In which I don the tinfoil hat
I need to go in for a half day of training at my temp job this morning, so forgive me for just doing a copy and paste of a post I did at My Left Wing last night. The bottom line, whatever you think of my nutty speculations below, is that rapid response is going to be crucial. I recommend keeping an eye on Huffington Post, which has been a useful source of information to me recently. For example, it pointed me to this story in the Canadian press:
Harper aide accused of sparking NAFTA-gate
Prime minister calls leak 'blatantly unfair' to Obama
Interesting that Maryscott should have a post today about Hillary Clinton and the state of the delegate math. Will add my 2 paranoid, conspiratorial cents, which I just posted in the comments at another blog earlier this evening.
Here's what Rush Limbaugh has said:
"I want Hillary to stay in this…this is too good a soap opera," Limbaugh told fellow conservative talk-show host Laura Ingraham on Fox News Friday. He reiterated the comments on his Monday show and replayed the exchange with Ingram.
He also said Clinton is more willing than the Republican National Committee and John McCain's campaign to criticize Barack Obama.
"We need Barack Obama bloodied up politically. It's obvious that the Republicans are not going to do it, they don't have the stomach for it," Limbaugh continued. "As you probably know we're getting all kinds of memos from the RNC saying we're not going to be critical. Mark McKinnon of McCain's campaign said he'll quit if they get critical over Obama. This is the presidency of the United States we're talking about. I want our party to win I want the Democrats to lose.”
We hear again and again that it's nearly impossible for Clinton to earn enough delegates in the primaries and caucuses to clinch the nomination. But isn't it mathematically impossible for Obama to clinch the nomination without superdelegates?
Regarding superdelegates, the common refrain from people speaking on Clinton's behalf is that they are supposed to use their independent judgment, based on what's best for the party. So, rather than voting to reflect the wishes of their constituents, they are supposed to vote for the person who is most "electable".
Is it possible that Clinton's goal is to get Obama "bloodied" enough by (or before) the convention that she and her surrogates could make the case that he's simply not electable?
Haloscan comment thread
