Grasping at straws

Shorter Hillary Clinton: “I am more appealing to White People, especially uneducated ones.”

And it’s not just the Hillary. Her supporters are actually lurching down this path, too. Talk Left, via Oliver Willis:

In Pennsylvania, Clinton won whites 18-29 (52-48), 30-44 (58-42), 45-59 (63-37), 60+ (68-32). In North Carolina, whites 18-29, just 8% of the vote, went for Obama 57-41. But whites 30-44 went for Clinton (52-45), 45-59 (64-33), 60+ (69-29).

More Oliver:

I’ve crunched the numbers, looked them over again and again, then again with a sprinkling of eye of newt and found the weakness in Barack Obama’s candidacy:

He’s getting too many votes.

In 32 out of the 47 contests more people have voted and caucused for Sen. Obama than for Sen. Clinton. Why is the media not reporting on this? They spend so much time on the slicing and dicing of the electorate highlighting ad nauseam which blocs are voting for and against a candidate when the writing is on the wall.

More people are voting for Sen. Obama and that’s a huge problem in the fall. If we extrapolate this trend, it’s possible that he could, in the general election, have more votes than any other presidential candidate in history! The nomination process will be a mockery of the highest order if Howard Dean and the DNC sit back and allow the person with the most votes and most supporters to walk away with the nomination. This isn’t what we all signed up for.

I wasn’t paying attention too closely, but how, all of a sudden, is Hillary the progressive trying to buck the establishment while, in the eyes of the Clintonistas, Obama is somehow the insider, a corporate machine candidate reincarnation reminiscent of some of the worst excesses of Tameny Hall?

I don’t get it.