TNR BLOGS

July 04, 2009 | 6:29 PM
July 04, 2009 | 11:58 AM
July 04, 2009 | 11:32 AM

March 09, 2009 | 5:19 PM
March 09, 2009 | 5:16 PM
January 07, 2009 | 12:20 PM

July 01, 2009 | 10:33 PM
June 30, 2009 | 8:42 AM
June 29, 2009 | 9:09 AM

July 26, 2008 | 2:24 PM
July 23, 2008 | 1:55 PM
July 17, 2008 | 3:56 PM

July 03, 2009 | 10:13 PM
July 02, 2009 | 12:57 PM
July 01, 2009 | 7:02 PM
COLUMNISTS
TODAY'S STORIES
22.04.2008
CNN's Bad Analysis

If you were watching CNN, you'd think Clinton was the odds-on favorite to win the nomination. Most of them are repeating all her talking points, saying Obama can't win the Reagan Democrats, big win for her, etc. Republican Bill Bennett said he made "an admission against interest" that Clinton is the tougher candidates, "the Clintons" always win, Obama is too liberal to win the general. What an honest guy. I'm sure he genuinely has no idea that the delegate math make Obama the all-but-certain winner.

--Jonathan Chait

Posted: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 10:11 PM with 13 comment(s)

Comments

You must be logged-in to comment.

Not a subscriber? Click here to get a digital or print and digital subscription to The New Republic!

virginiacentrist said:

Here's the truth:

Hillary Clinton doesn't win Reagan Democrats. These folks do not vote in Democratic primaries. And if they did, they would not vote for Hillary Clinton. These are the folks who ran kicking and screaming away from Hillary in 1994.  Reagan Democrats trend heavily towards white males and they tend to have traditional views about women..........

Hillary Clinton is winning liberal working class Democrats, not Reagan Democrats....there's a huge difference....

April 22, 2008 10:23 PM

mcgumbleton said:

Ha! "talking against interest" - I had no idea Bill Bennett was such a comedian. LMAO

April 22, 2008 10:34 PM

Crock1701 said:

CNN has 2 things going for it:  That good Flat Screen that can show you county by county results up to date as well as % each one is of the voting population,  and the fact that they have a similarly good county map online to let you track how the Returns are coming in.  When it comes to the on air talent (Bill Bennett, Paul "Hillary" Begala, etc) It's just godawful.  MSNBC blows them away in having interesting people to watch and good viewpoints, and also benefits from being able to bring in the NBC News Ringers in Tom Brokaw, Tim Russert, and Brian Williams.  Plus they have in Chuck Todd a good as gold in terms of counting delegates, which is what matters here.  They're right there telling us what all the percentages mean, which is what counts right now.  I never seem to get that from CNN.

April 22, 2008 10:36 PM

tec619 said:

The best political team on television, Not!!

April 22, 2008 10:39 PM

miceelf said:

Pat Buchanan is trying to peddle that same tired crap on MSNBC, aided by Joe Scarborough. Funny how the Clinton cheerleaders in the media are all hardcore republicans.

April 22, 2008 10:52 PM

BHLnyc said:

Bennett is even more cynical than imagined if he can deliver a line like that with a straight face.

April 22, 2008 10:52 PM

WoodyBombay said:

Yes  indeed - a lot of conservative pundits and yahoos are very happy tonight.

I'm sure Scaife threw caution to the wind and sacrificed two virgins today instead of just the one.

April 22, 2008 10:54 PM

adamvaught said:

You're too hard on Bill Bennett. He's a gambling man. And based on his losings, a gambling man who is terrible at understanding the odds. Hence, he thinks Hillary is where to smart money should be placed.

April 22, 2008 11:03 PM

AaronBBrown said:

Did you see Bill Bennett giving his pro Hillary Clinton speech, disgusting.  Only the network swine at CNN would put that hard-core Republican on a panel to discuss the Democratic nomination. He and every other Republican like Pat Buchanan over at MSNBC are rooting for Hillary Clinton to do as much damage to Barack Obama she possibly can, because they know she's doing the GOP's work for them.  

And Clinton knows she cannot win through votes or delegates, it's now an impossibility for her to win this election democratically, according to Chuck Todd.  

Did you see Hillary giving her victory speech tonight, the woman is obviously delusional.

Truth is, it was an a virtual impossibility weeks ago, after tonight it's a statistical impossibility for her to win, but of course none of the networks want this ratings gravy train to end, they all need to keep this feeding frenzy going right through to the convention, because it's putting big bucks in the pockets of their corporate masters, and makes for fat juicy end of the year bonuses for all the network executives.

April 22, 2008 11:10 PM

adaglas said:

Adamvaught, go easy on the guy.  He's tryin' to make a living, and doin' the best he can.

April 22, 2008 11:25 PM

psantillana said:

All those people who kneejerkedly love Clinton because the bad people hated her in the nineties, where are they now? Anyone? Anyone?

April 22, 2008 11:49 PM

asnevitt said:

Thank you for pointing this out. I was astounded at the way they were making it sound like she had a chance at pulling ahead.

What really struck me was how they  started talking about the strengths of Clinton's speech immediately upon the conclusion of Obama's. I listened to both. I'm an Obama supporter, so I'm biased. But another person in the room was undecided and was awed by Obama's speech. I really didn't get how they could so easily write it off as "less than" Clinton's.

But then I remembered the good ole $ sign. It's in the best interests of the networks to make it seem like a tight race. They need to milk this for all it's worth since the general won't likely hold anybody's attention for 6 or 7 months.

So, here's what I here them saying: "She's still in it, folks!"(ka-ching, ka-ching. wink, wink.)

April 23, 2008 2:16 AM

jemerk said:

Very exactly correct about the golden goose for the media - this strung along race might be what is preventing a few magazne and etc. closures.  

The country needs to figure out a way to conduct politics besides injecting private political donations into the media or Rupert et al will have exactly what they wants soon.

April 23, 2008 8:55 AM