Media Matters: Media run with anonymous "Tonya Harding" claim

[DeepModem Mom]

Media Matters for America: Mar 28, 2008
Media run with anonymous claim that Clinton win "will require exercising the 'Tonya Harding' option"

Following a March 25 report by ABC News senior national correspondent Jake Tapper on his ABCNews.com blog, Political Punch, that an anonymous Democratic Party official claimed, regarding Sen. Hillary Clinton, "Her securing the nomination is certainly possible -- but it will require exercising the 'Tonya Harding option,' " numerous media figures have repeated the reference -- some going so far as to assert that the purported "Tonya Harding option" is a specific strategy adopted by the Clinton campaign.

Indeed, Tapper's headline -- "Democratic Party Official: Clinton Pursuing 'The Tonya Harding Option' " -- asserts that, according to an anonymous source, Clinton is in fact "Pursuing 'The Tonya Harding Option.' " But that's not what Tapper wrote in the post itself. Rather, he quoted the anonymous source saying that to secure the nomination, Clinton would have to "exercise the Tonya Harding option," not that Clinton was actually "pursuing" such a strategy. Tapper referenced his blog post in an appearance on the March 25 edition of ABC's World News.

On the March 27 edition of MSNBC's Countdown, host Keith Olbermann questioned if the Clinton campaign was "second thinking" the "reported 'Tonya Harding' strategy" and New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd cited Tapper to claim "as one Democrat described it ... Hillary is going for 'the Tonya Harding option' -- if she can't get the gold, kneecap her rival." Additionally, during the March 26 edition of Fox News' America's Election HQ, co-host Megyn Kelly said of the purported "Tonya Harding" strategy: "According to one Democratic Party official, Clinton is reportedly using that same strategy -- destroy her leading competitor." Fox News contributor Dick Morris said in response, "Well, of course they're going to try that. They're going to try anything they can. That's their M.O." By contrast, later in the show Fox News contributor Michelle Malkin said of Clinton: "I don't think she seized this Tonya Harding strategy, which is being pitched so hard by the punditry and the blogosphere."

At one point during the March 26 America's Election HQ segment, Fox News displayed a graphic of Harding and Clinton side-by-side beneath a caption reading "ON THIN ICE":



***

From the March 27 edition of MSNBC's Countdown with Keith Olbermann:

OLBERMANN: The reported "Tonya Harding" strategy, the idea to kneecap Senator Obama's candidacy, to make him unelectable and thus, force the superdelegates to turn to her at the convention.

Is there any indication that there's any kind of second thinking about that, any second thought whatsoever from the Clinton campaign now that there are more signs that it doesn't matter? Once you bring the baseball bat out, whoever is standing is going to get hit? That the winner for the nomination and the loser for the nomination are going to suffer an equivalent amount of kneecap damage?

RICHARD WOLFFE (Newsweek White House correspondent): Well, I do think it's interesting that Senator Clinton's negatives have actually been on the rise recently. But, look, loyalty is key inside the Clinton camp. So there's no sign of second thoughts going on. But there is another path for them.

I mean, if the Clinton camp is really convinced as many people are inside the Clinton camp, that Obama will implode, there will be some scandal, there will be some reason for him to fall down. It's not going to happen because the Clinton folks prompt it to happen.

They will be much better off riding into the convention on a white horse, having suspended the campaign, and then rescue the party from itself. It's not going to happen because of a Tonya Harding strategy. It will just happen.

OLBERMANN: Well, Tonya Harding didn't listen to that advice. We'll see if her equivalent in the candidate -- in the campaign does. Great thanks to Richard Wolffe of Newsweek, joining us tonight. Thank you, sir.

WOLFFE: Thank you, Keith....

http://mediamatters.org/items/200803280013?f=h_latest

[AX10]

1. That memo has been pushed here too.

I am (pleasantly) suprised that mediamatters is going after Olbermann.

[rocktivity]

2. The time and effort that the Clinton camp in investing in destroying Obama

they could be investing in making Hillary look electable.

:(
rocknation

[PSPS]

6. Obama's doing just fine destroying himself

These really belong in the GD-P dungeon, don't they?

The fact is that Obama's candidacy is dead. Sure, his "true believers" won't accept that, but just today I saw all sorts of snarky headlines at the checkout counter: "DESTROY WHITE PEOPLE," "When Barry Became Barack," etc. Forget what you or I may think of this, or whether Obama gets the nomination or not. If he does, his "Reverend albatross" will sink him in the general election -- not because any of this affects how you or I think about all of this but because Joe six-shooter out there won't want to touch "Barack Hussein DESTROY WHITE PEOPLE islamo-fascist-in-hiding 'Barry' Obama. Those are the facts whether you want to face up to them or not.

Our best hope at this stage is that Clinton sweeps the upcoming contests and somehow convinces Obama's fawning acolytes to get on board the only chance we have of winning in November, such as it is.

The next best thing (or maybe even better than the Clinton scenario above) would be a brokered convention where another candidate altogether is put forward -- someone other than either Clinton or Obama.

Personally, I think either Clinton or Obama would be fine as president. They're roughly the same on all the important issues. The real enemy is McSame. Either Clinton or Obama would be a far better choice than McSame. Clinton will have a far better chance at winning, given what we know will happen to Obama after he's put through the MSM republican slime machine. It's already begun, for crying out loud.

[Larkspur]

3. Hillary Clinton is the political version of Tonya Harding

Olberman is right to use Harding as a metaphor on what Clinton campaign is trying to do to Obama. Mathematically, Hillary can't win the nomination nor the pledged delegate lead. her only tactic is to try to drag down Obama into the mud.

[PSPS]

7. Every thing you mention could also be applied to Obama

Mathematically, Obama can't win the nomination nor the pledged delegate lead either. So why won't Obama just give up and concede? Sounds silly, doesn't it? But that's the flawed logic Obama fanatics use.

Of course, you threw in the media-invented "drag (opponent) into the mud" canard. You probably think Clinton is "a racist" too.

[Larkspur]

8. Obama LEADS in pledged delegates. Hillary does not.

Nor will she get the pledged delegate lead over Obama over the remaining contests.

Obama earned his pledged delegates fair and square. The super delegates don't want to be responsible for igniting a civil war by overriding Obama's pledged delegate lead.

Obama has run a great campaign and has skillfully outmaneuvered the Clinton machine. Hillary was totally unprepared for Obama's run. She ran out of money after the Feb. 5 primaries. Hillary has proven that she would be a poor President and definitely an incompetent commander-in-chief.

[PSPS]

10. Someone leads half way through, so we call off the race? Nonsense.

Look, I know you're an Obama fan. And I think he'd be a fine president too. Frankly, I'd be happy to vote for either candidate. But you're letting fanatacism cloud your judgement when you say this:

Nor will she get the pledged delegate lead over Obama

We don't know that. She could certainly surpass Obama's number of pledged delegates.

It's simply ridiculous for anyone to demand a race be called off half way through simply because their candidate happens to be ahead at the time. In fact, that's kind of what the bushies did in Florida in 2000.

[Larkspur]

11. I'm a lukewarm Obama supporter but I'm also an Anybody but Hillary-Republican voter

The only way Hillary would surpass Obama in pledged delegate count is if Obama was struck by lightning and died. Hillary would need to win around 65-70% of the vote in EVERY remaining contest and that is mathematically and practically impossible at this point.

[grasswire]

4. Tragically, Keith is the new John Gibson where the Clintons...

...are concerned. And I say that with deep sorrow.

[Dogmudgeon]

5. Notice how Keith never says ...

... that Hillary has been "thrown under the bus".

At all.

He's used that phrase in the past in a generic way, for those in his favor and out. But since it has a slight moral edge to it, he won't use it about HRC. When it comes to Hillary, he snickers, he giggles, he trips over his own lines to make "the funny". It is among the most pitiful things I have seen from either side in this campaign. Partisanship is one thing -- it's mandatory in a pundit -- but Olbermann's behavior has changed dramatically.

Keith is in love. And that can be a good thing except when it leads to hatred of one's beloved's rivals.

--p!

[Patriot Abroad]

9. Very true.

It's the sort of sad behaviour we expect from Tweety or the Faux news gang. Sad to see Keith going the same route.