On National Public Radio's "All Things Considered" yesterday (Tuesday, May 13, 2008), I heard you imply that Hillary Clinton is "more electable" in battleground states such as Ohio, Florida, and Missouri.
Apparently, this is a talking point you're shopping around to the entire press, for it appears that you also used it Sunday, May 11, 2008 on "Meet the Press" with Tim Russert, who did not point out the obvious flaw in your logic (although I hesitate to tarnish the word by associating it with your statements):
HILLARY CLINTON LOST THE PRIMARY IN MISSOURI!
According to CNN.com's Election Center 2008, Barack Obama won the Missouri Primary with 405,284 votes to Hillary Clinton's 395,287 votes.
Clinton came in second in Missouri. She was number two there. She did not win Missouri.
Maybe you missed that primary. Maybe you are just in denial about reality. Your own recent behavior, as well as that of your candidate, seems to suggest the latter.
When I was in high school, my best friend, a mathematical genius, had this trick where she could prove that 2 = 1. But it was a trick. It relied on a fundamental flaw, a mathematical sleight of hand, slid unnoticed into her chain of proofs.
Are you trying to prove that 2 = 1 in Missouri for Hillary Clinton, sliding this in under the radar and hoping it will go unnoticed?
Sincerely,
Someone Who Can Count to Two