Let’s play Clintonian Primary Calculus shall we? You know – that game where we continue to try to come up with a way that possibly could explain a rational reason for us denying all other measures and selecting Hillary “I’m Due Damnit” Clinton as the Democratic nominee for President of the United States of America.

Previous entries have included:

– only pledged delegate counts matter, not states won
– total states don’t matter, just the important ones (ie: the ones we won)
– what matters most is electability, not winning states or delegates
– the nominee should be the person with the most calm pastor
– just pick me damnit!

Having failed all of the above tests, the Clintonians are at it again sending out a surrogate with yet another plan. Evan Bayh gives us our moment of Zen:

Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana, who backs Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton for president, proposed another gauge Sunday by which superdelegates might judge whether to support Mrs. Clinton or Senator Barack Obama.

He suggested that they consider the electoral votes of the states that each of them has won

Guess who comes out ahead in this new new math? Hillary! 219-202. Surprise! Surprise! Surprise! Shucks ya’ll. See? Super delegates should pick Hillary because we finally found a measure by which she comes out ahead! We spent all weekend working on this too, so don’t laugh.

These people are insane. Hillarious, but insane! I’ve got a crazy idea. Why don’t we pick a nominee based on the current set of primary rules? Whaddya think? Hmmm? Yeah! Let’s do that!

  • One problem with the new math, she is counting Texas which with the dual primary/caucus scenario, Obama won the most delegates.

    So give the Texas electoral votes to Obama under the clintonite math and its Obama 236-185

  • @1: ROFL. Good catch!

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:


Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!