Uh-huh. She's a hard worker, no doubt, but isn't it a tad stretchy to compare the largely white-collar work she's been doing with nightshift work? Kinda like John Edwards' kinship with the service workers' union being that his mansion and grounds require an entire union being employed to service them properly.
Meanwhile, Howard Kurtz wonders if the Clinton spin-meisters snookered us good on Wisconsin, where a lot of those blue-collar workers should be making Hillary competitive:
So why hasn't there been a drumbeat in recent days about who's going to win Wisconsin? Answer: because Hillary's team declared preemptive defeat a week ago and said it would make its stand in Ohio and Texas on March 4.
Somehow, we all went along with that, even though Wisconsin is a state where she should be competitive: not a caucus state, not a red state, not a state with a huge black population, but one with a substantial number of blue-collar workers.
Thus, if HRC competes strongly or pulls out a win, she's Queen of the World, whereas Obama will get very little credit for having won the state, which he probably will. Proving once again that the last place you wanna be in this primary season is out front.
"Earlier [Clinton aides] said they would make their stand against Obama in Ohio and Texas, rather than Wisconsin. But in the past few days they have increased their advertising and, in part because of the impact of Sunday's bad weather on the candidates' schedules, will end up spending more time in the state in the final 48 hours than Obama," Dan Balz writes in The Washington Post.
"There is every reason, absent powerful momentum for Obama after last weeks' big victories in Maryland, Virginia and the District, to see Wisconsin as competitive. Both campaigns argue that the state should be favorable to the other side."