Why do Republican Pundits <3 Hillary?

It has been a remarkable switch. Early on in the campaign, when Hillary held double digit leads in the national polls, conservative commentators took every opportunity to trash Hillary, often unjustly. When Obama won Iowa, the republican pundits were overjoyed. Joe Scarborough and Pat Buchanan, for example, were practically gushing when Clinton's campaign was supposedly on the brink of collapsing just before New Hampshire. They were taking every opportunity to pounce on Hillary and Bill for any alleged playing of the race card or any other misteps, and often sung Obama's praises. I was half expecting Joe to faint!

Then Super Tuesday came. Then Obama's string of primary wins came.

Now, Joe Scarborough sounds like Howard Wolfson each morning when speaking of Hillary Clinton. If you tune your TV into any of the major cable news networks, you will find that virtually ALL republican/conservative pundits are now singing a very pro-Hillary tune.

Why is this the case? Why are so many people who have been strongly anti-Clinton for so many years all of a sudden cheering her on?

Could it be a motive similar to Limbaugh's (prolonging the nasty battle and damaging Obama before the GE)?

Is it that conservatives want to run against Hillary now?

Are they finally realizing just how great the Clintons are? (lol)

Tags: clinton, MSNBC, obama, pundits, scarborough (all tags)

Comments

14 Comments

Could it be that

there is a scintilla of admiration in Clinton's continuing resiliance?  

And of course this kind of race puts money in their pocket - it gives them some weight in their profession.  

They'll savage Hillary soon enough.  

We as progressives have been complaining about press bias for years - can't we see it in the Obama candidacy.

I like both candidates - and admire both candidates.  Did the New York Times get as angry when Sen. Kerry lost?  I don't remember frankly.

I watch Scarborough off and on in am - and he keeps talking about how Sen. Kerry was swiftboated - a disgrace considering he was a war hero - and I don't remember him coming out during that race and a saying any such thing.

by Xanthe 2008-04-23 03:18AM | 0 recs
Re: Could it be that

Doubtful. They excoriated Mike Huckabee for doing the same thing, and his quest was even more nobly hopeless than hers.

by MBNYC 2008-04-23 03:42AM | 0 recs
Re: Could it be that

Hey, I have this bridge I'd like to sell you!

by XoFalconXo 2008-04-23 03:50AM | 0 recs
operative word: scintilla

Believe me I'm not a naive woman.  People admire fight in others.  

and considering the state of our infrastructure - I am not buying any bridges here.

by Xanthe 2008-04-23 03:54AM | 0 recs
Could it be that

there is a scintilla of admiration in Clinton's continuing resiliance?  

And of course this kind of race puts money in their pocket - it gives them some weight in their profession.  

They'll savage Hillary soon enough.  

We as progressives have been complaining about press bias for years - can't we see it in the Obama candidacy.

I like both candidates - and admire both candidates.  Did the New York Times get as angry when Sen. Kerry lost?  I don't remember frankly.

I watch Scarborough off and on in am - and he keeps talking about how Sen. Kerry was swiftboated - a disgrace considering he was a war hero - and I don't remember him coming out during that race and a saying any such thing.

by Xanthe 2008-04-23 03:20AM | 0 recs
Re: Why do Republican Pundits &amp;lt;3 Hillary?

You should have a new option in your poll: The GOP is afraid of Hillary Clinton. The only reason the GOP is singing Clinton's praises is because they know Democrats will vilify her for it. They're hoping it will 'close the deal' for Obama, who they really want to run against. He's the only thing relatively new in the equation. Until fairly recently, the GOP loathed anyone with the last name of Clinton. One of the most unbelievable developments in this primary season is the collective, long-term memory loss among Democrats

by zenful6219 2008-04-23 03:21AM | 0 recs
Re: Why do Republican Pundits

So... reverse psychology?

by smoothmedia 2008-04-23 03:32AM | 0 recs
Re: Why do Republican Pundits

Politically, Hillary Clinton has not changed since Bill Clinton's administration. Before Bill took the oath of office for the first time, the GOP had already started their witch hunt and they didn't stop until fairly recently when they began their odd and suspicious embrace of Hillary. The Clintons have not changed, but the GOP did. Why? I believe it is because they do not want to run McCain against Hillary Clinton. They'd much rather run against Obama.

by zenful6219 2008-04-23 03:43AM | 0 recs
Unlikely.

If there were a fear that Democrats would trash her for it, that fear would realistically be strongest within her campaign. However, they've touted friendly articles in National Review, had Bill go on Limpball's show, and made a huge deal out of the Scaife endorsement.

The republicans want Hillary to run because she's a weak candidate. This is classic divide and conquer.

by MBNYC 2008-04-23 03:40AM | 0 recs
And isn't Sen. Obama

continually speaking about reaching across aisle.  He's been doing this for some time.

She is not a weak candidate - a controversial one - but don't label her weak.  She may take steps you don't like MB - but she is not a weakling.

Why shouldn't Bill go on these programs if she could get some votes.

You don't think they'd go on these programs if they hadn't looked at it psychologically and politically?  I think the Clintons may be as astute politically as you are.

by Xanthe 2008-04-23 04:00AM | 0 recs
Re: Why do Republican....

The GOP is afraid of Hillary Clinton?

Really?  That is laughable, did you honestly have a straight face when you wrote that?  Wait, I can see the classic line in the debates now from McCain, "Well I really did have sniper file pointed at me Senator and it wasn't a parade"  

by HGM MA 2008-04-23 04:18AM | 0 recs
I don't think they've thought this through

I don't think so. If they are, they're not that bright. The voters she needs to energize are the ones most likely to be watching FOX News.

I think it's just a matter of not only prolonging the race, but also wanting to make themselves appear nicer to win people back. It won't last if she wins the nomination. Not at ALL.

by vcalzone 2008-04-23 04:31AM | 0 recs
I disagree..

about Buchanan.  Joe S. yes, that's true, but the poeple on Morning Joe besides him have always been pro-Obama and still are.  Peggy Noonan is a bona-fide righty and she still shills for O every chance she gets-so does Crowley.

by handsomegent 2008-04-23 03:46AM | 0 recs
Re: I disagree..

I agree that Noonan is still very much anti-Clinton, and she hasn't changed her tone. However, from what I've seen she is in the minority among conservative pundits.

by smoothmedia 2008-04-23 03:54AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads