Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen at Politico have a new piece up that quotes Clinton camp insiders as knowing full well that she has little to no chance of winning the nomination.
Unless Clinton is able to at least win the primary popular vote — which also would take nothing less than an electoral miracle — and use that achievement to pressure superdelegates, she has only one scenario for victory. An African-American opponent and his backers would be told that, even though he won the contest with voters, the prize is going to someone else.
People who think that scenario is even remotely likely are living on another planet.
As it happens, many people inside Clinton’s campaign live right here on Earth. One important Clinton adviser estimated to Politico privately that she has no more than a 10 percent chance of winning her race against Barack Obama, an appraisal that was echoed by other operatives.
In other words: The notion of the Democratic contest being a dramatic cliffhanger is a game of make-believe.
(more)
VandeHei and Allen break down why and how the Clinton team has managed to keep this fantasy alive, with the complicity of a media that loves a horse race.
The real question is why so many people are playing. The answer has more to do with media psychology than with practical politics.
Journalists, for instance, have become partners with the Clinton campaign in pretending that the contest is closer than it really is. Most coverage breathlessly portrays the race as a down-to-the-wire sprint between two well-matched candidates, one only slightly better situated than the other to win in August at the national convention in Denver.
One reason is fear of embarrassment. In its zeal to avoid predictive reporting of the sort that embarrassed journalists in New Hampshire, the media — including Politico — have tended to avoid zeroing in on the tough math Clinton faces.
Avoiding predictions based on polls even before voters cast their ballots is wise policy. But that's not the same as drawing sober and well-grounded conclusions about the current state of a race after millions of voters have registered their preferences.
The antidote to last winter's flawed predictions is not to promote a misleading narrative based on the desired but unlikely story line of one candidate.
It is the math. And the piece goes on to describe the overwhelming math problem Clinton faces. Even her own advisers don't believe she can overcome Obama in total delegates or popular vote.
The story concludes:
Her advisers say privately that the nominee will be clear by the end of June. At the same time, they recognize that the nominee probably is clear already.
What has to irk Clintons’ aides is that they felt she might finally have him on the ropes, bruised badly by the Wright fight and wobbly in polls. But the bell rang long ago in the minds of too many voters.
So it appears she will hang on through June, watching her campaign slowly peter out. So we can look forward to a continuation of the bitterness and "kitchen sink"-hurling until then.
Unless enough heavyweights in the Democratic Party have the strength, courage and candor to tell her that it is, indeed, over.
Even her aides know it. I wonder if they've told their candidate?
(Cross-posted at MyDD.)