AchievEverything.com

This statement from Bill Clinton, which I saw quoted in First Read, is so stereotypically Clintonesque (we tend to think Clintonesque is only evasive, when it also involves self-righteously misrepresenting your critics):

Now there’s a new tactic. It’s to say, ‘Oh what a bad sport you are for wanting to let the people of Kentucky and West Virginia and Oregon and North Carolina and Pennsylvania vote. You could get ahead in the popular vote, but you’re gonna be outspent. And why don’t you just pack it in and while we’re at it, we’re gonna disenfranchise the people in Florida and Michigan, even if it costs us the general election.

Now, I tend to agree with Bill on the substance. There’s no reason for Hillary to drop out as long as she still has some reasonable chance at the nomination, which she does. But let’s count the ways this statement is Clintonesque: 1) No one is criticizing Hillary for wanting to let people vote. Instead, they think she has very little chance at the nomination and is needlessly prolonging a bloody nomination fight. 2) People do cite Obama’s money advantage as an indication of the hopelessness of her campaign, but Clinton, of course, expresses it very tendentiously. 3) And no one is saying Florida and Michigan should be disenfranchised, even if it costs the Democrats the general election. Hillary’s critics don’t want Florida and Michigan seated because they broke the DNC rules and they think the matter can be resolved easily if Hillary is no longer contesting the race. 

Democrats ate this sort of thing up when it was directed at Newt Gingrich and Ken Starr, et al. Let’s hope they’re enjoying getting a good long blast of it themselves.