Loading ...She’s Excited, She’s On A (Mini) Roll, Reinvigorated, But Most Likely Still A Major Loser
And, why might that be, my friends? Well, I don’t know… could it be… well… that she’s about as well liked and admired as SATAN is? In other words, not too many people like the woman very much; myself — no exception. Why? She’s former Republican activist. She’s a former Wal-Mart Director. Need I say more?
That said, let us crunch some numbers, shall we? Better yet, Jonathan Alter of Newsweek has already done so for us, and while he takes it to the “fuzziest” of extremes, it STILL doesn’t add up to an “auto-bid” in “March Madness” for the over-testostereronated (yes, I do believe I just made up a new word there) and under-estrogenated (another new word, thank you very much) Senator QUEEN from New York…
Hillary’s Math Problem
Forget tonight. She could win 16 straight and still lose.Hillary Clinton may be poised for a big night tonight, with wins in Ohio, Texas and Rhode Island. Clinton aides say this will be the beginning of her comeback against Barack Obama. There’s only one problem with this analysis: they can’t count.
I’m no good at math either, but with the help of Slate’s Delegate Calculator I’ve scoped out the rest of the primaries, and even if you assume huge Hillary wins from here on out, the numbers don’t look good for Clinton. In order to show how deep a hole she’s in, I’ve given her the benefit of the doubt every week for the rest of the primaries.
So here we go: Let’s assume Hillary beats expectations and wins Ohio tonight 55-45, Rhode Island 55-45, Texas, 53-47 and (this is highly improbable), ties in Vermont, 50-50.
Then it’s on to Wyoming on Saturday, where, let’s say, the momentum of today helps her win 53-47. Next Tuesday in Mississippi—where African-Americans play a big role in the Democratic primary—she shocks the political world by winning 52-48.
Then on April 22, the big one, Pennsylvania—and it’s a Hillary blowout, 60-40, with Clinton picking up a whopping 32 delegates. She wins both of Guam’s two delegates on May 30, and Indiana’s proximity to Illinois does Obama no good on May 6, with the Hoosiers going for Hillary 55-45. The same day brings another huge upset in a heavily African-American state: enough North Carolina blacks desert Obama to give the state to Hillary 52-48, netting her five more delegates.
Suppose May 13 in West Virginia is no kinder to Obama, and he loses by double digits, netting Clinton two delegates. The identical 55-45 result on May 20 in Kentucky nets her five more. The same day brings Oregon, a classic Obama state. Oops! He loses there 52-48. Hillary wins by 10 in Montana and South Dakota on June 3, and primary season ends on June 7 in Puerto Rico with another big Viva Clinton! Hillary pulls off a 60-40 landslide, giving her another 11 delegates. She has enjoyed a string of 16 victories in a row over three months.
So at the end of regulation, Hillary’s the nominee, right? Actually, this much-too-generous scenario (which doesn’t even account for Texas’s weird “pri-caucus” system, which favors Obama in delegate selection) still leaves the pledged-delegate score at 1,634 for Obama to 1,576 for Clinton. That’s a 58-delegate lead. …”
In other words, “buh-bye, Hillary”. Running around America in an effort to impose your “torqued off mommy” version of a Nanny State isn’t something, which resonates well with the voters. We despise all forms of “Big Brother”, whether it be the Dems’ version of it (i.e., “Go to McDonalds, Go To Jail”, or the Republicans’ equally putrid “If you have nothing to hide, you’ve nothing to fear” brand of “Big Bro”…
You can count Sir Hillary Rodham Clinton IN anytime you wish but I’m not so quick to jump the proverbial “gun”, myself. At least, not YET.
***
H/T to MemeOrandum…
Big Bro tony Rezko won’t let Obama get away!
The Rezko Connection: Obama’s Achilles Heel?
Obama’s Connection With an Accused Political Fixer Raises Questions
By BRIAN ROSS and RHONDA SCHWARTZ
Jan. 10, 2008—
In sharp contrast to his tough talk about ethics reform in government, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., approached a well-known Illinois political fixer under active federal investigation, Antoin “Tony” Rezko, for “advice” as he sought to find a way to buy a house shortly after being elected to the United States Senate.
The parcel included an adjacent lot which Obama told the Chicago Tribune he could not afford because “it was already a stretch to buy the house.”
On the same day Obama closed on his house, Rezko’s wife bought the adjacent empty lot, meeting the condition of the seller who wanted to sell both properties at the same time.
Rezko had been widely reported to be under investigation by the U.S. attorney and the FBI at the time Obama contacted him and has since been indicted on corruption charges by a federal grand jury in a case that prosecutors say involves bribes, kickbacks and “efforts to illegally obtain millions of dollars.”
This week, a federal judge in Chicago ordered the Rezko trial to begin Feb. 25.
Obama maintains his relationship with Rezko was “above board and legal” but has admitted bad judgment, calling his decision to involve Rezko “a bone-headed mistake.”
Rezko’s behind-the-scenes connection in the Obama house deal became public as Rezko revealed personal financial details as he sought to post bail.
While Rezko’s wife paid the full asking price for the land, Obama paid $300,000 under the asking price for the house. The house sold for $1,650,000 and the price Rezko’s wife paid for the land was $625,000.
Obama denies there was anything unusual about the price disparity. He says the price on the house was dropped because it had been on the market for some time but that the price for the adjacent land remained high because there was another offer.
Obama then expanded his property by buying a strip of the Rezko land for $104,5000, which the senator maintains was a fair market price.
Obama later told the Chicago Sun-Times, “It was a mistake to have been engaged with him at all in this or any other personal business dealing that would allow him, or anyone else, to believe he had done me a favor.”
Obama had known Rezko long before the house deal, calling him a “friend.”
An ABC News review of campaign records shows Rezko, and people connected to him, contributed more than $120,000 to Obama’s 2004 campaign for the U.S. Senate, much of it at a time when Rezko was the target of an FBI investigation.
“It surprised me that late in the game he [Obama] continued to take contributions from somebody who was under a rather dark cloud in the state,” said Cynthia Canary of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform, a group that has worked closely with Obama and supported his legislative efforts.