I thought the exact same thing when Hillary said it last night, and Matt Welch caught it too [Requiem for the Clintons; the ALL CAPS was his contribution].
And what the heck is a “Green Collar Job”? A job that has no carbon impact? A job planting trees? If I hear that phrase again this week, I’m throwing something at the TV.
ah, George Will:
Hillary Clinton, 60, Illinois native and Arkansas lawyer, became, retroactively, a lifelong Yankee fan at age 52 when, shopping for a U.S. Senate seat, she adopted New York state as home sweet home. She may think, or at least would argue, that when she was 12 her Yankees really won the 1960 World Series, by standards of “fairness,” because they trounced the Pirates in runs scored, 55-27, over seven games, so there.
Unfortunately, baseball’s rules — pesky nuisances, rules — say it matters how runs are distributed during a World Series. The Pirates won four games, which is the point of the exercise, by a total margin of seven runs, while the Yankees were winning three by a total of 35 runs. You can look it up.
somebody needs to re-factor this into the form of a question, and ask Hillary during the Q&A of one of her appearances: do you favor “fairness”, or do you favor the Rules?
the graphs are the price of futures contracts for each candidate for their respective party nomination. the basics of these futures is that they pay out $100 if the candidate wins and $0 if they lose. so it would have been sweet to buy on Obama’s dip (below $25) back in October ’07 and have it pay 4-to-1; shorting Clinton at the same time also would have paid off handsomely.
while there are shortcomings in these futures markets, they represent real people staking real money on the results — so they have more riding on them than an opinion given to a pollster. and they represent something much more important than the current polls (which have Clinton and Obama virtually tied) — they represent the lead that Obama has and the virtual impossibility of Clinton to overcome it. she can beat him 51% to 49% in every state from here to the end, and she still won’t overtake him on pledged delegates. that might put her ahead in the overall popular vote, but well, that’s a topic for another post…
[images, futures quotes, charts: intrade]
here is what I heard this week — Hillary has to win by 20 points to have a shot at the Democratic nomination… and she didn’t even win Pennsylvania by double-digits. so will she call it quits?
this reminds me of a funny show that was played out around my own dinner table, Talking to Canadians: when I said I couldn’t vote for Hillary because I thought she was the spawn of Satan (or something like that), my friend said “well, THAT’s not a very good reason NOT to vote for her.” like somehow, instead of needing a good reason to vote FOR someone, my default choice should have been to vote for her, and only could I diverge if I had a REALLY GOOD REASON.
truth be told, I didn’t need to have a good reason not to vote for Hillary — I am a citizen and my friend is not, yet she still felt the need to correct my vote. that’s the vibe I get from every Hillary supporter — and it’s really annoying. don’t they understand how much people [with half a brain-cell] despise being told what they should think and do? I guess they’re counting on the other half, those with barely a brain-cell, since that’s where they seem to be building their base…