Cardinal Richelieu asks, if Romney wins in Iowa, "will the snarky and contemptuous tone of most Romney coverage continue?"
I don't know if that was intended to be a rhetorical question (do Cardinals ask rhetorical questions? and how do you say "rhetorical question" in French?). But my answer to our perplexed Cardinal is, Yes. The media resents and dislikes Romney, for some good reasons and mostly bad ones. Above all, they hate someone who has moved to the right and might benefit from doing so (think of the coverage of Vice President Bush in 1987-88). Incidentally, as this example suggests, media hostility doesn't mean Romney couldn't win the nomination--or the general election.
And the media hostility to Romney also poses a potential trap for John McCain. McCain has to make sure his criticism of Romney doesn't seem simply to echo the liberal media's, or isn't perceived by GOP primary voters as simply echoing the liberal media's. McCain shouldn't attack Romney for his new-found conservative positions, but for his old liberal ones: When McCain was supporting Reagan in the 80s, where was Romney? When McCain was fighting Hillary's health care plan in the 90s, where was Romney? And, as he's now arguing, when McCain was supporting the surge earlier this year, where was Romney?
As for Iowa: I've been here sixteen hours (half of them asleep), and obviously have only the skimpiest anecdotal evidence and impressions. For what it's worth, they are: Hillary won't win, and could run third; Ron Paul will outperform his poll numbers, but McCain should still be able to take third on the GOP side; and that it's really cold outside.
