Why Americans Hate the Media

Having given him a smidgen of credit for pressing Huck on the Fair Tax, let me add that overall the debate was exactly what I would expect from Russert-moderated affair, thick with pointlessly gotcha-ish questions seemingly designed with YouTube in mind. I thought Russert's badgering of Mitt Romney about how much money he's spent on the race was the low point (and no, I didn't care for Huckabee's Russert-like crack about saving Romney's sons inheritance either), but I'm sure everyone else has their favorite examples. (McCain's Mom! The NYTimes hates Rudy! Chuck Norris!)

Overall, I'm with Geraghty - the candidates were too restrained and the questions too lame to pick a winner. And so to bed.

Comments

We heard why so many Americans hate the media and why so many Americans hate the Clintons. A lot of strong lines previewing the attacks headed the Clintons way in November. If it's Hillary, she's going to get clobbered.

Posted by fougasseu | January 24, 2008 11:26 PM

We heard why so many Americans hate the media and why so many Americans hate the Clintons. A lot of strong lines previewing the attacks headed the Clintons way in November. If it's Hillary, she's going to get clobbered.

Posted by fougasseu | January 24, 2008 11:26 PM

fougasseu, you are correct. I am a fervent hater of a fairly large portion of the Republican platform, and a big Obama supporter, and I am convinced I would have to vote for Romney (or maybe McCain) if Hillary gets the Dem nod. And I don't particularly like either Romney or McCain. I think a whole lot of people who have voted for Edwards and Obama, as well as a great many who won't vote at all in the primaries but will vote in the general election, feel the same way.

The one twist is that I haven't made up my mind about just how stupid McCain will allow himself to be on Iraq, long term. I'll turn to that issue when and if he and HRC are both running in the general election; but if he turns out to be as quacky as he now seems to be, I may write in "Obama" or "no thanks" in the GE.

Posted by Tim | January 25, 2008 1:29 AM

Russert was supposed to be the moderator. At one point he appeared to be debating Romney. Tim was obnoxious. The last 20 minutes were all character assassination, nothing one question on policy - NYT and Rudy, McCain’s Mom, “people don’t like you Mitt”, Mormon question, Huck’s religion. I don't recall Reverend Al being asked about religion.

Posted by Austin personal yrainer | January 25, 2008 2:11 AM

If Americans hate the media, why do they consume them so avidly?

Posted by PEG | January 25, 2008 3:30 AM

PEG - I agree that hate is the wrong word for most people, who love to be told what to think. Hence today's NYTimes endorsement of the Clinton machine, which, along with the Times, has been telling us for four years now that Hillary would be the frontrunner. Of course, they were right, because they kept saying it. For me, hate IS the right word.

Posted by Tim | January 25, 2008 5:02 AM

I have watched every debate this year including all the Democratic and Republican events. It is in my opinion that Mitt Romney is the best candidate to lead America for the next four years. I have full confidence from his credentials that he has the knowledge and abilities needed to fix our economy. He also has the desire and understands the importance of protecting America and the world from the violent jihad extremists. He is exactly what the Dr. ordered in stopping congress from their pork barrel excesses and will cut wasteful spending. I predict that more voters are also going to come to this same realization and Mitt will be the Republican nominee and go on to win the 2008 election.

Posted by JoAnne Smith | January 25, 2008 11:25 AM

Another Obama supporter here (actually a "big donor" now! in my little dribs and drabs of $50, $100 here and there, now up to $1,000).

I would vote for Romney if he is the candidate against Clinton. He doesn't scare me. I think he'd end the war. I don't think he'd want to put extremists on the Supreme Court and anyways the Democrats will have the Senate. His being a Mormon has come to look like a plus for me because I've been upset by the all the prejudice against him on his religion; it would be a positive for that prejudice to lose out.

I don't have one positive thing to say about Hillary Clinton (or her husband).

Posted by KarenS. | January 25, 2008 2:49 PM

Romney would definitely put extremists on the Supreme Court if he wanted to get re-elected. The Dems won't stop him in the Senate, just like they allowed Alito and Roberts to shift the Court to the right.

Posted by bob | January 25, 2008 4:10 PM

I have been a Romney supporter from the beginning. While I am not a mormon, I consider myself a bit of a mormon "insider" as I have known and worked with many over the years. In my view, Romney's faith is a big positive. However, it seems Romney must earn the public's respect before they will look beyond his mormonism. He appears to be succeeding at that, which is encouraging. The conservative base of the GOP are beginning to see Romney as the only real alternative to McCain, who most conservatives will not support in the general election.

Posted by Kent B. | January 25, 2008 4:18 PM