Thursday, May 8, 2008


This quote from Slate's Today's Paper is dripping with sarcasm:

"Suddenly, a primary day that few expected to be decisive in the Democrats' long and close contest was interpreted on all sides as a game-changer," notes the WSJ.
Exactly. This primary "race" has been over for weeks if not months in my humble opinion. But it's just the opinion of one schmoo. Because the "punditry" labeled it as a continuing competition for their purposes, everyone seems to have accepted it was "competitive". Now, the punditry is proclaiming it over. Is it? It's no more or less over than it has been for months.

There's only two ways it's over. One, if a candidate drops out, and two, if the convention votes and a candidate wins the majority. Beyond that, it's merely gasbags (myself included) who are speculating. Of all people, I don't want Tim Russert being the almighty arbiter of when or if a race is "over".

No comments: