Anyone who’s been reading the news knows that Hillary Clinton is currently running circles around both John Edwards and Barack Obama. What’s amazing is the number of people in complete denial about that. I mean, from the perspective of the lunatics on the radical left, Hillary is in the same equivalence class as Bush. Most of the time they just whine and cry about the whole affair, but today I saw a new one — sticking their heads in the sand and claiming it ain’t so. The recent opinion piece by Drew Cline is a perfect example of the ostrich behavior. Despite the fact that Mr. Obama doesn’t have enough experience to qualify for the Governor’s mansion in Springfield, Mr. Cline finds himself enamored with the the diet Senator (nice and hopeful but devoid of substance) who is currently serving as Senator Clinton’s chew toy. Instead of being willing to admit that the Obama campaign is floundering, he’s put on his rose-colored glasses and claimed that Obama is really ahead despite all evidence to the contrary. Let’s look at his poor excuse for logic to allow his conclusions to defeat themselves:

Fact #1: Obama is doing well in the money race. Well, having the wealthy liberal elite on your side is always a big bonus with respect to cash, but Obama has been doing relatively well with individual contributors as well.
Fact #2: The fundraising numbers are hard data, whereas polls have an error bar.
Fact #3: Mr. Cline doesn’t understand statistics.

Stupid Conclusion #1: The polls must be incorrect. Obama must really be ahead.

Illogical Reasoning: People are sending Obama money, but are telling pollsters they are undecided. To allow Mr. Cline to use his own words, “The ones who will support Obama in the end, including many who gave him $20 or $50, are telling pollsters that they are still undecided.”

For the life of me, I can’t imagine what would possess a person who’s not a member of the upper class to send money to a politician they don’t support (the wealthy generally hedge their bets and rightly so). Evidently, the “Audacity of Hope”, leads to embracing fanatically stupid assumptions in order to back their floundering candidate. Perhaps Mr. Cline hasn’t realized that the number Obama contributors (258,000, according to Mr. Cline) is infinitessimal compared to the number of likely primary voters, and that while there generous to Obama, there are a ton of non-donors who prefer Hillary. After all, as David Brooks (a columnist for a real newspaper) noted, she’s commanding a dominating lead among working class Americans (not generally people who send out checks before the primaries), while Obama’s support concentrates amongst the (largely white) liberal elite. Overall, Mr.Cline’s conclusion have a lot of hope and no substance…. much like Obama’s campaign. And people wonder why Hillary’s ahead in the polls.

Breaking news: Hillary is now ahead in the money game in the 3rd quarter by a cool $7 million. This puts her about on par with Mr. Obama overall. I imagine that Mr. Cline will have to resort to astrology to explain why Obama will still win (Mars has eclipsed Venus presaging an Obama victory)! Well, I for one welcome our new pink dress wearing overlords! It is a shame that Mr. Cline’s brain has been reduced to jelly so long before the dawning of that glorious day!

Special thanks to Chris Sullentrop of the New York Times for bringing this logic-impaired gentleman national news attention.