POLITICS -- Normally I defend us media types...

I hear you, Okie, but the thing is, they're right.

The Democrats use of proportional delegate allocation and the close nature of this election, particularly the large, delegate-rich states, mean there just isn't likely to be a knockout in this primary.

 

Convention ratings have sucked for about 20 years. The networks want to design a convention that spikes ratings. And that's scary in terms of who is running the agenda.

 

Doing the math, it does look like the reporter is right. It is virtually impossible for either to have enough pledged delegates before the convention.
I was wrong.
But freakin' still, that doesn't mean there won't be a nominee by then. If Obama continues to roll, I'll bet the supers fall in line behind him pretty quickly. If he screws up or Hillary makes some big comeback, they will back her.
I absolutely cannot believe he could run away from her with normal delegates but the party will go against the will of the people.

 

Oh, I agree, and I absolutely agree with the sentiment behind your argument.

The problem is, the Clinton folks are spinning like crazy, and the political press, as per usual, chooses a false balance by playing up the arguments of both sides as though they are equally likely.

They aren't. Whoever has the most pledged delegates will be the nominee. I truly can't see even the Democratic party being dumb enough to overturn the result of the series of primaries with back-room deals.

Well, OK, I can see it, but it would be the dumbest thing I've ever witnessed.

But your point stands. It's laziness to just play the spin of both camps down the middle and call that "balance".

 

We blow everything out of proportion. It's part of our charm.