Hillary Clinton Supporters -- The Global Warming Deniers of Democratic Politics?

Hillary Clinton supporters seem to have become the equivalent of global warming deniers in Democratic politics. If facts don't suit your argument, insist on the opposite. And even more importantly, insist that your non-facts get at least 50% of the coverage.

The Clinton team is now trying to make the specious argument that she is winning in the popular vote. The first problem with that argument is that it's not true. Obama still leads by over 500,000 votes. The second problem is that they try to include states like Michigan and Florida where all sides agreed not to campaign or have their delegates counted. Hillary Clinton's flip-flop on these states is even more absurd given that Obama wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan.

But the more fundamental problem with this popular vote argument is that it is the wrong metric. Nobody ever said they were running a campaign for more popular votes. If those were the ground rules, no one would have spent any time in Iowa or New Hampshire. Obama and the others would have been campaigning in California for six months to a year instead of those first primary and caucus states.

This is like saying we're counting only touchdowns in the middle of a basketball game. Well if I knew that was the game we were playing I would have put on a helmet and tackled you a long time ago. Why did I bother scoring all these baskets?

Look, this is absurd. Why is anyone humoring these arguments? Why do we have to cover Hillary Clinton's side as if it has as much validity as Obama's? This isn't about who is the better candidate; this is about facts and reality. She can claim to be better on healthcare, but she can't claim to have a lead in this race. One is subjective, the other is objective.

None of her arguments make any sense: She wins the big states - congratulations, go run for president in a country where there are only big states. The popular vote is now the relevant metric in this election - then you're disenfranchising all of the caucus states and changing the rules in the middle of the game. Obama is not electable - really, then why is he kicking your ass in this election?

I love the audacity of someone who is losing to another candidate claiming that candidate is not electable. So, what does that make you?

You might love Hillary Clinton, you might think she would make a great president and you might even have concerns about her opponent. You have a right to think all these things, but you don't have a right to your own math. Two plus two still equals four and Hillary's team shouldn't get equal time for claiming it equals five for her but only three for Barack.

We have got to stop treating these math deniers as if they have any legitimacy or credibility. They are spinning for their side and the tales they are spinning are comically wrong. And as always, the media is falling prey to the idea that every side of an argument must be presented equally rather than what the facts merit.

Young Turks on You Tube

Comments

[shrugged]

The democratic primary vote numbers do not matter. Most important is to win the Presidency. The real objective is who can beat McCain with swing voters in swing states. Hillary has raised some very valid points that must be addressed. Who can win swing voters in swing states? Should Democrats feel good they listened to the college students and non general election voters to go forward selecting Humphrey, McGovern, Mondale, Dukakis, Gore, Kerry? The objective is to win.

[Phaedrus21]

Remember...like a million years ago...at the end of that debate when she said she was honored to be sharing the stage with Obama and she knew that whatever happened America would be all right?

That was awesome.

[xcrunner77]

Cenk--
Any guesses as to what the Hillary people will do when Obama becomes the official nominee some time during the first week of June (if not sooner)? Will Carville still go on TV yammering about how "it's not right?" Will Bill still be out there wagging his finger? What will all these Hillary devotees do? I really fear for their mental health. I'm guessing lots of checking into rehab. Or Hillary will take someone hostage.

Fortunately, we Obama supporters know a thing or two about math. As annoyed as we might get, we know the math is on our side, that Hillary will be no closer to Obama in pledged delegates when this is all over than she is now, and that superdelegates will not be stupid enough to take the first place trophy out of the hands of the guy who crossed the finish line first and put it in the hands of the person who crossed second. We've done a lot of work, our guy has won by any measure you like, including THE ONE THAT ACTUALLY COUNTS, and it's time for us to claim our prize and move on to the next phase: beating John McCain.

It's time for someone to call security and escort the Clintons off the premises. Democrats everywhere can breathe a sigh of relief when that happens.

[wolfi101]

She will either talk about running Independent or using the lawyers to push her case. She will claim, that she was robbed on the nomination by not having the Florida and Michigan votes count.

If she goes gracefully from the stange and supports Obama, as she said, she would do ( for whatever nominee the Dems decide upon ) ............ I'll be shocked.

Relieved, but shocked.

[ I think, it's already time for her to exit-stage-right. ]

----- Good article, btw.

[NeoAmerican]

Good analogy. Just like the climate change deniers or the creationists, one half of the Democratic Party has closed their minds to reason and it appears no one can reach them. They're being incited by Bill and Hillary the same way the no-minds are incited by Limbaugh and O'Reily with the exact same results. We now have Democratic ditto heads.

I guess the only thing which might wake them up is the 8 years of McCain which they have enabled; that is if he can hang in that long without life support. Of course by that time, the Chinese may have called the note due and payable on our future. If the country ends up on a diet of rice and varmint from the Clinton catastrophe of 2008, they brought it on themselves. Unfortunately, they're bringing it on the rest of us also.

[PioneerKing]

Chuck Todd said "Hillary got an automatic 3% by having the PA political machine support her," politicians in PA used financial resources to support Hillary so there was more money spent on behalf of Hillary than her own campaign money.
Clinton"s supporters have failed to acknowledge that people who are polled after every election are NOT first time voters, voters who changed their party affiliation or voters who where previously inactive and, it is not a given that those voters will support Hillary.
People who say they will not vote for Obama but, will vote for McCain if Hillary is not the nominee were NEVER going to vote for Obama!
If someone wants America out of Iraq and knows that the economy is hurting as a result of war expenditures why would they vote for someone who wants to stay the course?
No one has said to those people "your vote for McCain will mean more dead troops and more of your money going to Iraq while the economy suffers," "is this what you are willing to sacrifice by refusing to vote for Obama?"
Why aren"t you asking "why can"t Hillary close the deal and get the voters that Obama is attracting?"
If Obama was not bringing new voters to the party the dems would have Hillary not being able to garner more than 45% if she draws that many votes, 3% others, and McCain will get 52% because the right wing base will galvanize against anything Clinton.

[inspectormerlot]

Why also are you not pointing out that her popular vote claims are outrageous given that she's excluding the caucus results!
What is simultaneously so disappointing is that no-one is talking about the incredible impact Limbaugh's Operation Chaos has had on the popular vote.

[wolfi101]

I think, everyone ( except for the Hillary supporters ) are aware, that the Republicans are trying to fudge the situation by pushing people to vote for Hillary. This isn't a typical 'conspiracy theory lurking in the shadows' scenario.

Rush has been preaching this for months. Not to worry, most of us know the truth.

[ann1]

Shame on Bill Clinton, look what he's done to Hillary. He cheated on her and humiliated her before the world. He made her feel less than, not good enough, not pretty enough. He tore down every ounce of self-esteem she had. He's doing it to her all over again leaving her in the dark when everyone else knows the truth...............it's over. Shame on you Mr Clinton!

[liberalfan]

It's sad to watch this meltdown IMO. The fact is the Obama and Clinton campaign planned for this election with these rules in mind. There are clear quotes highlighting how these campaign's planned for these rules. But when she's losing: HRC gets to keep moving the goal posts and the media (in love with this race and shocked that a black man can come this far) goes along.

It's just killing Obama's chances in November at this point.

He still has a great field advantage, the issuses are on his side, and the grassroots organizing is here.

But every day HRC is in the race is another day McCain gets stronger.

She's ruining this party. By supporting her you are supporting the Republican platform at this point.

[justobserve]

You hit the nail on its head! The loser keeps finding ways to say the winner is unelectable instead of herself! With the records of the Clintons' tenacy during their 8 years in the WH of "we never quit! we will lie, spin, cover up, intimidate" until the blue dress proved, uh, my DNA and still, "we'll not quit! we are not quitters!" Yes, we heard that and we knew the Clintons won't quit. They just lie, cheat, spin, cover-up and intimidate to win.
Even William Louis-Dreyfus, the NY billionaire financier, said he had been impressed by Clinton's performance in the Senate and distressed by eight years of the Bush administration when he donated the maximum to her campaign last August. Then, he said, he began watching more closely. "However much one might have supported the Clintons, or one might support the usual suspects in the Democratic Party, I began to believe Obama represents a new approach. He gives off such a sense of relevance that he's sort of irresistible," Louis-Dreyfus said.
He also expressed, as did other big givers who crossed to Obama, exasperation about the tone of the Clinton campaign and frustration with the candidate herself.
"At the end of the day, all she had to do was open her mouth for me NOT TO BELIEVE HER," Louis-Dreyfus said.

[Manx]

The more desperate the Clinton campaign, the more ridiculous their claims. What next? They'll be telling us that the nomination should be decided by blue-haired ladies.

[sociocanuck]

The problem with insisting that Clinton supporters are math deniers is that it may not be quite true: sure, the ARITHMETIC doesn't lie - but surely there's a MATH out there that will support an alternate definition. Perhaps some wild non-Euclidean geometry that allows her campaign to "triangulate" in a way that completely blows past the (Euclidean) notion that the angles in any triangle must add up to a semicircle.

[TommyMcCarthy]

Mr. Unger finds it "absurd" for Sen. Clinton to cout the votes of the two and a half million or so voters in Michigan and Florida.

I wonder if he detects and "absurtity" in the Obamites inclusion of the big, election-deciding "swing" states of "Americans abroad", the virgin islands, Alaska, and Hawaii, in his "electability argument?

Or how about those certain-to-go-Republican states of Kansas, Oklahoma, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, S. Carolina, Texas,etc.? ("But we won 11 in a row!!) Any "absurdity" there?

Of course "absurd" is being produced in great quantity by my beloved Democrats this cycle. I guess it started early when the insufferable Mr. Dean and his absurd rules/bylaws committee decided to monkey with the primary schedule in the name of...........what was it agan?

The MOTHER of all things absurd would be to try to go into Nov. having disenfranchised Florida (yet again...by Democrats no less!) Regards.......................................tm

[MrLion]

This Michigander is dead-set against counting the results of the January 15 Train Wreck Primary. Doing so would reward the Michigan Democratic Party mandarins for their arrogance and incompetence, represent a cave-in to the Clinton campaign's lies and threats, and send the unmistakable message that you can thumb your nose at the rules if you have a famous last name.

[xcrunner77]

These are the same rules that put Bill and Hillary in the White House twice. I didn't hear Hillary or Bill complaining about the rules back then. In 1992 and 1996 the rules were awesome! Delegates were great!! Now that she is losing the rules are "unfair." Boo hoo.

If you want to make the argument that "only the states that Hillary has won should count" that would be fine if it was the way things were set up in the beginning. Then Obama could have ignored the 30 states he's won and focused on the 15 that Hillary has won. If he had done that, he would have won 13 of those 15. And then Hillary would be screaming that we should be counting all 50.

Just admit it. It's OVER. You LOST!!

[unity08]

Imagine if the tables were turned, and it was Hillary who was ahead in pledge delegates, popular vote, and most states won. Imagine if it were Obama who was contesting the Florida and Michigan votes. Imagine that it was Hillarys name not on the ballot in Michigan.

Imagine what would be happning right now to Senator Obama. It wouldnt be pretty.

[nsiah7]

So you think by twisting and chaning the rules of the game they all agreed to at the beginning, in the middle of the game is good enough to legetimise a nominee. Let the superdelegate do the wrong turn and see the voters punish them for that in November. No one will care if the nomination is won by the rules set at the beginning of the contest but not in mid of campaign. Grow up my friend

[Mesaywar]

When you misrepresent, misquote, misinterpret or misspeak about every single point you're trying to make, you tend not to be credible.

[TommyMcCarthy]

I didn't "misrepresent, misquote,or misinterpret anything, I merely statedmy opinon.........go piss up a rope

[cla62]

Much like the global warming debate. For every clown that believes it, their is another that doesn't, for every dem that likes the rock star, their is another that likes Billary. Try making some type of comparison using phenomonem that is actually a fact, not one that has no standing whatsoever. Well, other than the loonies that want to give it some. One of these days Gore is finally going to jump onto a cause that is a proven fact, then maybe everyone can finally take the clown seriously.

[realistxxx]

Actually, they remind me more of Bush supporters.

[jrutle]

Clinton's comment that she's winning the popular vote is another proof of how she's willing to dissemble truth to fool the electorate she's trying to influence. Her ethics, as is often the case, is situational. Its not an accident that the vast majority of Americans view her as untrustworthy. Coupled with her comment about obliterating Iran this past week, she's demonstrated why she's not fit to lead our nation.

[jfor]

Hillary Clinton is a liar. There is nothing more to be said. You can disagree and argue the nuance of her lies but in the end she is a liar and if her supporters do not admit it, then they too are liars. I have no problem calling HRC and her cabal of lunatics liars, I can even admit that when it comes to lying and misdirection she and they are some of the best this country has ever seen. Her lies are who she is and if you have been paying attention, you can probably name a half dozen right off the bat.

As Cenk points out curently Hillary and company are lying about the numbers, this really is no surprise since they already have lied about her experience, her past votes, her role as first lady, her Commander in Chiefability, her military skills, her hunting past and many many things so insignificant your child would even admit to them. Yep, Hillary is a liar and she is good at it, in fact Hillary is the best liar of this electoral season.

We already have a liar in the Whitehouse, do we really want to elect another?

[jimi945]

Next on Hillary's agenda, since she has been DUCK HUNTING and drinking beer and getting religious, she is now willing to obliterate Iran. Her statement the other day has not been argued by the press at all. She is talking more and more like McCain today...Remember? Bomb, Bomb, Iran? Now she is a people killer....Wow..That sure shows her toughness.
You people that are voting for Hillary....I want you to remember something.....If she steals this election and goes to November against McCain, if she gets elected, tell me in four years that she cared about what she said to you....Believe me, she could care less. That smile and bobble head nodding is just to get your vote and that's it. If you vote for Hillary, you are in deep doo-doo. Just remember it.

[TheKnownTruth]

Give this some thought:

If Obama was playing these numbers games, he would be run out of town on a rail tarred and feathered

[mdargo]

Why do so many people seem to think that Hillary Clinton would be good on the economy when she has bankrupted her campaign?

[wolfi101]

Not to mention, sat idly by ( or was AWOL ) as her own senatorial state --- NY --- began losing jobs by the countless thousands. Western NY's economy is practically in shambles.

[Caringthinkingperson]

Cenk,

Come on now... we are dealing with the same lack of reality that is the Clintons. It is called denial. It is the cornerstone of disfunctional behavior. What we have to ask ourselves about the media's participation is two fold. Is this about money (longer coverage, and larger ratings)? Or is this a more sinister plot to keep people so divided that they won't notice that the voting machines have been fixed again. One senario is self-serving, the other is diabolical.

Up until I saw the coverage change from reality to fantasy I thought it wasn't going to happen - not this time! Now, I am wondering....

[nellie]

As you would say, and surely know already, "It's about the money, Lebowski!" What we have is another media mind game, where presenting the public with truth and a sensible perspective takes a back seat to the financial agenda of the media moguls. We're in a sad sad state, where people are encouraged to believe that false arguments are credible. Thanks for being one of the points of light in the darkness.

[JR49]

Well I see it all by European eyes even if I am not living there for long time. I am sure you all remember German propaganda and it is exactly what is happening here now. Media like MSNBC, CNN, ABC, NBC and so on are beating dead horse and repeating again and again poisonous HRC ideas...until people start to believe that it is all true. Of course HRC has now new friends in Republicans and F..k News but I hope people are not so beaten down and say their word properly and aloud.
Fact is the race is over and I hope nobody will change the result because if so then we will have McBush president because all Republican states which voted for Barack Obama will return back to Republicans even though everybody is fed up with them.

[freedomis]

I'm a retired oldie at 72 and can't wait to vote for Obama in Nov. and am from CA. and an Ind.We got screwed by the Dems because they made the ballots almost impossible to read so the game was rigged for Clinton.another point is that on super Tues. she could hardly wait for Pennsylvania because she had a 25 point lead to start with there so with my math 25-15=10 which is what the % she got out of there with.That looks like a loser to me but I'm a few months older than McCain so that could be my problem. Tony

[harriscrl3]

This is what bothers me about all her arguments she make it seem like if they had use some different critieria such as popular votes, electoral votes, primaries etc that she would be winning. How do you figure this? You knew the rules and you are losing base on those rules so how do you figure if the rules were different that you would be wining. I cannot understand how the media lets her get away with this kind of illogical argument. If the rules were different Obama would know they are different and he would change his strategies accordingly. He would spend more time in the bigger states launch a better ground organization and win. He followed the rules and he strategized based on those rules and that is why he is winning. To say if the rules were changed it would mean that you would be winning is a fundamental flawed argument because it does not guarntee what is there now would be there when the rules change. They NEED to call her on it. When she is giving this illusion that she can win its letting democrats know that this race is tied. NO ITS NOT if you go by the mathematical metrics number of states, pledge delegates and popular votes its NOT tied.

Carol

[jimi945]

The media just wants ratings. Hillary and McCain create these ratings. They want a knock down, drag out BS fight to go on daily so they can get their talking points out. I am wondering where they are getting all of these pundents from? I have never seen so many so-called experts being brought in to the fold. All these people do is sell their books on national news networks. Is that legal? Every person that comes on has a book and gets a promotion from it....Are they having to pay for the advertisement like the others have to?
Hillary will use every nasty tactic and lie to get to this nomination. Bill Clinton has now taken over the campaign in N.C. and guess who he is talking to? White, blue collar, beer drinking, bowling, rednecks. Bill has not gone into any black areas to talk to any. He is trying to use the Pennsylvania method to win for her. Someone, somewhere, needs to stop this madness. It sickens me.
Today, I and 125 others, in our small town in the mountains of N.C., just went to the court house and voted early for Obama. Join us! I am proud to have my Obama pin on and my I VOTED TODAY sticker. Good luck to all1

[harriscrl3]

Thats how they win they divide people. If Americans think anything will change in a Hilary administration then they are sadly to say dumb as dirt. Its a choice between someone who wants to bring people together to solve challenges that they know cant be solved if we are divided, verses someone who wants to divide people to win. Then you have half the country unhappy.How does her strategy differ in anyway from what has been going on for the last 25 years or so and if she couldnt pass healthcare then what makes her think that she can pass it now when she is using the same methods.

How you run your campaign says A lot about you. There is a reason why people are DEFECTING from her campaign AFTER a win. Thats how her White House is going to be one dragged out fight that turn off people and destroys the chance of accomplishing anything. Obama said in an interfewi he hates drama he doesnt tolerate it in his campaign and he wont tolerate it in his white house. Hilary is the epitome of drama every week some drama is going down in her campaign. Thats how her White House will be. Dont believe her lies look at how she runs her campaign.

Carol

[chasgoose]

The popular vote is a completely legitimate statistic for superdelegates to consider. The only delegates bound by the bizarre delegate allocation system are the pledged delegates. The superdelegates can use whatever they want to make their decision. Pledged delegates are only part of what one needs to get the nomination and unless one gets enough to make the superdelegates irrelevant, they are not the be all and end all.

Obama and his supporters keep hammering the point home that if the superdelegates elect Clinton, they will be "overturning the will of the people, but if Clinton can reasonably make a claim to the popular vote (she isn't right now, MI/FL shouldn't count unless their delegates count too, which does not look to be the case), then wouldn't they actually be overturning the will of the people if they went for Obama? The pledged delegates would actually be in opposition to the