Harold Ickes:
In the wide-ranging interview, Ickes also [confirmed] that the Hillary campaign could still try to woo super-dels even if she lost the popular vote, with Michigan and Florida counted
So what's the point of even counting the popular vote?
Armando:
Hillary Clinton is out there arguing in favor of counting the votes in all 50 states and here is Ickes saying that the RESULT of those votes will not matter to the Clinton campaign.
Of course it won't matter. I'm not sure why Armando or anyone else would be surprised about that.
Clinton's campaign has one premise -- victory at all costs. If that requires sundering the Democratic Party, so be it. She doesn't care. Therefore, there is no logic that applies. The popular vote only matters if it favors her. The pledged delegate lead only matters if it favors her. Michigan and Florida only matter if it favors her. States only matters if they vote for her. Groups and communities in this country only matters if they supports her. Super delegates only matter if they cast their lot with her.
Clinton personifies the worst of the "with us, or against us"-type thinking that has gotten us in trouble with the rest of the world.
So we have a campaign that is losing by every metric imaginable. And now that campaign says that it doesn't care if she's losing by every metric imaginable. Her campaign will carry on regardless.
No one can say that Clinton doesn't play to win. In some circumstances, that is admirable.
The only problem is that she already lost. At this point, this is just pathetic.