I'm Calling it - Chris Matthews is officially pro Hillary IMO

nyyyyce

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
I don't know how many of you watched all of MSNBC's coverage of the debate last night, but near the end there was an interesting exchange between Chris Matthews and Olbermann. They took a text poll to see who won the night. Chris, throughout the post debate coverage, poo pooed Obama and said that there was nothing exceptional about Barak's performance, but he still was scratching his head about what he thought he was going to see from Hillary. :confused: He sounded disappointed. Though he admitted she did not do enough to move most voters he wanted to still know what more she could have done. That's not the point but the backdrop.

OK, 90,000 people sent in text messages. Obama won 70% to Hill's 30%. A landslide victory. You would think that Chris might say that "it appears the public has voted and they saw a clear winner in Obama even if I didn't" or something similar to a slight acknowledgment of the smashing she took in the poll...right? This &^*%%$*&^#$@!!$&* said (paraphrasing): "Obama has won overwhelmingly, BUT let's not forget that most grown people do not text like young people do". Implying that you should not read too much into the numbers because "real adults" don't readily superscribe to communicating via texting. Or more to the point it was an overinflated victory for Obama and the crowd voting skewed ti his demographic. :angry: Keith ("THAT DUDE") quickly commented that the grown folks are the ones who pay for the plans therefore they are savvy enough to vote by text as well since the know what they are paying for since they get the bills.

I had been confused a bit about His stance but now Chris is "officially" peeped in my book. Just wanted to know if anyone else saw that or had the same pissed reaction.:dunno:
 

Obadiah Plainman

Potential Star
Registered
I don't know how many of you watched all of MSNBC's coverage of the debate last night, but near the end there was an interesting exchange between Chris Matthews and Olbermann. They took a text poll to see who won the night. Chris, throughout the post debate coverage, poo pooed Obama and said that there was nothing exceptional about Barak's performance, but he still was scratching his head about what he thought he was going to see from Hillary. :confused: He sounded disappointed. Though he admitted she did not do enough to move most voters he wanted to still know what more she could have done. That's not the point but the backdrop.

OK, 90,000 people sent in text messages. Obama won 70% to Hill's 30%. A landslide victory. You would think that Chris might say that "it appears the public has voted and they saw a clear winner in Obama even if I didn't" or something similar to a slight acknowledgment of the smashing she took in the poll...right? This &^*%%$*&^#$@!!$&* said (paraphrasing): "Obama has won overwhelmingly, BUT let's not forget that most grown people do not text like young people do". Implying that you should not read too much into the numbers because "real adults" don't readily superscribe to communicating via texting. Or more to the point it was an overinflated victory for Obama and the crowd voting skewed ti his demographic. :angry: Keith ("THAT DUDE") quickly commented that the grown folks are the ones who pay for the plans therefore they are savvy enough to vote by text as well since the know what they are paying for since they get the bills.

I had been confused a bit about His stance but now Chris is "officially" peeped in my book. Just wanted to know if anyone else saw that or had the same pissed reaction.:dunno:



A prof of mine once told us that it is impossible to be impartial or in the case of journalist, to be completely objective. That your personal experiences will always come into play. Matthew loves politics, campaigning, the no-holds-barred drag out fight for the office to be specific. I think its very difficult to spend a lifetime pondering and puntiting the who, whats, whens, wheres, and hows of a politician and not sound conciliatory or in favor of sometimes.

I've read conservatives call the guy a liberal, Liberals call the guy a conservative, women call him a male chauvanist, not to mention he's from San Francisco (I think).

My point is if everybody thinks he's on the other guys side or payroll, then you must be doing something right.

I may be wrong though.
 

Turbulent

Star
Registered
lol, i see through him. couple of weeks ago he was VERY pro-Obama and anti-hillary. He was even getting clowned by other news dudes cause he was such a passionate Obama supporter. Now in an effort to seem neutral and balanced he's overcompensating. Deep down he's an Obama supporter. he's just insecure about sounding like a cheerleader. Even SNL clowned him for being an Obama-dikkrider.
 

Obadiah Plainman

Potential Star
Registered
lol, i see through him. couple of weeks ago he was VERY pro-Obama and anti-hillary. He was even getting clowned by other news dudes cause he was such a passionate Obama supporter. Now in an effort to seem neutral and balanced he's overcompensating. Deep down he's an Obama supporter. he's just insecure about sounding like a cheerleader. Even SNL clowned him for being an Obama-dikkrider.

I hear you , but if you're a talking head and your job is to speculate and comment on the specifics of the race, then there is no question that at times you'll sound like a cheerleader. SNL also did a sketch a year ago of him kissing Clinton ass. Don't read too much into it, its just his style. I think it shows the guy unlike most analyst, doesn't just criticize but gives praise and advise.
 
lol, i see through him. couple of weeks ago he was VERY pro-Obama and anti-hillary. He was even getting clowned by other news dudes cause he was such a passionate Obama supporter. Now in an effort to seem neutral and balanced he's overcompensating. Deep down he's an Obama supporter. he's just insecure about sounding like a cheerleader. Even SNL clowned him for being an Obama-dikkrider.
True.

Chris Matthews is just trying to appear neutral, but way before, he was on Obama's nuts calling him the second coming of the 60's. He's only being more critical to sway the viewers who view him as anti-hillary (which he really is).

All this shit he's doing is just a ploy.
 

deputy dawg

~wait a cotton pickin' minute...
BGOL Investor
CNBC had Hillary on with that idiot Jim Cramer talking about how government should/could deal with the current financial mess in the country yesterday 9 the day after the debate. This trying to appear neutral by overcompensating with Hillary is just pathetic!

cramerandclinton.jpg


http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=666654935
 
Last edited:

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
I didn't see it and don't watch much TV, so, can somebody post it ???

Thanking whomever in advance,

QueEx
 

nyyyyce

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
I didn't see it and don't watch much TV, so, can somebody post it ???

Thanking whomever in advance,

QueEx
It was a brief segment @ the end of the debate coverage. I don't know if MSNBC made a clip of it for their site. I will see if somebody put it on youtube.
 

rNubb

Rising Star
Registered
Yes, he is pro hillary because he is really anti black president. Someone stated the Obama's campaign is partially a white folk joke gone wrong. I can see it.

A lot of the white folks in the media thought they would beat up on the clintons for a minute. The media thought they could flip a switch and get Hillary back on track. They didn't realize that he has a bunch of support that was picking up a head of steam.

None of this matter now. His momentum is too great to be stopped. No matter what happens.
 
Top