Is Hillary Clinton getting the Huckabee Treatment?

Posted by: adams6kids | April 23, 2008

Is Hillary Clinton getting the Huckabee Treatment?

Hillary Clinton has just come off a convincing victory over Barrack Obama in the Democratic primary contest in Pennsylvania. In the most recent of primaries she has not only won Pennsylvania, but also Texas, Ohio, and Rhode Island. One might look at this and surmise Clinton has the political momentum in the ever so tight Democratic presidential primaries. That is, of course, unless you turn to the mainstream media (MSM) for your “analysis” for this recent trend. Many in the MSM have announced Clinton’s political obituary and say Obama is the inevitable Democratic nominee. Somewhere, this has brought up recent memories of another MSM “analysis”, that of Republican presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee.

Despite winning the Iowa caucus and winning 5 Super Tuesday states, the MSM never considered Governor Huckabee a serious contender. They chose to marginalize him as the evangelical candidate who was more often described as a former Baptist minister then as the former Governor of Arkansas for 10 ½ years even though he hadn’t been a pastor in over 15 years. Also, anytime John McCain was in any news story, the story always began…”The presumptive Republican presidential nominee”. The MSM had already decided John McCain was going to win the nomination…one full month before he actually did. The psychology of hearing this day in and day out normally leads one to two conclusions. First, John McCain already has won, therefore why should I go vote. This would bring a suppression of voter turnout, or a form of voter disenfranchisement. Secondly, the voter will just mark the “X” next to John McCain since they know he is going to win anyway. How do they know he is going to win? The trusty MSM already told them so. This is something Mike Huckabee had to try and overcome day-in and day-out. Not having a personal fortune to put into his campaign to overcome this bias at least partially led to his demise as a presidential candidate. We will never know because the playing field was never level.

Barrack Obama has had the perceived media favor during this presidential primary/caucus season. So much so that it has given Saturday Night Live enough material to last at least the next season. The MSM helped lead what has been called Obamamania, where he was treated more like a rock-star than a politician. This glamour blitz led to many of his early season primary/caucus victories and a lead in the delegate vote. Reports from the MSM have come for Hillary Clinton to drop her presidential bid and that she had no opportunity to overcome Obama’s delegate lead. This was even before the March 4^th primaries. Now even when Senator Clinton has been closing in on Senator Obama’s delegate lead with her recent success, we are still hearing that Senator Clinton has virtually no possibility of securing the nomination.

I am not a supporter of either Senator Clinton or Senator Obama and plan on voting for neither of them. I say this to show that my axe to grind is not with Senator Obama or his supporters. However, it appears the MSM has had far to great a role in presidential politics than they should and they think the public should follow them like cows being led to slaughter. Apathy is high among voters which has partially led to this intellectual paralysis in politics and reasoning. The only way out of it is for each voter taking the time in making a conscious choice based on facts in what kind of America we want for ourselves and our children’s future. The people has given the MSM their power, its about time we take it back.

Posted in Uncategorized

Responses

Nice and insightful article. Thanks

By: Happypappy11 on April 23, 2008
at 11:51 pm

Hillary did not have a ‘convincing win” in Pennsylvania. She will net only 9-12 pledged delegates, most likely 10.

She LOST Texas by 5 pledged delegates.

Hillary cannot be the Democratic nominee. If she were, she and Bill would have to stop endorsing McCain. She can’t quit him.

By: 01/20/09 on April 24, 2008
at 6:26 am

The larger problem is that the culture and voting habits of the MSM are a small and undeterminative portion the voting public. Seems like everyone knows that by now, except them.

Really, everyone I knew except the Obamites felt Clinton still has, and always has, a chance for the nomination. It was the MSM and Obama’s supporters who were drank the Koolaid.

By: pashley on April 24, 2008
at 8:12 am

I never considered Mike Huckabee a serious contender either. Sorry, guys… He’s a lightweight when it comes to politics. He’ll never be considered seriously for the VP slot with McCain, nor will he ever get enough traction in another national contest. He’s too much of a religious bigot for most people’s liking.

By: Rockyspoon on April 24, 2008
at 2:43 pm

The media is treating Clinton like Huckabee, but there’s a big difference between the two. Obama and Clinton both need superdelegates to win the nomination. While Clinton needs more supers - because Obama has more pledged delegates - she can still reach the number needed for the nomination. The media has been creating a narrative that Clinton will do anything to win and that she should drop out for two months now. Some in the media were calling for Clinton to drop out if she lost either Tex or Ohio, after she won both (more votes - contrary to the blogger who said Obama won because he netted more delegates) - those same media folks were saying she should still quit. She’s one 4 out of 5 of the most recent contests. She is blamed for all the adverse information coming out about Obama now (Rev Wright, Ayres, Rezco, “bittergate” - as if she caused Obama to make those choices. If she didn’t capitalize on these things - trust me, Obama might sail through to get the nomination and then have a McGovern-like (huge) defeat in November. The left-media want Obama to wrap up the nomination before he is further damaged. The flaw in this reasoning is that these weaknesses (running from hard questions from the press/avoiding debates now) will be revealed now or later - if my party (the Dems) want four more years of Republicans - they should continue to ignore Obama’s weaknesses. This is the same media that were cheerleaders of the war in Iraq, before reality set in. Reality about Obama will set in too… it’s just a matter of whether it will be too late for Dems.

By: Lisa - Ft. Lauderdale on April 24, 2008
at 2:59 pm

Yes this was happening to Mike Huckabee even before Super Tuesday on Fox, which promoted Romney ever time they could. They were announcing Romeny as the winner of every debate, yet he keep losing whenever he faced a challenge. His big money could not buy him a win similar to Obama in Penn..
However in this case I would vote for anybody over Sen. Clinton. In the other case it was anybody but the 7th most liberal Republican in the country, Gov. Romey, according to Human Events 2005.
McCain also was counted out by the media, yet to his credit he made a major comeback.

By: Rich Allen on April 24, 2008
at 3:38 pm

What a ridiculous analogy.

In the Democratic race, Clinton trails by only about 130 delegates and it appears neither candidate can get enough delegates to win the nomination.

In the Republican race, at the time Romney dropped out, McCain probably had @900 plus delegates to then 3rd place Huckabee’s (who had come in 3rd or 4th place in 20 of the 29 contests) about 160 delegates. Romney was smart enough to realyze that there was simply no way to overtake McCain or keep him from capturing the nomination and thus no sense in staying in the race. The Huckster either was too stupid to understand basic math or too interested in his own political opportunism to drop out.

The fringe segment of the evangelical community is in for a hard time if they really believe that America would elect a religious bigot like Huckabee ( I know, you think he is the only “true christian” candidate and that the devil and Romney are brothers). LOL.

By the way, I see the Huckster was listed by the nonpartisan group judicialwatch.org as the 6th most corrupt policitican of 2007 (one of only 3 republicans on the list) due to his corruption charges in Arkansas. Glad the truth is finally getting out.

By: bw on April 24, 2008
at 4:01 pm

bw,
If “Poor little Mitt” wants people to believe he’s a man; he needs to grow up. (Or is it only his bigoted supporters that are still being childish?) If Mormon’s have problems when people ask questions about their honest religious beliefs; they are the ones with the problem. (Reminds me of Obama’s problems with his pastor’s beliefs)

It’s about time people quit using the “religion” excuse. Informed people have been onto it for months. Here is a quote from an article posted at Townhall.com in Nov.

[quote]As long as Mitt Romney keeps America focused on his religion, he may win the upcoming January primaries.

But as soon as Americans are able to penetrate the religion smokescreen and see his governor’s record, voters may think twice.

The media – liberal and conservative – have been a willing co-conspirator in keeping Mitt’s governing record a secret. Am I suggesting the Romney campaign deliberately focused America on his being a Mormon to hide his record as governor? You decide.

For your edification, here’s the real Mitt Romney.[/quote]
http://tinyurl.com/2jl9jj

I considered voting for Romney until I started researching. Some Christians vote principles and records rather than religion. Romney flunked personally not religiously.

From the research I’ve done; Mormons seemed to vote overwhelmingly for Mitt. According to your logic; does that make them bigger bigots?

By: Granny T on April 24, 2008
at 5:09 pm

BW,

That “truth” has been out there for a while, and that’s why so much of the mainstream media jumped on it, like they do with every hint of scandal….oh, wait a minute……

The decrees of religious bigotry are getting monotonous and stale, and they’re beginning to reflect on the accusers. Clearly, Romney’s Mormon faith has become a crutch for his supporters who can’t own up to the fact that he was a not-so-great candidate who had to spend $80 million dollars to try to buy himself conservative cred.

Did Romney’s and Huckabee’s faith play a factor in whom I decided to support? Yes, and I think it’s illogical for people to say that they don’t care if a candidate believes in “the Great Spaghetti Monster” as long as he is a “good leader” and “agrees with me politically.”

But the fact is, I would not have been inclined to support Romney anyway. You’re so fond of calling Huckabee a/the “Huckster.” Let’s coin a new term: The Romster.

By: kingdomadvancer on April 24, 2008
at 8:37 pm