From The Left Coaster.
Obama blogger Markos Moulitsas uses his Newsweek gig to repeat what's become boilerplate at his Obamablog:
No matter how you define victory, Barack Obama holds an insurmountable lead in the race to earn the Democratic nomination. He leads in the one metric that matters most: the pledged delegates chosen directly by Democratic voters. But he also leads in the popular vote, the number of states won and money raised. Still, Obama's advantages aren't large enough to allow him an outright victory. He needs the 20 percent of party delegates who aren't bound to a candidate. It's with these superdelegates that Clinton has staked her ephemeral chances.
Clinton's near-lone chance of victory rests with a coup by superdelegate, persuading enough of them to overcome the primary voters' preference.
Of course, almost none of this is factually accurate. Here are some facts... [Please read the post. He also quotes Sean Wilentz.] . . .
Obama bloggers want to scare Clinton supporters and Clinton donors. They want to create an aura of inevitability for Obama such that any Clinton victory will be seen as a theft. This makes Clinton look petty and dishonest, and her supporters, at best, delusional. But facts are stubborn things, and the facts are that such a framing is simply inaccurate. And these same Obama bloggers then claim that it is Clinton and her supporters who are dividing the Party! And they wonder why Clinton supporters are so angry. They wonder why people who do not support Clinton but simply care about honesty are so angry! . . .
No comments:
Post a Comment