Jophiel wrote:
Clinton does have the nomination sewn up and has for weeks. If that was your metric, you already out-argued yourself
And... that's the moving of goalposts I was talking about. Prior to the voting season actually starting, sewn up meant "already has enough to win the nomination", or sewn up, as in "such a massive lead, that her opponents all drop out". You get that she's only leading Sanders by 263 pledged delegates, right? That's out of 2223 delegates earned.
In contrast, Trump is leading Cruz by 256 delegates. But that's out of only 1218 earned between them. His is a much larger lead (53% greater delegates versus only 26% more for Clinton). Yet, almost no one is claiming that Trump has the nomination sewn up. The *only* reason anyone says so on the Democrats side is because of two things: Super Delegates (which btw, can decide to switch their support up to the day of convention, so counting them now is pre-mature), and frankly wishful thinking. Oh. And I suppose a heaping dollop of denial.
The Democrats want their nomination process to look smooth, so they lie and pretend it is. The fact is that it's going terribly for Clinton. This was supposed to be an easy sail into the nomination, with all her effort saved for fighting the GOP candidate in the general. Instead, she's finding herself in a tough fight with Bernie Sanders of all people. You can try to spin this all you want, but either you're lying, or you've bought someone else's lie. Clinton is not doing well. Not by any sane metric.
If the only support you have for her doing well is that she's winning by technicality, then I guess you can hang your hat on that if you want. But she has massively underperformed expectations. I'm just not sure how you can keep denying this. I mean, I can see *how* you can do this, I'm just not sure who you think you're fooling.
Edited, Apr 5th 2016 5:28pm by gbaji