Experience tells us that the Republican presidential candidate the media prefer is the one they believe is most easily defeated.
On this weekend's "Chris Matthews Show," seven of the twelve regulars said Mitch Daniels "has the best shot to overcome his obvious flaw" (video follows with transcript and commentary):
CHRIS MATTHEWS: We put it to the Matthews Meter, twelve of our regulars including Howard, Katty and Norah, “Which candidate has the best shot to overcome his obvious flaw?” Well this is surprising I guess. Seven said Mitch Daniels. Three said John Huntsman, two, one each for Mitt Romney and one for Pawlenty.
According to Matthews, Daniels' "flaw" is the issue surrounding him having divorced and remarried his current wife. Romney's of course is Massachusetts health care. Huntsman's is his connection to President Obama as well as support for same-sex marriage. Tim Pawlenty's is his support for cap-and-trade.
Regardless of the seriousness of any of these issues in the minds of primary voters, conservatives have to be suspicious when liberal media members start jumping on a Republican's bandwagon.
The only elephants they like are RINOs, ones that are easily defeated, or both.
As Rush Limbaugh said on his radio show Monday:
Why do you think the Democrats want us to nominate him? Do they really want to nominate a challenger here? (laughing) They really want us to nominate somebody they really think could beat Obama? Is that what they want us to do? And there's this phrase again: serious. That's the new gravitas. That's the new, "He's an intellectual. He's a serious person." It also means boring and moderate, and it does not mean conservative. [...]
We are to believe that Obama and the Democrats seriously want a strong challenger for Obama! Just ask yourself a simple question. You're a member of the Obama regime (or you are a high-ranking member of the Democrat National Committee) and your first and foremost objective right now is raising money so as to secure the reelection victory of Barack Obama. That's what you live for.
Are you really going to go out and try to find a Republican who could beat you, and then call a reporter for the Washington Post and say, "You know, we're really scared of this guy. If this guy, Daniels, gets in, we're gonna be really worried. If this guy Daniels doesn't get in, well, it's home free for us; 'cause the rest of that field's a joke." Is that how you're gonna think, that the strongest opponent you have is who you're going to trumpet? [...]
So what they are doing is they are trying to take out every candidate on the Republican side they can think of. They are already started impugning one candidate after another. Now, you know my theory: They will always tell us who they fear. I'm not trying to cause any problems here (I'm really not), but it's obvious to me they don't fear Mitch Daniels. Maybe in time they'll come to fear him, but right now Mitch Daniels is who they want to run against.
Now, less than a week later, the Matthews crew overwhelmingly claims Daniels is the most likely to overcome his flaw. These are the same people that wanted McCain in 2008.
Regardless of what your views are of Daniels, if liberal media members want him to oppose Obama, it's not because they think he can win.
Just something to consider.
