It Depends On What The Word ‘Win’ Means

CNN has the results up from the Nevada Caucuses. All the media is shouting that Clinton "won" in Nevada. I suppose that really hinges on the definition of the word 'win.' Obama did, indeed, walk away with 13 delegates to Clinton's 12 even though Clinton won the raw vote count. Obama also now leads in total committed delegates with 38 to Clinton's 36.

Can you say 'Pyrrhic victory?' I knew that you could.

If Clinton keeps on winning this way, she'll be declaring victory even as Obama is nominated at the convention.

This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to It Depends On What The Word ‘Win’ Means

  1. Mwalimu Daudi says:

    I have to disagree with you on this, Gaius. If the attempts by Clinton Inc. to suppress voter turn out in Nevada and the coded racism of Clinton supplicants has not kept Hillary from winning there, it is hard to see how she can be stopped.

    As Jonathan Last notes at The Weekly Standard, Hillary’s numbers in Nevada resemble the traditional Democrat coalition without the black vote.

    Once she sews up the nomination, all that it will take to drive many back voters back onto the Clinton plantation will be for an “independent” group to run a few ads suggesting that Republicans are tools of the KKK and want to legalize lynching. It’s not like we have not seen this trick before. Remember the James Byrd ads back in the 2000 election?

  2. feeblemind says:

    Have to agree with Malimu. The hamfisted tactics worked in Nevada. If they work there I can not think of a logical reason why they won’t work elsewhere. I think if Obama is slapped down in SC it will be over.