Sometimes it’s better to be lucky than good, according to one of our favorite sports cliches, and nothing proves this better than the improbably lucky and not at all good career of former First Lady and Senator and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Her unlikely but widely presumed status as the presumptive First Woman President of the States was challenged during Monday’s Democratic caucus in Iowa by such a long-shot underdog as self-described socialist and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, but she somehow prevailed thanks to six favorable coin tosses in a row.
What are the odds of winning six coin tosses in a row? Although we have only a public school education in mathematics, our finger calculations indicate that it’s approximately a one-in-64 shot, which sounds worse yet after we cheat and use an internet percentage calculator to find that’s also just a 1.562 percent chance, which is even more remote than what the suckers at one of Donald J. Trump’s house-odds casinos could expect. And what are the chances that six county races would end in a tie, and that one of America’s major political parties would choose to settle such weighty matters as its presidential nomination according to a coin flip? Such questions are beyond our public schooled powers of computation, but we’d bet it’s like a gazillion or something to one.
Even the self-described socialist’s necessarily fanatical followers, who are apparently too innumerate to comprehend the mere trillions of deficit spending on economy-crushing and liberty-squashing government programs that he’s proposing, are wised-up enough to be suspicious about it. There’s some talk among the supporters of a recount and other protests, even if the long-shot self-described socialist himself seems willing to call it a tie and move on to the New Hampshire primary where he’s currently a prohibitive favorite, and we wish them well. The Iowa Democratic Party’s ways of doing things are awfully vexing though, and we spent most of Monday night trying to find actual votes cast rather than precinct and county and state delegates won, and then we found out on Tuesday that even the self-described socialist’s campaign operation was having a hard time getting its hand on hard numbers, so it should take a while to sort it all out. Last time around it took the Iowa Republicans more than a week of “Romney Wins” headlines to figure out that former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum had actually won, and by then Romney was well on his way to the nomination, which proves that these sorts of screw-ups are not so unlikely in either party, and it’s a safe bet that a week’s worth of stories about Clinton’s asterik-affixed victory will carry her through the expected New Hampshire primary on to the supposed “firewall” state of South Carolina and all it’s supposedly faithful black voters.
Last time around all those black voters derailed the First Woman President’s supposedly inevitable inauguration by voting for the First Black President, and this time around Santorum didn’t even get to one percent in the Republican Iowa caucus, and each successive coin toss has the same 50-50 odds, and we honestly don’t know how you’d rig that game in front of all those cel phone cameras, but something about the Democrat’s Iowa caucus still seems awfully unlikely. Then again, Clinton has a longstanding habit of beating the odds.
Old-timers with an interest in old news will recall the time when a relatively youthful Clinton parlayed a $1,000 bet on the cattle futures market into a $100,000 cash-out just ten months later, and although we won’t even pretend to be able to guess the odds of that happening without some funny business we did find some better educated fellows writing for the Journal of Economics and Finance who figured it to be about one-in-35-trillion, We also note that the chances of the First Woman President being the wife of a former Living White Male President is just four-in-150-million or so, and that the chances of a brother and son of a former Living White Male President are by now pretty much nil, and when you add in all the other coincidences and that fact that she’s never accomplished anything to the good in any of her prestigious jobs it’s bound to add up to some more-than-astronomical odds, given the finite number of stars and planets and moons in the universe.
As we’re not at all the suspicious sorts, we’ll just assume that Clinton is one lucky lady. The Republican front-runner is running on the argument that he’s so good he and his house odds always win, even though he lost the Iowa caucus by frankly reported numbers, and that if elected he’ll win for the country. It’s a compelling argument, we suppose, but by the same logic it might be better to bet on someone so impossibly lucky as Clinton to win those coin-tosses that so often determine a Republic’s fate.
— Bud Norman