Chris Matthews: Can You Win on Sympathy?

How can we get Chris Matthew off of MSNBC's campaign coverage? His behavior is unethical. Just a few minutes ago he said, re; The Tear "But can you win a campaign on sympathy?"

That's analysis? No, that is venal. And his role as the Hillary Killer couldn't be plainer, it's embarrasing and disgusting and sexist.

How can we get him off the air?

•  Chris Matthews: Obne of the BIG LOSERS tonight

  Assholes

  Olbermann, too.

  - Albert Einstein

  by Walt starr on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:11:14 PM PDT

  •  Exactly both of them look stupid tonight

    Mathews really should be fired. He is a disgrace.

    by kitsapdem on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:27:27 PM PDT

•  I agree

  When he said "I wouldn't put it past the Clintons.." for about the 20th time tonight, I just gave up on MSNBC, despite Olbermann's presence.  What a fucking weasel Matthews is.

  by geordie on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:12:14 PM PDT

•  Priceless Rachel Maddow just slammed Tweety!

  by humphrey on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:15:17 PM PDT

  •  What did she say

    I just caught the end of it.  I surmise she was siting TalkingPoints.com as siting him as some kind of catalyst to protect Hillary from the likes of people like him who unfairly pile on.

    by astoundedstill on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:21:18 PM PDT

    •  Maddow said

      That bloggers on Talking Points Memo said that Chris Matthews crapping on Senator Clinton for two weeks on TV has helped her win New Hampshire.

      Matthews sarcastically responded something to the fact that "Oh, I'm all powerful!"

      by Ed in Montana on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:25:41 PM PDT

      •  Well Olbermann crapped on Clinton

        yesterday too...he had to look like the "man" that Tweety is...they are both useless.

        by kitsapdem on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:28:54 PM PDT

•  The grim look on Matthews' face

  earlier when Tom Brokaw was setting him straight was priceless.  And unlike most everybody else, he wouldn't dare interrupt Brokaw...

  by historyrocks on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:15:42 PM PDT

•  I agree, and I'm not even voting for her!

  I think Chris Matthews is shameful, and I wish they'd kick his senile, loud, old ass off MSNBC permanently. Christ, even Pat Buchanan sounds balanced compared to him.

  I'm voting for Obama, but I think Chris Matthews taking advantage of his role in the limelight to influence an entire nation is absolutely ridiculous.

  Granted, people in America shouldn't listen to him anymore than they do O'Reilly, but even so. Shame on him, shame on MSNBC. Even Keith Olbermann looks less classy with Crap Matthews by his side.

  by GirlZero on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:16:28 PM PDT

  •  manipulate, not influence...

    In the second paragraph above. Sorry, I'm drinking wine to drown out the sound of his nasal whining.

    by GirlZero on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:17:52 PM PDT

  •  Even if you're not for Clinton

    Tweety is just disgusting. And he'll move from candidate to candidate doing his number on them. I have seen him love and then fall out of love with Edwards, now he's moved to Obama..he's always hated the Clintons...but geez if you're supposed to be a professional you need to STFU.  Olbermann is starting to look like a wheenie and siding with Tweety.

    by kitsapdem on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:31:00 PM PDT

•  Hate Tweety but

  he's right on this one.  They took a page from the Karl Rove playbook.

  by Paleo on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:17:22 PM PDT

  •  what??

    this comment is absurd: what page was that? any facts to go with this insidious, cynical innuendo?

    by historyrocks on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:19:22 PM PDT

    •  Common sense

      Yes, the Clintons just came out and admitted they staged it.  Don't be ridiculous.

      by Paleo on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:24:08 PM PDT

      •  You are an idiot

        by kitsapdem on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:31:48 PM PDT

        •  W.C. Fields was right

          There's a sucker, and apparently a moron, born every minute.

          by Paleo on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:35:41 PM PDT

          •  And that would be you.

            by Radiowalla on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:03:48 PM PDT

            •  Absolutely!!!

              Suckers for Obama unite!

              by kitsapdem on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:19:29 PM PDT

•  What is there to do about Matthews?

  I suppose e-mails to NBC/MSNBC -- not sure really, what kind of impact we could have.  

  Tonight, however, it seemed that the rest of the MSNBC crew: Olbermann, Maddow, Brokaw, etc. were clearly re-butting the anti-Hillary BS that he's been spewing for months now.  

  by historyrocks on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:17:59 PM PDT

  •  It didn't seem to me

    that KO was all that much.

    by astoundedstill on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:22:25 PM PDT

•  chris matthews

  can kiss my ass

  by GregNYC on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:19:02 PM PDT

•  I know...he's wondering how the Clintons

  are going to make this sound like a comeback.  What an idiot.  He's spent the last three days totally trashing her and advancing the notion she would lose along with everybody else.  Like it or not...that's a comeback.  If he doesn't like it he should have kept his smarmy mouth shut.  AND if I hear him call the dems the Mommy party again I think my head will explode.

  by astoundedstill on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:19:13 PM PDT

•  This is a comment. Not a diary.

  There are great open threads for your comments. All opinions aside tonight, we have unspoken rules.

  -fink

  by fink on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:19:15 PM PDT

  •  sorry

    but i thought this particular comment from Chris Matthews needed to be highlighted. i rarely diary, so please excuse me.

    by BrooklynBoy on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:25:24 PM PDT

•  Actrually----it's the reason for

  Clinton's strong showing---no matter what Tweet said----it was the women sympathy vote---and there's no getting around it.

  by dotster on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:19:33 PM PDT

  •  there's zero evidence to support this-

    to my knowledge: its rank speculation.  Just as likely: many NH Dems actually responded to her message &  independents weren't as much a factor as Iowa.

    by historyrocks on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:21:58 PM PDT

    •  then they responded in the last 15 minutes

      to her great message.  As Russert and Williams just reported----all tracking polls for both Clinton and Obama showed big Obama win.  
       There's no other explanation----huge women sympathy vote for her calculated tears.

      by dotster on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:35:34 PM PDT

  •  is that right?

    could it be that the people of New Hampshire think she is "electable" or that they like her on the issues, or her experience ? or is it because she got a little choked up, contrived or not?

    by BrooklynBoy on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:23:32 PM PDT

    •  Sorry----all polls---showed big Obama win---

      when was the last time that happened in this century?  Everyone I know commented on the affect the crying thing would have.  I knew it when the media replayed it 1000 times.

      by dotster on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:37:45 PM PDT

  •  Give me some evidence for this...

    ...or are you just going by your gut.

    I am not dismissing the idea I just need to know how you can feel so certain.

    If anything, I would speculate that many VOTERS (not just women) were attracted to her because she has been so clearly mistreated by the media.  I know, I know, every candidate feels that way but this is different.  Compared to what is happening to Clinton, the fact that the media is ignoring Edwards should be counted as a blessing.

    And since I will be supporting the Democratic nominee no matter who is nominated (who else can say that?) I will also say that it does not bother me that Obama is getting such glowing coverage.  What I want is fair coverage for all - the media does no favors to Obama by treating Clinton poorly.  The poor treatment will just swing over to him tomorrow.

    by Terrapin on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:35:23 PM PDT

  •  Sympathy?

    Perhaps women are seeing the media bias in action. They are seeing the media going after someone on something they they really understand.

    When the media went after Gore on the internet thing or Love canal, people didn't know the facts, so they believed what they were told. The media are going after HRC for something most of us have experienced and so they are calling bullshit. The media have lost credibility because of this.

    This could be the crack in the bullshit wall that has been built around HRC over the last fifteen years.

    Sympathy? Not so much. Anger.

    by 5x5 on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:47:29 PM PDT

  •  I wouldn't call it

    sypathy as taking back our collective power from white middle class talking heads.

    by astoundedstill on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:56:01 PM PDT

•  He's insane

  He just said, "It's clear the Democratic Party is driven by women"....um,  excuse me? Since when? Because there are more OF us?  And does that make the GOP the testosterone driven MANLY party?  His analysis is falling flat on its ass...oh, and here comes bootjack Buchanan to be all amazed at the NH voters.
  They can spin it but it's not over until WE say it's over.

  AHAHAHAAAAA....Rachel Maddow announced that TPM is calling Screamer Matthews out on his misogyny. This is getting amusing. The site must be on overload. Wait, got in.

  TPM Reader MS ...

     I have always had somewhat lukewarm feelings about Hillary Clinton. It took me years to forgive her for her "baking cookies" comment. At the time I had just given birth to my first child and decided to leave my job as an attorney to stay home and take care of my baby. I have been on the fence throughout this campaign, liking John Edwards more than the others. The media coverage of Sen. Clinton has caused my blood to boil. I can not bear to witness blatant misogyny. Gloria Steinheim's article in the NYT this morning was so on the mark. If I lived in New Hampshire, I would have voted for Sen. Clinton today. I would not allow the talking heads to tell me who to vote for or declare this race over. And I certainly was not going to participate in the sexist bs that has been spewing out the mouths of the likes of Chris Matthews.

  --Josh Marshall

  Elizabeth Edwards, A REAL WOMAN, Mr. Matthews you big headed lout, is now speaking, so shut up. She and her husband, whom you have patronizingly and smugly ignored have something useful to say.

  ~~~~
  Hell, if we can't even get rid of that little jerk Tucker, Matthews is a long shot.

  by Panda on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:22:43 PM PDT

•  I am so enjoying watching Tweety's

  head explode because Hillary is leading. I'm just going to sit back and enjoy. Because just now msnbc, aka tweety has just called Hillary the winner of New Hampshire. Ya Baby!

  by bonesy on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:33:15 PM PDT

•  Randi Rhodes was spot on today

  When she said that all a woman had to do to get Matthews approval was to put on a short skirt and a push up bra.  The guy is repulsive and stupid.  It looks like KO can't stand him.

  Just let Tom Brokaw do this stuff.  He may be old but at least he is a journalist.  Maybe they could hire Rachel Maddow to co-anchor.

  by klw1963 on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 07:35:57 PM PDT