In The Silly Season Straight Talk Goes South For the Summer

"Hilary Clinton has won states with about 260 electoral votes and Barack Obama has won states with about 190."

That’s what Pennsylvania governor Ed Rendell said this morning on “This Week”.

How can you argue against logic like that?

What, with only ten more electoral votes, we have a new president, right?

My question is this: How stupid do Governor Rendell and the Clinton campaign think we are? Some in my midst would have some disagreement with that statement but there are some things I think we can all figure out. Like how electoral votes are counted when you oppose a Republican, not another Democrat.

Stuff like that.

Does Governor Rendell, or any one in the Clinton campaign think that if Barack Obama is the Democratic nominee, that people who voted for Clinton in the primaries will not vote for Obama in the general election? Their alternative, need I remind anyone, is to vote for Ralph Nader or Darth McCain.

So of course not. The argument is completely specious. It lacks any credibility and makes people suspicious and resentful. People see through these arguments like glass.

So I have this problem with the Clinton campaign. They won’t talk straight. They make up stories. I am guessing that this is an effect of the “kitchen sink” phenomenon.

And speaking of straight talk, what is all this with the Florida governor? He was on the same ABC program this morning. In the interview Governor Crist , a Republican, had this to say about holding a new vote in Florida to determine the delegate distribution at the Democratic National Convention:

“They exercised that precious right. I think that the Democratic National Committee should come to the common-sense conclusion that the right thing to do is to honor that vote.”

Now one would think that the governor was saying this because he and his Republican friends don’t want to foot the bill for another primary, but no one has mentioned that they should. In fact, any mention of a "re-do" in Florida also comes with proposals that the election be either entirely privately funded, or funded by each of the campaigns. No, in truth the Republican governor was simply driving the thorn in the side of Democrats a little deeper – maybe giving it a twist in the process. And maybe, since the winner of that damaged primary was Clinton, giving Clinton 105 delegates, Obama 70 and Edwards 29, netting Clinton 35 additional delegates, that could do its work in overturning the Obama lead in delegates, creating furor in the party that opposes Republicans, and give Republicans an easy win in November.

Certainly the Clinton campaign sees this by now. Howard Dean is exactly right in this argument when he said:

“[T]he only thing that can beat us is that we're divided. I have to run these rules so that the losing side feels they've been treated fairly”

I have said this before. Americans have an abiding sense of fair play and will not abide a cheater or someone who has the rules changed in mid course so that they can win. Partisans won’t care. They are with the Clintons because their passions take them there. It’s the swing voters I worry about.

Without the swing voters, Clinton can kiss the White House goodbye forever.

Obama has time on his side, and only needs another 4 years to get him some of that there experience that the Clinton campaign thinks he lacks.