Reason: Media reports Hunstman can come in second are biased

[tsetsefly]

That Huntsman might pull ahead of Paul into second today in New Hampshire has been widely said with very little evidence, which certainly feeds into the Paul fan paranoid narrative that the media is desperate for anyone-but-Paul to become the anointed anyone-but-Romney. I am even now watching cable tv pundits, presenting the current 20-13 Paul-Huntsman polling, still talking as if Huntsman beating him is reasonable to expect today. I'm not saying it is impossible; I will say that as of now there is no good reason to believe it, even after Dixville Notch.

Good read btw...

http://reason.com/blog/2012/01/10/hu...-world-that-is

[CaptUSA]

Good article from Brian Doherty, but he's a little close to the campaign. He may not be seeing that the media can actually make things happen. Or at least, he's underestimating their abilities.

[KingNothing]

His point is legit though. There's no reason for the media to be saying that Huntsman can come in second. Without them, he couldn't.

Full disclosure: I am not a conspiracy nut. It's obvious, though, that the Party has told their sycophants in the media that "Huntsman could surprise" and like good little groveling nothings, they repeated the "inside information" that they were given.

[TheLasersShadow]

I got a feeling that Huntsman is going to do very well because no one has attacked him on anything that I know of we might even lose second because of it. I really wish someone had done at least one ad on him ... Personally I don't even know how to go after him. I know Collins posted a sheet on him but I can't find or remember what was on it.

If I don't know whats wrong / negatives with Huntsman then 95% of the electorate doesn't ether. PROBLEM!! thats not good as I follow things decently closely SO ... I think I have to predict that Huntsman is going to be neck and neck with Paul challenging him closely for second. Mitt takes top but not by as much.