Spinning? Fine. Spinning AND Lying? Not Cool.

Spin, as we usually refer to it, is trying to take facts and present them in a way that is good for one or another candidate. We see this most often when it comes to setting expectations. Candidates try to spin things to set expectations in a given election one way, so that when they meet or break expectations the media writes positive stories about said candidate having "momentum."

Lying, by contrast, is either saying things contrary to the facts, or pretending the facts just don't exist. We saw this most often in the Bush administration's lead-up to the Iraq war, and more recently, in Hillary Clinton pretending that she never supported NAFTA, when, in fact, a decade of public speeches shows she did. Now, Clinton is doing something fairly new: spinning AND lying -- all at the same time.

Here's what ABC News reports that Clinton is now saying:

"We came from so far behind in Indiana. We're still the underdog."

Clinton is trying to set expectations in advance of Tuesday's Indiana primary, with the goal of making it seem as if a victory in Indiana would be "unexpected" and proof that she has "momentum." The spinning part -- the expectations part -- is fine, and no surprise. That's what candidates do, and that's part of politics. What's not fine is the dishonest basis of the storyline. Clinton has been ahead in Indiana from the beginning -- and in, fact, has been ahead in the majority of Democratic primary polls done in the Hoosier state.

As Real Clear Politics shows, Clinton has been ahead or tied with Barack Obama in 12 out of 18 Indiana primary polls. In fact, she's never been behind by more than 5 points -- basically the margin of error in these polls. Put another way, Clinton has been either ahead or right on the cusp of the margin of error in 100% of the polling done in Indiana.

This isn't surprising. Indiana is squarely within the Race Chasm (ie. the group of states whose black populations are above 6% and below 17% of the total population). Clinton has won most of her victories in Race Chasm states. I believe that is, at least in part, because of her deft use and exploitation of racial politics. In other words, Indiana is precisely the kind of state Clinton's scorched earth campaign has proven adept at winning in a Democratic primary -- her being consistently ahead or close is not news because it is to be expected.

But that's not the point here -- and frankly, I don't really care who has been ahead or behind in polls. What's notable -- and disturbing -- is that Hillary Clinton feels the need to lie in very obvious fashion, as if everyone is just too stupid to look up the easily verifiable facts. I'm going to capitalize this and boldface it for emphasis: SHE HAS BEEN EITHER AHEAD OR AT THE MARGIN OF ERROR IN EVERY SINGLE MAJOR POLL* DONE IN INDIANA, YET IS CLAIMING WITH A STRAIGHT FACE THAT "WE CAME FROM SO FAR BEHIND IN INDIANA."

This is not normal human behavior -- not by a long shot. It's actually rather scary, and it gets to a deeper issue -- the issue of trust. Why does Clinton feel the need to lie in the face of verifiable facts? She did it with NAFTA, she did it with Bosnia and now she's doing it with polling numbers. I just don't get this - and I say that not as a "Hillary hater" but as an honest declaration of frustration. Her behavior tells me she's either so arrogant that she's fine with insulting the public's intelligence with such in-your-face lying, or she's a pathological liar that has gotten so used to lying that she doesn't even know she's doing it anymore.

Look, it's one thing to spin -- it's another thing to spin and lie, all at once. It is that penchant for brazenly trampling the truth that troubles so many people about Clinton.

If you can't trust her to at least acknowledge the verifiable facts, how can you trust that she's serious about doing what she says she'll do as president? I mean, really, would anyone be surprised if - seeing this pathological behavior now -- Clinton gets into the White House, and then pretends she never made all the promises she made as a candidate? I think not -- and that trust issue, more than anything, is what polls show makes so many people uncomfortable with her candidacy.

* UPDATE: A commenter pointed out that in a tiny-sample poll way back in February, Obama was up 15 points. This poll was so insignificant as to not be listed even by RCP, and I think it's a huge stretch to say Clinton -- with all the rest of the polling data over the last few months -- isn't deliberately lying to create a storyline about being "an underdog." Nobody -- not a single honest observer of politics, nor anyone who knows even a shred of political data about Indiana -- thinks Hillary Clinton was "an underdog" in Indiana. It's blatantly ridiculous -- and those who rest that claim on one tiny early, wildly outlying poll are showing they are actually willing to accept pathological lying as truth. All of that said, in the interest of getting all of the data out there, I just wanted to flag it now that someone pointed it out to me.

Join the book club for David Sirota's upcoming book, The Uprising, due out on 5/27.

Comments

[mortrefuge]

It's pretty much like Hillary spinning her underdog status in Pennsylvania. She was up by 20 there yet cast herself as Rocky. And then she spun her 9.4% (and 9 delegate margin of) victory as a huge upset win. The real question is what is the storyline that the MSM will flog after Indiana and NC?

[frustratedinohio]

You are splitting hairs here. I don't understand why anyone would spend time writing about such a miniscule point. I think you need to take a good look at why you are doing this and why you feel so emotional about it. Also, you are just fanning the flames out here at a time when we need to put the fire out.

[clevelandchick]

No fire will be put out and David isn't fanning anything. There's nothing to fan, the damage is done.

Hillary has dealt a fatal blow to the party and the Dem POTUS chances. Half the Dems are appalled and disgusted by her. The African American voting block is not going to forgive or forget the Clintons Rovian campaigning against Barack. You can whine and stomp and complain all you want. She's become who she supposedly loathed and repulsed a majority of the party. If she wins the Nom by hook or by crook, she will lose badly against McCain and her political career will be over for good.

[philinburb]

I am disgusted with HRC's Rovian tactics and will not vote for her for pres. I believe you are correct clevelandchick.

[NightRider]

And this is worth repeating,

"This is not normal human behavior -- not by a long shot. It's actually rather scary, and it gets to a deeper issue -- the issue of trust. Why does Clinton feel the need to lie in the face of verifiable facts? She did it with NAFTA, she did it with Bosnia and now she's doing it with polling numbers. I just don't get this - and I say that not as a "Hillary hater" but as an honest declaration of frustration. Her behavior tells me she's either so arrogant that she's fine with insulting the public's intelligence with such in-your-face lying, or she's a pathological liar that has gotten so used to lying that she doesn't even know she's doing it anymore."

[nolalily]

David, we love ya, bro', but spinning IS lying. Isn't it taking something out of context and turning it into something other than what it was?

[NCMan]

I think I recall Obama making a statement over the weekend trying to play down his NC numbers. He was acting like he NEVER had a 20 point lead in NC. Where's your outrage?

[wingman1]

You think you recall? Quote it or put a sock in your mouth.

[NCMan]

From "Meet the Press" yesterday

MR. RUSSERT: In the remaining minutes, let me talk to--about some politics. You said, "Indiana may end up being the tiebreaker­." Right? That's where we are. So if Hillary Clinton wins here, she wins?

SEN. OBAMA: No. I...

MR. RUSSERT: She wins the nomination?

SEN. OBAMA: No. I--what I, what I said was is that--this was in the context of Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Indiana, the three largest states that are remaining--I said clearly Senator Clinton was favored in Pennsylvania, I WAS SLIGHTLY FAVORED IN NORTH CAROLINA, Indiana was one that was a toss-up. So, between those three states, that would be the one that was hardest to gauge in terms of where the voters might go. But we've got more contests remaining, and I'm confident that Senator Clinton's going to stay in until, until the very end, and then we're going to have a decision about who's going to be the nominee.

Now, you put a sock in it. The time period he is discussing, he was ahead in NC by 20 points. There was nothing slight about it.

[SouthFloridaDem]

Why does Clinton feel the need to lie in the face of verifiable facts? She doesn't feel a need, but rather sees a golden opportunity. After nearly eight years of Bush lying and the public buying, she figures, why not? It's worked like a charm for GW. The people in this country have shown themselves to be quite gullible and way to busy to to try to learn anything for themselves, so they 've taken what Bush says at face value, and she figures they'll oblige her in the same way. It does seem to be working, as the race is much closer than it should be for how she "lies as much as she breathes in and out," as another commenter in here noted.

[xargaw]

The reason we want Bush to be gone is that we are sick sick sick of the lies. That is why we simply can't support Hillary. We are sick sick sick of the lies.

[NCMan]

It's the MEDIA that has been spinning the numbers for IN. They have been calling this race a virtual TIE for at least two weeks now even though in most polls Clinton has beed up by MORE than 6 points. Other than Zogby, which has been showing the race tied or Obama up a couple points for several days now. So, why shouldn't she spin it. That one little poll you cite where Obama was up 15 points was reported at the time. And, it was on RCP at the time as well. No one called it irrelevant at the time. Apparently you just weren't paying any attention then. Instead, you were trying to spin Obama's closing of the PA numbers as a win for him instead of watching the IN polls..

Ever watch Chris Matthews on MSNBC, he quote polls almost every night as long as he can find one that favors Obama. On nights that ALL the polls favor Clinton, he just doesn't bother. He picks some other opinion poll to talk about then instead, like favorability.

If I was Clinton, I would spin it too. And, since the poll was out there showing Obama leading, it's not a lie.

[EinChicago]

Inidana is practically a suburb of Chicago. If Obama can't win by at least double digits in his own back yard, he may as well give up. Unless we can change teh rules and hgold teh general by popularity contest open show of hands format, he is less than a joke candidate at this point.

[NightRider]

I'm going to capitalize this and boldface it for emphasis: SHE HAS BEEN EITHER AHEAD OR AT THE MARGIN OF ERROR IN EVERY SINGLE MAJOR POLL* DONE IN INDIANA, YET IS CLAIMING WITH A STRAIGHT FACE THAT "WE CAME FROM SO FAR BEHIND IN INDIANA."

[EinChicago]

Exactly! the fact that she has not been down by double digits in Obama's backyard, the east chicago suburbs, proves Obama is clearly allergic to winning anything resembling an actual election. Thank you for so adequately pointing that out. :)

[byrok67]

English. Learn it, love it, and for god's sake, use it.

[BassMent]

The sad thing is that her pattern of calculated lying and obfuscation have served her extremely well with her demographic. She's counting on the likelihood that her "lunch bucket" supporters don't have a computer with an internet connection so will not check her "facts." And I think, to a large degree, she's calculated correctly here. How else do we explain why anyone other than aging 60's feminists with a gender fixation is voting for her?

Clinton: "Chelsea and I had to duck our heads to avoid the incoming sniper fire."
Reality-Based People: "No, you didn't. Not in Bosnia, not in Serbia, not anywhere, ever in your life. It's a complete fabricatio­n."
Clinton: "I mis-spoke.­"
Clinton supporters: "You're forgiven!"

[bobdob]

Indiana is a red state. They haven't elected a Democrat in a national election there since 1964. OF COURSE Hillary will win. Obama is a Democrat.

[doublesvb]

hehe

[philinburb]

Very Good!

[TheSphinx]

Gawd...why so much hate towards Hillary. BO still calls himself the underdog when he is the front runner. Why not make a big issue about that. Your bias sickens me. If electing a Dem means that I have to go from Sean Hannity bias to yours I would rather stay at home. Geez...get a grip.

-TS

[glassalchemist]

God help us all if Hillary slimes her way out the back door with the nomination. It's been pretty clear that she is the most fake, calculated, deceitful, lying, power-hungry, sloth of a politician in this primary.
Her lies are right up there with G W Bush, I trust them both about the same amount. I trust that they will both screw the American people as hard as they can, and as often as they can to bend anything their way!

[Cynde]

And pray tell, with all the World Leaders knowing that her word is not golden and she lies as much as she breathes in and out, how will she do anything for America on the world stage. The world has lived with our Bush administration of deceit. If we want to have any "friends" out there in the world, we need to take the bully out of the playground.

OKAY .. if the Superdelagates have any sense in them, it is time to end the madness. How much more do you need to drop on your heads???? Disgusting and don't come asking me for money again until you fix it.

[OrionGal]

I am patiently waiting for Obama to become our President.

I will be PROUD to have a President with Integrity, Compassion, DIPLOMACY skills, Constitutional Law experience for We the People, and the Man can SPEAK.

When Obama is President, we can FINALLY start building a TRUE Nation that we can be proud of !

[sg096]

well said

[doublesvb]

i haven't been proud of this country for a long time.

i am trying to wait patiently but with each passing hour my blood pressure rises. these shenanigans from the clinton camp have got to stop.

obama can make us proud again.

[cjo30080]

As of late, the GOP doesn't have any anti-Hillary talking points. They love her talk of "elitism", "gas tax holidays", "obliterating Iran", "I would have left that church", ...

Hell, the Republicans might ask Lieberman to step aside so Hillary can give the keynote speech at their convention this summer.

She's Zell Rodham Lieberman.

[truesoccermom]

The GOP has lots of anti-Hillary talking points (Google "Hillary The Movie"). In fact, they are salivating at the idea of running against her. They are laying low and voting for her so they can pummel her if she is the nominee.