My point is, simply, that it is over.
Patrick T. Maloney
1

I don’t think you realise how off-putting that attitude is.

It’s not a computer program with a predetermined outcome. It’s an election where people vote. You can call it political science, but it’s like every other social science. People’s behaviour is not subject to immutable laws like physics.

Hubris wins in the end. That’s what Greek tragedy always taught, right? Or did I get that wrong?

It’s not won until the votes are cast.

If your candidate agreed, she wouldn’t be going negative on Sanders. She’s doing that now, at the risk of alienating his supporters for November, and why? Because she feels the need to. Because she feels threatened.

And rightly so too. Unlike you, she can do delegate maths, and she knows that she’s nowhere near a pledged delegate majority yet.

If you want to do your candidate a favour, stop projecting hubris, stop acting like it’s won already, and start electioneering in a way that’s earnest, compassionate and humble. Hillary can still lose from here. You’re not helping her to avoid doing so.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.