The media hates Hil so much that I feel like voting for her

It would be stupid to vote for someone because a group you hate is against her. But that's the way I sometimes feel when I read these orgasmic articles by conservative pundits overanalyzing Hillary's defeat and praising Obama only because he beat their most hated politician. Obama deserves a lot of praise, of course, but my point is that the media in normal circumstances would just brush him aside, as they do with any Democrat. But they hate Hillary, and they need to sink them first.

I'm with Obama, now that Edwards' chances are bleak. But a Hillary comeback victory would give me a reason to celebrate--seeing the media pissed off like it never was before.

She just seems to irk certain people. But she is my second choice now, after Edwards.

and KO. It's outrageous to see the pundits behave with so much hatred and bias. Matthews needs to go back on his meds.

Well, I guess there's got to be at least one reason.

I wouldn't call that spite though. Prudence, maybe.

Obama is not progressive. He and Clinton are neck and neck. Though he says he wouldn't have voted for the IWR you can't say for sure it is true.

Just look at his present votes. He didn't want pick a side in those votes.

I can't wait, cuz if he wins the GE...people will be bashin his ass on DU within a week of his entry into office.

I said I'm with Obama. But the temptation is there. I'm not doing it though. I'm from NY and will vote for Obama.

going to get the full treatment now as front runner (Huckabee too.) When the dust settles, Edwards will still be running. I'm beginning to think that all the candidates will be so beaten up that Al Gore might be persuaded to step in and save the day (at least I can hope.)

get the full treatment. I don't see that happening.

I have not noticed that. Although, being a Biden supporter, I always felt like my candidate got the short end of the stick.

The same media that had been declaring her nomination "inevitable" for the past four months?

The only person I have seen NOT handing her the nomination on a silver platter is Olbermann and on another thread someone posted that he is a "shill" for Hillary :shrug:

charge of inevitablity against her. Something she's never once said.

Same with Tweety.

They just have to figure out a way to keep the republicans from nominating our candidate

I originally didn't have a candidate, but the vitriol here regarding Clinton made me come to her defense and eventually became a Clinton supported.

I too would get so much pleasure if she won...just to rub it in their noses...especially Chris Matthews, All Rethugs, most the media, O'Liely,
Rush and all those who tried to impeach Clinton, etc.

They will all croak and I pray for that day. Go Hillary!

Is that some of the same pundits that are going after her now, were praising her and had her as the "nominee" back 6 months ago! These people just go with the flow, and say stupid things to get ratings.

that the thought of the first woman executive of the United States isn't considered change. She's run on experience, but why this doesn't consitute a significant change to this country's history is beyond me. Yet the Chris Matthews' of the media never bother to consider this at all.

When in fact all three (Obama, Edwards and Clinton) can invoke change in their campaign speeches because they would be a welcomed change from the REPUBLICANS.

She's no different from Bush, so her presidency wouldn't be a change.

A load of crap, of course, because as you noted, a female presidency simply has no precedent. It is the epitome of change. Not to mention that her record is nothing like Bush's or any Republican's, for that matter.

to go anti clinton. One can go back to the 30th of October when HRC made a serious error on the imigration question as it related to New York's Gov.. I will only use one network and one 3 hour program and that being CNN and The Situation Room. From the end of the debate through November 14th CNN and this program within each hour had at least one to three anti clinton reports. On the 15th of November CNN covered the Nevada debate and HRC did herself some good in this debate. There were no negative stories on this program on the 16th, 19th.(over the weekend on CNN there was fair reporting on HRC) Then on the 19th of November, CNN gave their new polling and reported the race in Iowa was still showing HRC ahead by mid single digits.(note: other networks also showed HRC still had a good lead in Iowa. Only one reported a change and that was the ABC Washington Post poll that showed Obama taking the lead. Now on the 20th CNN used this polling report and disregarded their own polling. Also, NBC, CBS, Fox all used this ABC poll and disregarded their own polling. Now CNN and the Situation Room kept reporting for the next three weeks CNN and the Situation Room used this poll as their standard. Then on December 15th The Des Moines Registar endorsed HRC and that basically ended th negative reporting as polls showed HRC either ahead by 2 to 4 or trailing 2 to 4. In watching as much evening news the other networks basically followed the line as CNN and the Situation Room.....

There has been way too much negatives reporting of the clinton campaign and way too much positives during this period for obama and edwards and even the second tier candidates. I only surmise now that Obama is the presumptive leader the msm will take a look at him, but I doubt serious they will.

Whether you call it hate by the msm or they are doing their job, there has been way to unbalanced negative reporting on clinton.