Credit Chuck Todd for candor. The NBC News Political Director has acknowledged that the media is poised to take a third-place finish by John McCain in Iowa, declare him the winner and catapult the Arizona senator to victory in New Hampshire. Todd appeared with the Politico's Roger Simon on this afternoon's Hardball.
View video here.
ROGER SIMON: John McCain is trying to thread the needle perfectly here, not to spend too much time so people think he's trying to win, but enough to get third place. And if he gets third place, he hopes that Huckabee wins, so that independents will come out to slam the door on Huckabee like they slammed it on Pat Robertson [when he finished a strong second in the 1988 Iowa GOP caucuses.]
CHRIS MATTHEWS: Chuck, do you see the same results: if McCain pulls a third and Huckabee wins then John McCain goes right to New Hampshire and perhaps to the nomination?
CHUCK TODD: Yeah you know, I hate to be existential here, but the media -- and I say this as if I'm not a member of it -- but the media does seem to be ready to will John McCain out of Iowa [i.e., with his "ticket punched" for NH]. It is a stunning thing, and if I were Mitt Romney, or Giuliani or Mike Huckabee I'd be like "wait a minute. You're gonna take a third place finish and somehow use that to catapult this guy, with free media, and get him the victory in New Hampshire?" And frankly that is what's gonna happen. There's a reason John McCain is sort of the king of working the media. He's doing a great job of it.
MATTHEWS: Gary Hart back in 1984 got 17% in Iowa, Walter Mondale got 49%. Guess who "won"? Gary Hart "won." The media declared him the winner and he won in New Hampshire. You are so dead right, if it happens.
TODD: No, it happens.
Simon's point was also very interesting -- that McCain needed to spend just enough time in Iowa to finish third, but not enough to give the impression he was trying to win. It's all about exceeding expectations.
—Mark Finkelstein is a NewsBusters contributing editor and host of Right Angle. Contact him at mark@gunhill.net.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
The media is going to push
January 2, 2008 - 19:17 ET by alamojbThe media is going to push for the moderate Republicans. No doubt about it. Senator John "amnesty" McCain and "Jimmy Carter" Huckabee are going to be alternately pushed. If Huckabee wins, he can be beaten in the general election. If Senator McCain wins the general election, he will not be so bad from their point of view. The media has been giving him free press for years.
The poison of Multiculturalism has made people so that if the "Borg" of Star Trek were to show up saying "resistance is futile, you will be assimilated", half the Western World would call those of us who resisted "Bigots"
I'm not too worried about
January 2, 2008 - 19:37 ET by NBFI'm not too worried about McCain. Yes, the liberal media will do anything to get him in a showdown with Hillary, but they also underestimate how much the rank and file Republican loathes McCain. The media having McCain as the token Republican (in-name-only) on seemingly every show for the past decade probably didn't help him.
Emphasis
January 2, 2008 - 19:41 ET by Jerry MackThere is too much emphasis placed by the media on Iowa and New Hampshire. All it does is give the winner some bragging rites. I do not know anyone who will have their opinion swayed by the winners in either state. Due too the encreasing growth of talk radio, cable news and the internet, people can find all the information that they need about any candidate.
I would like to see the first primary moved to a more populated state where they actually vote. Maybe Florida, Texas, California , Ohio, New York or Georgia. Seems to me these caucuses can be manipulated.
Yes, Jerry
January 2, 2008 - 19:58 ET by BlondeAgreed. I'd be happy to vote first.
Inasmuch as you are absolutely correct with your too much emphasis point...I believe it's compounded by the media being stuck in the "old" paradigm of election patterns, with of course, the media right in the middle of it.
I suspect they're going to be in for a huge shock when we actually have a vote somewhere important, like South Carolina, and then here (Florida) on Super Tuesday.
Either way, I will be glad to see Iowa in the books. I am OVER it, already.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Shorten election season
January 2, 2008 - 22:59 ET by nkviking75Iowa gets the attention it does because in '76 Jimmy Carter came from nowhere to claim second place. A noname candidate parlayed that second place finish to win the White House. The MSM wants another dramatic story like that, preferably starring a Democrat.
Although the ad revenue underwrites my paycheck as a radio announcer, personally, I think a national primary would be in order. The jockeying for the head of the line this time out was ridiculous. So's a Jan. 3 caucus night.
If we can't get that, don't let any primary or caucus happen before May of election year, and don't allow any open campaiging before March of election year. I think a lot of people are burned out on the election already, and we have 11 months to go.
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
You said a mouth
January 2, 2008 - 21:21 ET by Gary P JacksonYou said a mouth full!
You got a little over 200,000 people caucasing in Iowa.(the estimated Republican and dim turnout) Tell me how giving this one state, and NH, so much clout makes a lick of sense in a country of 300 Million.
I agree, it makes more sense to start the process off in a state with some population, and where folks actually turn out in numbers to vote.
One thing these two
January 2, 2008 - 22:51 ET by MidAmericaOne thing these two little states do is equalize the money game. Big states are all about money and who's got it. Big states have rallys and huge fundraisers, all of it packaged for maximum effect. These little states force the candidates out of their limo's and studios and to go meet the people face to face. Look what it's done to hillary (lots of cash) and what it's done for Huckabee (no cash). These states won't determine who the ultimate winner is but they can help bring out the true character of the candidates so the rest of the country can make better informed choices.
Huckabee is un-ethically using religious organizations in Iowa
January 2, 2008 - 23:16 ET by Daniel BakerYou don't need a lot of money when you can befriend pastors and use their networks
Huckabee, a Baptist minister whose campaign has
caught fire only in recent months, is largely relying on pre-existing
networks within Iowa, particularly people of faith. Christian
conservatives make up an estimated 40% of the state's GOP electorate.
Reisetter said at least 90 pastors have endorsed
Huckabee and have been careful to make those endorsements personally
and not on behalf of their congregations. "There's a fine line the
pastors have to walk," he said.
At Huckabee's appearances in the state, volunteers hand out a
"commitment card," on which potential voters check a box pledging to
caucus for Huckabee. They are also asked to provide their .... churches.
http://www.usatoday....
What's unethical?
January 2, 2008 - 23:17 ET by nkviking75As long as the religious people or organizations involved are careful to follow the law, what's unethical about using "pre-existing Christian networks"? The evangelicals would be a major block if they could be united behind a candidate. Any candidate has a right to try to win their support.
As a Baptist minister, Huckabee maybe had a head start. So what? Dems have powerful unions backing individual candidates. For that matter, some Dems like the Clintons, use black churches a lot for exposure.
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
Well, since it's illegal to politick from the pulpit
January 2, 2008 - 23:33 ET by RJ....doesn't that also make it unethical?
It's not illegal persay to
January 2, 2008 - 23:38 ET by BlazerIt's not illegal persay to politik from the pulpit RJ, that is indeed covered under the first amendment. There's just that pesky little problem of losing ones tax-exempt status.
"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "
- Ben Kenobi on Liberals, and the MSM.
You've cited a "difference without a distinction", Blazer
January 2, 2008 - 23:56 ET by RJThat makes it a law, and doing so makes it an illegal act.
Your right RJ, I should
January 3, 2008 - 00:02 ET by BlazerYour right RJ, I should have put (-sarc on) because that was my intent there.
Just wondering why churches in particular cannot politik under their tax exempt status, but other tax exempt entities like labor union's and the .org's can.
"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "
- Ben Kenobi on Liberals, and the MSM.
lol blazer!
January 3, 2008 - 00:08 ET by RJRe-reading your post, I can see it's facetious nature. :^)
Obama and Clinton
January 2, 2008 - 23:24 ET by BlazerObama and Clinton both gave major speeches addressed from churches last year in Selma and you didn't hear anyone in the media sayin' they were unethical.
Well accept for Hillary doin her best Hattie McDaniel.
"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "
- Ben Kenobi on Liberals, and the MSM.
AMNESTY man
January 2, 2008 - 19:57 ET by 10ksnookerrises from the ashes for one last fling.
McCAIN WILL APPOINT A LIBERAL SUPREME COURT JUDGE
January 2, 2008 - 22:00 ET by Daniel BakerHe blocked nominations of conservative judges for MSM praise.
McCain = More Liberal Judges
January 2, 2008 - 22:05 ET by Free StinkerDaniel,
That is probably the best reason for us to make sure McCain doesn't get the nomination.
Newsbusters. Log on and find out What the heck is so yummy over here!
McCain Raising Taxes isn't a bad one either
January 2, 2008 - 22:15 ET by Daniel BakerBut SCOTUS is definitely more important