Clinton: But whites like me!

What the f--?

"I have a much broader base to build a winning coalition on," she said in an interview with USA TODAY. As evidence, Clinton cited an Associated Press article "that found how Sen. Obama's support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me."

"There's a pattern emerging here," she said.

How is that not race-baiting?

Are African Americans not hard working? Are Americans with college degrees not hard working? And this obsession with race!

And she's wrong, too. Look at Obama's support in these relevant categories over the last six contests, spanning eight whole weeks.

              TX   OH   MS   PA   IN   NC

White         44   34   26   37   40   37
No College    42   40   58   42   46   56
College Grad  55   51   62   49   50   57
Over $50K     51   47   52   45   49   60
Under $50K    47   42   66   46   50   54

So let's see what Clinton is claiming again -- that "Obama's support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me."

• Obama's support among whites is actually increasing compared to Ohio, Mississippi and Pennsylvania. She lied about that.
• Obama's support among "hard working Americans", which is code for poorer Americans, has also increased over those in previous contests, save for Mississippi, where the under-$50K vote was overwhelmingly black.
• Obama's numbers among college grads is static to increasing. We don't have exit poll breakdowns for education by race, and we can assume North Carolina's huge numbers with "no college" are due to the large African American percentages in the state. But what about Indiana, a state that is whiter (83.9%) than Pennsylvania (82.1%), Ohio (82.9%) and Texas (48.3%)? Despite the demographic disadvantage, Obama actually increased his support among voters with no college degrees.

So how can Clinton be so wrong? Because she's citing an AP-Yahoo News poll from back on May 3rd. Rather than cite actual voter data, she is basing her claims on an old poll taken before the Indiana and North Carolina primaries.

Yup. That's what Hillary Clinton has been reduced to. Ignoring actual votes and cherry picking polls.

Which really, shouldn't surprise anyone. She's already ignored and belittled every state and voter demographic that doesn't support her. So it only follows that since in her world, the only things that are important are things that support her, she'd ignore election results in favor of the one (outdated) poll that confirms her manufactured reality.