Monday, May 05, 2008

Analyzing the Clinton Metrics For Winning

Which states are "insignificant," according to the Clintons? Which voters count more? Is the nomination process about delegates or the popular vote? And what time of day is most important for votes to matter?

Keith Olbermann takes a look at the various metrics the Clintons have used up to this point in the primaries for what defines winning.


pbwiener said...

As much as I respect Keith's intelligence and love MSNBC, I find it increasingly hard to watch his show, both because of his small-spirited smugness and because he always seems to be reading off the teleprompter rather than speaking to the viewer - and seems very tickled by what he finds on the prompter! He'd be more believable on the radio.

cowboyangel said...

If I were on the opposite side of Olbermann, I'm sure I'd find him insufferable. As it is, his is the only "newsy" show I can actually watch. I think he nails things for what they are. I appreciate his ridicule of Fox News and buffoons on the right like "the comedian" Rush Limbaugh. And Olbermann doesn't set up stupid shouting matches over ridiculous topics, as so many other "news" programs do, including several on MSNBC. Like what happened to David Gregory. I used to find him a fairly intelligent guy, but I watched his new show a couple of times and I was appalled at how stupid and obnoxious it was.

Or Dan Abrams. I can't stand the man.

And your buddy Chris, though I like him more, relies on the shouting-about-flag-pins thing too much as well.

I notice, btw, that you didn't actually respond to what Olbermann had to say in this video. You simply dismissed him as a messenger. You'd make a fine political surrogate! :-)

pbwiener said...

But I'm not on the opposite side of Olbermann - that's one of the main reasons I'm uncomfortable with him. I agree with most of his commentary, though I think he pays way too much attention to Fox and O'Reilly and enjoys that whole shtick too much. I agree: Gregory's new show was as little embarrassing. As I said before, I like Matthews primarily because he loves politics for what it is, and because he seems to be a kind-hearted person. So does Tucker Carlson. I suppose, in the long run, I don't care very much what anyone believes or says; I care more how they act, and how their actions affect other people. I find his commitment to principles one of Obama's weak points, though he seems a genuine enough person.