The intellectual dishonesty on this site has reached a new low with Jerome's last two posts.
Your "new" math was especially fun. You know, its actually insulting your readers to promote such misinformation, Jerome.
We know you think HRC is better. Fine. Your argument so the supers (both sides only path to victory) should be simply that -- that on a qualitative basis she'll be a better president. I happen to feel differently but I can respect that argument. I would, as Obama has, also like to have the benefits of arguing to the supers that he has won more contests, the popular vote, and the most delegate. I think those are strong points, but ultimately the supers have to make up their own mind. Please, however, don't try to come up with some bullshit rationalization that she is actually ahead on the objective metrics. If I only had a million more dollars, I'd be a millionaire.
There appear to be some open positions on the HRC campaign staff -- are you applying?
The point about debates is simply ridiculous. They've debated some 18 times at this point and will have two more prior to 3/4. Please tell me that you honestly believe HRC would be open to debating Obama this week if there roles were reversed? If you can't would it be lack of courage on her part?
I understand supporting your candidate and there are ways for her to come back (although I don't understand the mythical drama surrounding her "comebacks" in NH and CA -- how does a front-runner comeback exactly?), but intellectual honesty on some of these points would be appreciated by the readers.