It’s sad when the paper of record has to lower itself to report on the raving delusions of a fading dynasty.

Mrs. Clinton has sounded almost like a professor of political science on the trail, explaining how the popular vote should be calculated by her lights, as she did before an audience in Kentucky on Monday.

“I believe that with your help we will send a message to this country because right now more people have voted for me than have voted for my opponent,” she said. “More people have voted for me than for anybody ever running for president before. So we have a very close contest for votes, for delegates, and this is nowhere near over. None of us is going to have the number of delegates we’re going to need to get to the nomination, although I understand my opponent and his supporters are going to claim that.

“The fact is we have to include Michigan and Florida — we cannot claim that we have a nominee based on 48 states, particularly two states that are so important for us to win in the fall,” Mrs. Clinton said.

This argument is beneath contempt. It’s just patently dishonest in an embarrassing way. I feel Patrick Healy’s pain as he is forced to report it straight without snark tags or open derision. Sometimes it is much better to have the freedom of a blogger. It’s better for the digestion, too.

0 0 votes
Article Rating