Speaking to reporters in Conshohocken, Pa., today, Clinton rejected that common argument, saying “a win is a win.”
“But maybe I’m old fashioned about that. But you run a very competitive race at a considerable financial disadvantage. I think maybe the question ought to be why can’t he close the deal?”
Which is a fair question. He’s the new face in a party that loves new faces (as long as they peddle the same old cobwebbed policies), and he’s cool and glamorous, to boot. She’s a divisive figure with high negatives who’s fought an inept campaign with far worse press coverage hobbled by a blundering hubby who’s turned the buy-one-get-two double-act into a pantomime horse with two rear ends. Why can’t he close the deal? The Vodka Pundit suggests:
If the Democrats ran a winner-take-all system like the Republicans and the Electoral College do, she’d have this thing clinched — and Obama would look like a regional candidate who can’t win much outside the South and his home state of Illinois.
Instead, the race goes on and on and the candidates get weaker and weaker and without an end in sight.
There’s some truth in that, beyond the Dem system. Where is Barack’s Mobamamentum?