I know there are some reading the blog, but I found this sports parable by Chris Orr just too funny:
"Once you abandon the artificial four-games-to-two framework that the media has tried to impose on the series, a very different picture emerges, with the Celtics leading by a mere 549 points to 539. Yes that’s right, the margin between the two teams is less than one percent—a tie, for all intents and purposes. This is probably the closest Conference Finals in NBA history, though I will thank you not to check on that."
Hilary Clinton has not officially conceded her Presidential campaign, but the writing is on the wall, and it seems 99% certain that this week will see the end of the campaign.
I'm of two minds about this interminably long, historic primary season. One is that all it cost for Hilary to lose now instead of months ago when it was pretty clear she was going to is a drop of about ten percentage points in Obama's match-up with McCain as a result of a hard-fought battle between the two candidates.
But the other, more realistic, more reasonable, view is that whatever I might feel about the Clintons' political tactics, they didn't do anything wrong in competing for as long as they could. And I don't want to hear *anybody* bitching in November if Obama loses that it's somehow Hilary's fault. That kind of "Blame Nader" BS is what makes the Democrats look so pathetic, and it just helps the Republicans beat them, year-in and year-out.
Would it have been nice for Obama to go in with a 10-point lead against McCain in the polls, like the one he had months back? Sure. But every campaign has its challenges and difficulties to overcome, and pointing out how things could have gone better and than you would have won is the kind of spin I'm used to from the Bush Administration, and I hope we don't see it from this campaign or from its supporters.