Clue sticks are in short supply, so I fixed me up a few with this short crib sheet.

Why is Hillary still running?

1) Because Obama hasn't beaten her yet. Yep, that's right. There's a little known clause in the Democratic rule book that says you have to get a certain number of delegates and superdelegates to win, even if all the TV and newspaper columnists and your opponent's fans have declared it over. I know, it's not exactly sensible - who'd want to buck Chris Matthews after all, but that's the way it goes. And it goes against American tradition and all our sports and movies, because it's very strange for someone to fight against overwhelming odds. Why would she do a thing like that?

2) There are still primaries left. Yes, that's right. This confuses a lot of people since we were told that this was all over by February 5 or with Wisconsin or something, but the problem is the DLC went and scheduled primaries into June, and like if no one shows up, they've gone and wasted a lot of money for nothing - they might just as well have held a caucus or embezzled more money than usual, and that just makes them downright grouchy. We don't want that.

3) 17 million voters. Or just shy of. Yep, somehow Hillary thinks she owes them something - you know, for standing up and moving to their polling place, like that's a lot of work. And they kind of want to be counted, even if for futile narcissism. Because there's this rumor going around that her opponent really smoked her by getting... just shy of 17 million votes. Yeah, it was a real blowout, but her fans are asking for a roll call anyway. Spoil sports.

4) The VP slot. Yes, I know - we've heard it from Jeanne Kirkpatrick and the Psychic Connection themselves that Hillary will never take the VP slot. But the problem is that Hillary doesn't seem to know this. Not that anyone's been brave enough to ask her (you know her reputation). But it seems that there's some peculiar reason, Hillary may just possibly believe that the VP position is worth it, maybe access to the President, coming up with policy initiatives on the sly, or otherwise using the position to stir things up in Washington. I know it's been reputed to "not be worth a bucket of warm spit", but then again, being a minority Senator under an opposition President for 6 years probably wasn't a bale of hay either, nor being under investigation by Ken Starr for most of her adult life. Come to think of it, the VP position might be her best chance to slink away into sweet anonymity. Remember when Dick Cheney wasn't seen for what, 2? 3 years after 9/11?

4) The Ascension. No, not the religious one, the political one. I know it's almost a foregone conclusion that Hillary's really trying to destroy Obama so she can run again in 2012 - who wouldn't? Think of all the fun being on the road for a year and a half giving the same speech!!!  The fund raisers! The debates! The press scrutiny! What could go wrong? But it seems that someone may have put a bug in Hillary's ear that being VP isn't bad odds either, and if you're planning 4 years ahead, sitting comfy in the Naval Observatory and afternoons shopping for shoes might be a more straightforward path. How good of odds? Historically, better than 1 out of 5. Not too shabby. (Okay, that's per President - the odds are a bit worse if you tally it by  the larger number of Vice Presidents, such as poor Spiro Agnew who sadly came oh so close only to see it slip away). Even if Obama loses in November she could still run in 2012, and while it's certainly inevitable she'll be President at some point, after this primary season she may be thinking 20% isn't a bad hedge bet after all. And I think we all know she's always been good at options trading.

So there you have it. Feel free to add your own reasons, and be sure to click the Recommend link - we come from the obligation wing of the party.

How can it be - an ABC survey says that 59% of Blacks would like to see Hillary as the VP candidate on the Democratic ticket? How can that be? Conventional wisdom here has it that Hillary is so racist and has offended so many Blacks that her career should be over, and here we see her hitting the magic number of 3/5th? (sorry, couldn't resist - a bit of black humor).

Also, 64% of voters think she should stay in the race, including 42% of Obama supporters. Oh my, could it be that punditland is wrong? That Americans really don't mind democracy and voting and all that, and that they're not irretrievably fragmented? Curiouser and curiouser.

From the NY Times:
The average student loan debt among the 580 graduates of Harvard Law School in 1986 was $27,200, said Susanne Davis, a spokeswoman for the school. Many students also have debts outstanding from their undergraduate years, and the average combined debt in those cases is $32,800, she said.

Multiply that by 2 and you get $66K. But the Obamas made roughly $2 million between 1997 and 2004 with a $200K+ average. They lived in the same condo for 13 years. So why couldn't they pay off student loans? And why is this in her stump speech?

Here's a nice little tidbit on the great traditional sport of Harvard Law School whining - I guess it's part of their entry training to keep them from seeming elite.

I was looking for something else and ran across a reference to Hillary's initial salary at Rose Law Firm - the privileged law firm that well-connected hubby Bill Clinton got her into in 1977. $25,000. Yep, between the 29-year-old Yale grad/Watergate committee vet and up-and-coming Bill they were earning a whopping $52K a year. Heck, Michelle's family was scraping by on only $42K at this time. And it gets sicker - look at her meteoric rise. Her income soared from $50,579 in 1981 (she became a a partner in 1979) to nearly $180,000 in 1992 - 7x her original salary in only 16 years!!!

She also raked in $5,500 in speaking fees and $64,700 for serving on three boards: the Arkansas- based $44 billion Wal-Mart and $321 million frozen-yogurt chain TCBY, as well as $1.6 billion Lafarge, a Virginia cement maker. (She remains an unpaid director of nine nonprofits, including the Children's Defense Fund, the Children's Television Workshop and Public-Private Ventures, a Philadelphia group that helps teenagers.) Somebody should ask her about her excessive earnings.

Though I did notice something a little strange in Obama's tax records today. No investments until 2005. None. Nada. $0 interest, $0 dividend income. Then in 2005 aside from their home, it was 2 serious investments, one in AVI Biopharma and one in SkyTerra - overall $13K in mutual fund gains and $11K in stock losses on $1.7 million in income, $1 million after taxes & deductions. In 2006 on almost a million income, $550K after taxes and deductions (including $60K mortgage), he had $6K in interest & dividend income and a single $100K investment that paid nothing. Anyone ever heard what Obama's investment strategy is?

Thanks to Eric Boehlert via MyDD for bringing up one more refrain of the Clinton Rules, in this case the sudden Concern Trolling of the MSM and so-called "Progressives" as to how Hillary's "destroying the party" and "why won't she quit?", conveniently forgetting that nasty primary fights lasting way too long have been quite the norm for Democrats, and somehow these were never a problem in former years, when say they were the whims of a candidate with no chance in hell still blasting away at Bill Clinton up to the convention.

Of obvious humor and irony is the chorus from people who not long ago were hoping for the endorsement of John Edwards and mulling over the appropriate compensation (or "Quid Pro Quo", as it's called in the in the payoff racket), who now feel that Hillary, who's so far mustered some 17 million people out to vote for her, is owed absolutely nothing. (Oh, okay, possibly some token appointment of Sibelius for those who didn't get the memo that identity politics is supposedly dead - and for those who haven't figured out that a lot of people who aren't 60 year old white women with enormous bank accounts are still voting for Hillary).

Actually, Eric is a little behind the times - a quick trip to the Daily Howler Archives from January & February 2007 shows that the same MSM and progressive punditry was already at work then - declaring Hillary washed up, she's really Bill's 3rd Term, how will she control Bill?, too divisive, doomed once Obama and/or Edwards enter the race, a ballcutter, will do anything to win, Monica, and so on. 16 months ago.

Hillary will continue to the convention for one simple reason - to get as much from the process as she can get - whether the nomination, the VP slot, or whatever other assorted combination of goodies is warranted for her huge stake of voters - a true Universal Health Care package? A sensible strong foreign/domestic security policy? More focus on women's issues? More fiscal responsibility? Less catering to Republicans? Because what some people don't get is that the "Party" includes Hillary supporters, and if the "Party" is demonizing half of its voters, it's hard to decide who's leaving whom. The outright slurs against the elderly and the "racist Bubba vote" have not been pretty. The widened rupture between white feminists and feminists of color, while understandable, is disconcerting in its vehemence and lack of  marginal shared empathy.

Obama fans seem to have taken to heart Hillary's pledge to fight on as a Democrat whoever wins, even while tossing out rumors of Hillary & supporters joining McCain or in other ways going over to the dark side. What doesn't seem to be happening in any meaningful way is Obama reaching across the aisle to his own party. I suppose having effectively branded Hillary as a racist traitor to his own club this will be tough to do, but there's a certain amount of delusion in thinking that a Sibelius or Richardson VP slot won't be a significant come-down from an energy packed season. The fact that these two lackluster candidates are leading the Daily Kos/OpenLeft poll gives an idea how poorly most progressives do as effective campaign strategists - had Al Gore chosen a running mate with a modicum of personality on the campaign trail (instead of a legacy pioneer long past expiration date for most voters), we'd likely be having a completely different conversation these days. But if there's anything that "Clinton Rules" tells us, it's that vitriol will rule over logic in those who hate Hillary the best. What should be obvious is that most voters are not addicted to blogs - and will vote whatever way they feel. If the Democratic ticket does not excite them, they will stay home, vote for a 3rd party, or even vote for McCain. If Hillary supporters see their candidate dissed, it's hard to imagine a full base supporting the ticket. This of course works the other direction as well, but Hillary fans seem to grasp this, whereas the Obama side seems to feel like it's exorcising ghosts and slamming the door shut. This of course does not smack of the "inclusive" campaign once promised, and worse, it threatens both the Presidential aspiration as well as many down-ballot candidates and ballot initiatives. It is time for Obama followers to start seriously considering what is good for the party.