The ‘Numbers guy’

by Michael O. Allen on April 24, 2008

That would be Carl Bialik, who examines the way numbers are used and abused in a blog at the Wall Street Journal, crunches the numbers post-Pennsylvania.

He does not in this post reach a earth-shattering conclusion different from conventional wisdom but it’s still an enjoyable read, especially when you consider he’s dealing in numbers.

The numbers do not favor Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s cause. Unless you change the rules and make them all favor her. Even then, they bring only close enough for an almost tie.

(Jae C. Hong/Associated Press) Barack Obama on his campaign plane Wednesday.

(Joe Raedle/Getty Images) Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton on a flight to Washington on Tuesday.

Her argument to the Superdelegates then, argument which she voiced in Pennsylvania, would be that she is best suited for the general election because Sen. Barack Obama is simply the kind of candidate Democrats nominate only to see them lose ignominiously in the general election.

So, overturn the results so far and give the nomination to her, even if she is trailing by all the measures by which you determine the party nominee.

She, for instance, is saying that results from caucuses should not count because they skew to Mr. Obama’s strength, which is organizing. I consider myself a political junkie and this is the first time I’ve heard this argument against the caucuses.

There’s a certain part of me that appreciates HRC’s win-at-all-cost mentality. For once, I don’t want to be virtuous. I want to see Democrats give Republicans a dose (maybe even more than that) of their own medicine.

I don’t know what Sen. John McCain, the Republican nominee, has to say about anything. I know he believes war is a good thing, that people need to get second jobs to deal with the declining economy and the credit crisis, and that he and the money bags he married are sitting on a mountain of wealth.

A debate between the Democratic Party nominee, Clinton or Obama, and this corrupt and unprincipled man should be a no-contest. HRC is a fighter. She’s more than demonstrated that? But, can she guarantee a win?

No. And, is it too much to want some grace and intelligence and brilliance, all of which Obama possesses in abundance (which Clinton does too, except for the grace part) in your nominee? And when you consider Obama already leads in the number of votes and delegates and by any other measure you want to use, why overturn that?

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: