his campaign.
While McCain’s rich wife doesn’t toss a cent into the hat for Mac’s run, preferring to let the average, non-millionare voters fund his effort.
Damn that rich Mormon!
profitsbeard on February 6, 2008 at 11:48 AM
Stereotypes are engendered, fostered, and perpetuated by the creator of the sterotypes. In my opinion, if you don’t like southerners, that’s your problem, not theirs.
fourstringfuror on February 6, 2008 at 11:51 AM
Nice little setup we have here. So Mormons can vote 90% for a Mormon as a expression of principle. But when evangelicals vote for an evangelical it’s anti-Mormon bigotry. Heads you win, tails I lose, right?
Sorry but Utah went for Mitt because Romney’s a Mormon. 90%? No one, Romney or otherwise, has approached those numbers anywhere else. Is it a remarkable coincidence that this just happened to be in the most Mormon state?
I’m not dissing Romney. But you can’t whine about anti-Mormon bigotry and give Utah a free pass on pro-Mormon bigotry.
Vote Sauron 08 on February 6, 2008 at 12:00 PM
Hear, hear!
As I have long maintained, people have an absolute right to vote the way they wish for whatever stupid reasons they want.
Christoph on February 6, 2008 at 12:13 PM
Yeah, i don’t like Huck, but how come Mormons can vote 90% + for Mitt and it’s all good, but evangelicals vote less than 50% for Huck and they are a bunch of uneducated lambs, voting only on the basis of religion? What a joke.
RW Wacko on February 6, 2008 at 12:35 PM
Allah
I count 3…
21, 49 and 52
Chakra Hammer on February 6, 2008 at 12:54 PM
Well in 49 Mitt was a .4% lead with 93.0% reporting.. LOL
Chakra Hammer on February 6, 2008 at 12:56 PM
thats 0.4% lead.. pretty close..
Chakra Hammer on February 6, 2008 at 12:57 PM
Can Calif. deliver gold for Romney? NOPE!
Mitt can’t buy a vote!
Chakra Hammer on February 6, 2008 at 1:04 PM
Let’s get rid of this “Romney only won Utah cuz he’s a Mormon–the only people biased here are the Mormons, those filthy bigots” meme you guys are starting.
Romney spent a lot of time in Utah. He saved our biggest event ever from disaster–the olympics. The Romney family has a history in Utah as well, and Mitt went to BYU (indeed, currently the school of public management at BYU has the name Romney, though not named after Mitt). He spent almost two years being front and center every day.
And he was the last conservative standing in Utah…. he won Mass. with over 50 percent of the vote; why do you think McCain would have done well here? Or Huck? Especially Huckabee–who ran as the anti-Mormon candidate? You expect the people of Utah to just vote for a guy who disses them and their faith? Maybe Huck would have done better if he’d not done that.
Utah’s not 100% Mormon, either. Only about 50% of the state is active, going to church, LDS. Clearly Romney did something to win over the other half of the state too.
McCain’s mother is a virulent anti-mormon as well. And how well was he expected to play in the most conservative state in the union–remember, Utah was the only state where Clinton came in third.
All of that sets up a perfect storm for why Romney got 90 % or so of the vote. If Fred had stayed in, I’m sure he would have gotten a pretty decent chunk of the vote too.
And finally–if Mormons were the bigots you are making them out to be, why didn’t Orrin Hatch do better?
Vanceone on February 6, 2008 at 1:05 PM
Everyone of these guys are trying to out Reagan each other and the geist hits the nail on the head. They all hate Romney because he is an outsider. The politicians know that he will owe none of them anything. The msm knows that he will do what needs to be done without caring what they think. That is more Reaganesque then any of the others can claim.
peacenprosperity on February 6, 2008 at 5:15 PM
So are you saying that when Huck describes himself as a “Christian Leader” he’s encouraging positive biogry?
Tzetzes on February 6, 2008 at 5:35 PM
Next time that two young men with black ties, riding
bicycles, knock on my door, I’ll be extra nice to ‘em.
(As I always have and will continue to be ).
And (Mormon) may be the turn-off for southern state
voters. JFK broke the “glass ceiling” for Catholics, so
let’s help Romney do the same.
His message for conservatives rings louder than that of McCain OR Huckleberry !!
gary on February 6, 2008 at 7:05 PM
After 4 years of Liberal media hit pieces bashing religion,
and Mormonism in particular,which has led up to this point,
its not hard to figure out why!
canopfor on February 6, 2008 at 9:46 PM
You make some good points here, that might well account for Romney getting 60-70% of the vote in Utah. But he got 90%. 90% votes are the sort of things you see in totalitarian countries with rigged elections. When Romney won Nevada, exit polls showed the Mormons voted for him to the tune of 94%.
To argue that this wasn’t identity politics is absurd. Like it or not, the correlation for Mormons voting for Mitt is at least twice as strong as the correlation for evangelicals voting for Huckabee.
So yes, it’s way past time the rhetoric about supposed anti-Mormon “bigotry” on the part of evangelicals be dropped. With at least a little embarrassment, if you have any decency.
Instead, I expect you to lash out at any and all such criticism as proof of aforesaid bigotry.
theregoestheneighborhood on February 7, 2008 at 2:39 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2