Once again the media have chosen our winner for us. Don't bother to vote.

It's surprising that NPR is so uncool when it comes to talking about the Democratic campaign.  In NPR's phrasing (is it possible that this is completely innocent?) Hillary gets first mention every time, Obama second.  Hillary is the winner, Obama the challenger, the one struggling behind.

Ben Smith of Politico, talking on public radio's "To the Point" just now, got a little testy about this. He didn't mention NPR, but he did seem to be convinced that the media are making Hillary the winner.  Leaving out the super-delegates, he said, Barack is well ahead.  Even factoring in the super-delegates, Smith added, doesn't mean that Hillary can count on the votes she keeps claiming. 

He's right, of course, and of course the reason the Clintons are making these claims is that they hope to set off the "win" mood, the psychological tsunami Clinton would need to make a win more likely.  That plus, of course, exerting some pressure on the super-delegates, many of whom are colleagues and and friends of both Clintons.

What Smith didn't exactly say was that suddenly everybody seems to have noticed how the Democratic party system works.  Everyone seems to be talking about the "super-delegate problem." Everybody starting realizing about 12 hours ago there is a problem.  That's resulted in a significant amount of cynicism and resentment out there about the way the way the super-delegate system seems to override the choices of individual citizens.  For now, at least, there's a slow boil among voters who aren't in the Hillary column.   Whether it's sustained long enough to shake up the convention... ?  Well, we'll see.

Meanwhile, Ben Smith's colleagues over at Politico, Jim Vanderhei and Mike Allen, have this to say about Hillary Clinton's un-win.  Having not really won, she comes out of Super Tuesday with five big problems.  In short:

She lost the delegate derby.  Pure and simple, this is a war to win delegates, one that might not be decided until this summer’s Democratic convention. ...

She essentially tied Obama in the popular vote.  Each won just over 7.3 million votes, a level of parity that was unthinkable as recently as a few weeks ago. ...

She lost more states. Obama carried 14 states, six more than Clinton, and showed appeal in every geographical region. ...

She lost the January cash war. Money chases momentum, so Obama crushing’s 2-to-1 fundraising victory last month is revealing. ...

The calendar is her enemy. Now that more than half the states have weighed in, there is a fairly predictable formula for determining who is most likely to win the upcoming contests. ...

Allen and Vanderhei conclude:  "So it couldn’t be any clearer as to why the supposedly inevitable candidacy is anything but — even when she’s supposedly winning."

Comments

[Jim W]

Thank you for that post. When I sacked out last night, I was prepared to wake up and find Clinton had shifted into another gear, leaving Obama choking in her dust. I was busy all day, and didn't realize how bright the silver lining of yesterday's results truly were.

Now, if only Edwards will suck it up, endorse Obama, and hit the campaign trail on his behalf, even yet all might be well. I certainly hope so. I want to cast a vote for the democratic nominee this year, but will burn before I ever vote for another Clinton.