Friday, February 22, 2008

Politics (reality check)

A good editorial in the Washington Post about what people would say about Obama if he just lost 11 straight contests in a row with no end in sight. My favorite quote:

And while we're on the subject of message, what genius decided it was a great idea to demonize hope?
Besides Bill Clinton intervening, this tactic sickened me the most. You can attack the messenger, a poor, fallacious strategy at best, but railing against truth is cynical and unseemly. The Clinton campaign seemed lazy, convinced of their inevitability.

The article is meant to be a wake up call, since the press seems convinced Clinton can pull off a victory. It's over for her unless they find a corpse in Obama's closet or something.


  1. I think that Clinton is counting on the Democratic establishment to hand her the nomination via the superdelegates and the uncounted delegates from FL and MI.
    Note that the party said nothing to her when she violated the agreement not to campaign in those states, and she is using her "victories" there (where Obama - playing by the agreed upon rules - wasn't even on the ballot) to justify trying to seat their delegates in her corner.
    Could it be that Clinton remains confident becaus ethe fix is in, and has been from the start?

    Conspiracy theorists want to know!

  2. I've been reading that her super delegates are starting to shift to Obama:

    "Most unnerving for Clinton is the trickle of super-delegates who have defected from her corner to Obama's. The shift comes as Clinton failed to deliver a telling blow on Obama in their penultimate televised debate before the Texas and Ohio primaries on March 4."