So I agree with Wil about Hillary, and am deeply amused that he finally sees the Clintons for who they are, but goodness gracious:
"historical opportunity -- maybe even a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity"?
"fundamentally change how my government interacts with the rest of the world"?
"she's been moving the goalposts"? (Michigan/Florida shenanigans excepted, how exactly has she attempted/accomplished this? - it's not as though the Clintons can literally rewrite the rules of the Democratic nomination process, not if they don't even understand those rules (point #2))
"a Clinton victory in the primary about as likely as jumping off the roof of your house and landing on the moon" (futures markets still have her nomination odds anywhere from 10-15%; I'll give Wheaton benefit of doubt and assume he means the odds that she goes to Denver with a lead among pledged delegates)
"millions of Democratic voters -- many of them first time voters who, like me, finally feel truly inspired by someone"
See THIS is why people talk about a cult. Obama's nomination is not a birthright, not a sinecure, any more so than Hillary was "inevitable" as of last fall.
Posted by Matt Bruce at May 8, 2008 05:54 PMthe undeclared superdelegates (again, the absolute worst idea in the history of politics)
I am going to vote "no" considering that the forerunners of "superdelegates" controlled nearly 100% of the nomination process until suprisingly recently.
Posted by: Kubi at May 8, 2008 11:01 PM