Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
To meddle in the government of society and to speak about it is the greatest business and, so to speak, the only pleasure that an American knows.... An American does not know how to converse, but he discusses; he does not discourse, but he holds forth. -ADT
4 comments:
Assuming that the conventional wisdom/math is right, why's the Clinton campaign doing it?
Am I just not being cynical enough about the Clintons? Or is there some other answer?
Knowing absolutely nothing about the Clinton campaign, here are my SWAGs:
1) Eight years of the current administration teach us how deeply some otherwise intelligent people can buy into their own propaganda.
2) Maybe they really, deeply believe that Obama has some deep lurking vulnerability that can snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. Or, you know, whatever. I think Bill Richardson breaking Obama's way casts serious doubt on whether the superdelegate strategy will pan out.
3) It is terribly hard to give up something that you thought, correctly or not, that you had some claim or right to: especially when, looking at the bare numbers, it still seems so close. One of Senator Clinton's touted strengths is her fighting spirit. A fighter may want to keep on answering the bell, long after the fighter's corner thinks the towel should be thrown.
3)
Here are two more arguments posted by Talking Points Memo readers. One is more convincing than the other.
In re: your second comment. Yikes. I've heard similar things as the second, desert-the-party-and-vote-for-the-hardcore-conservative commenter from the hardcore Clinton supporter who was so over the top anti-Obama.
The first argument seems to agree with the reasons behind the creation (note the author!) of the superdelegates. Or not so much.
And, in re: your first comment, those make a lot of sense. People's rationality is often overstated. (See, e.g., Spitzer, Eliot; crisis, housing market.)
Post a Comment