Slip of the tongue, or was the man who gets a thrill up his leg from Barack Obama's rhetoric voicing his innermost apprehension at the prospect of Hillary Clinton regaining the upper hand?
On this afternoon's Hardball, host Chris Matthews was discussing the March 4th Texas primary with Wayne Slater of the Dallas Morning News, John Heilemann of New York magazine, and Norah O'Donnell. The MSNBCer made the point that under the arcane Texas rules in which the race is a hybrid of caucus and primary, it's possible for one candidate to win the popular vote and the other to walk off with more delegates.
That seemed to trigger Chris's anxiety reflex at the prospect of Hillary getting good publicity . . .
NORAH O'DONNELL: Hillary's campaign is increasingly worried about the state of Texas. Not only because the polls show it tightening, but also because of this very convoluted delegate what that it's apportioned in that state, which means that she could win the state in terms of percentage points and that he could end up winning more delegates.Have a look at the video. It does seem that Matthews realizes that he let his pro-Obama cat out of the bag, and quickly moves to cover himself by casting the matter in terms of what Hillary needs to do.
CHRIS MATTHEWS: Who gets the headline, Norah?
O'DONNELL: Which isn't fair.
MATTHEWS: Who gets the headline?
O'DONNELL: She may get the headline because --
MATTHEWS: Now, is it the popular vote that gets the headline or the delegate vote gets the deadline?
O'DONNELL: Well, the delegate vote in the end matters.
MATTHEWS: Well who gets the headline the next day? I'm asking about this because of momentum. If Senator Clinton does do well tomorrow but loses by seven or eight points in Wisconsin, still able to say "I'm still in the game," then you go to Ohio and Texas on the fourth of March, which is two weeks hence, whoever gets that headline? Who gets the double-header? That's gonna matter. We're talking momentum here, we're not talking delegates because Hillary is way behind in delegates.
What I'm worried about is -- what I'm looking at -- Hillary's got to keep the momentum thing in check by getting that headline: "I won Texas and Ohio."
—Mark Finkelstein is a NewsBusters contributing editor and host of Right Angle. Contact him at mark@gunhill.net.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Jeez, when he's questioning
February 18, 2008 - 20:35 ET by motherbeltJeez, when he's questioning Nora about "who gets the headline???" can you hear the panic in his voice?
Right about now, I'll bet he's wishing his mouth had a built-in tape delay!
Matthews i definitely losing it...he is becoming more unhinged and out of control by the day!
ROFL!!
MB: I think you've nailed
February 18, 2008 - 20:40 ET by Mark FinkelsteinMB: I think you've nailed it. Chris really does seem to be panicking at the prospect of Hillary getting the positive headline.
Matthews is an Obama partisan hack.
February 18, 2008 - 20:34 ET by Missouri ConservativeMSNBC as a network has devolved into nothing more than an Obama PR outlet. Matthews and Olbermann practically air Obama commercials for two hours every night.
"women and minorities hardest hit"
Wayne Slater? Hahahaha.
February 18, 2008 - 20:37 ET by TEWayne Slater? Hahahaha. I read the Dallas Morning (so-called) News every day. Slater is as much a kook fringe leftist conspiracy theorist as Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermoronn. Consequently, he has been a frequent guest on Olbermoronn's unwatched freak show.
Martthews and the rest ought to be worried
February 18, 2008 - 20:42 ET by c5thenThey threw Hillary under the bus at the first opportunity they had. If she actually pulls out a comback, the clinton machine is probably going to roll over some of these folks like a Panzer Division.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Alan Keyes '08.
I don't know ... Anybody
February 18, 2008 - 20:49 ET by drillanwrI don't know ...
Anybody else find it ironic they are discussing the "popular" vote winner and the "delegate" vote winner in this situation?
When you men get home and face an anti-war protestor, look him in the eyes and shake his hand. Then, wink at his girlfriend because she knows she’s dating a pussy… ~ Attributed to General Tommy Franks
Sure it's ironic, and hypocritical
February 19, 2008 - 10:49 ET by Indiana JoeEspecially for a group that is foaming at the mouth over the Electoral College!
LMAO
MSNBC has no business
February 18, 2008 - 20:58 ET by SMGalbraithMSNBC has no business permitting Matthews and Olbermann to co-anchor the news desk for primaries and the election. None. Nada. Zilch.
Did I say none?
Their partisanship and bias is so obvious that it should preclude them from covering political matters.
That's if this network had any standards. Yeah, Keith, those "tenets of journalism" that you so self-righteously think you have.
Watch out, Chrissy!
February 18, 2008 - 21:30 ET by GalvanicMatthews must be fully aware that his Valley-girl excitement over Obama is earning him a spot on the Clintonistas' Hit List. The Clintons model themselves after the JFK generation of the Kennedys, whose family creed was "Don't get mad . . . Get even!"
With their powerful connections, the Clintons could terminate Matthews career rather easily.
He can't stand
February 18, 2008 - 21:35 ET by GregEHe can't stand the thought of that thrill that went up his leg being the last one. Afraid he's gonna lose that lovin' feelin'.
Obama = thrills.....Hillary = chills
Oh, boy. Chrissy couldn't
February 18, 2008 - 22:00 ET by fitzfongOh, boy. Chrissy couldn't avoid stepping in it. Now Wolfson is going to call up, demand an apology...again, and Chrissy's going to have to read out the prepared statement, apologizing to the "uniquely qualified" junior Senator from New York. By now, the Clintonistas have learned from Steve Centani's captors and are going to demand Chrissy fully convert to Clintonology before they release him. Clinton ak bahr, Chrissy.
Matthews
February 19, 2008 - 00:02 ET by iveseenitallMatthews and Olbermann are certifiably mad. They need to be committed. I'm serious. I can picture them being hauled away, holding on to their desk chairs, kicking and screaming, ranting and spitting. Sad.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
It's time to permanently separate the words: MSNBC and News.
February 19, 2008 - 03:47 ET by Parker1227Matthews is not a news analyst, he's an underwear chucking middle-aged woman at a Tom Jones concert.
Olbermann isn't a news broadcaster, he's Tokyo Rose in drag.
Edward R. Murrow indeed!
Find it interesting...
February 19, 2008 - 08:34 ET by docbThe Hclinton campaign had determined that all would be wrapped up by super tuesday..So they did not look to the complications of the Texas vote. this begs the question-- the management was incompetent=== the arrogance was driving the campaign or they were smug fools. They have little money, no inspiration and questionable character... Do the Dem want that to be their legacy?