Preposterous punditry

17 Feb, 2008 by Ron Coleman

Print this article Font size -16+

ELEANOR CLIFT: “Al Gore on the second ballot: A scenario that a few weeks ago seemed preposterous is beginning to look plausible to some nervous Democrats looking for a way out of the deadlock between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.”

This seems more like a pundit’s dream than anything that’s likely to happen. But to the extent that Democratic leaders are seriously talking about this, it’s a poor reflection on both Clinton and Obama.

Not hardly any of this makes sense to me.

“Plausible”? In what galaxy? The Democratic Party — the party of tokenism, identity politics, “diversity” and quotas — throwing out the two survivors of an essentially democratic primary system, a woman and a black man, in order to “look for a way out of a deadlock,” and choosing a puffy white male millionaire son of a U.S. Senator? The same Democratic Party whose entire political premise is an essential mindless lockup of female and black votes, and then-let’s-see?

And… Al Gore? Does anyone besides the thinnest layer of elite liberal moonbats think of him as a white knight?! (And what exactly size horse would he have to ride on these days? Talk about “footprints”!)

Not only does that not make sense to me, but neither does Glenn’s characterization. “Dream”? More like an acid trip. Unless Democrats are willing to reconsider the wisdom of “destroying the village in order to save it,” which isn’t too likely considering how nice they’ve decorated their village, it’s positively bizarre — and especially as a scenario for answering John McCain, a candidate already attractive to the center.

But, by all means, be my guest, Democrats. Please!

Originally posted a few hours earlier on Ron Coleman’s blog, Likelihood of Success.