# Fork Hillary 3: The Final Forking **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 18, 2008, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fork-hillary-3-the-final-forking/441726 "2008-03-18T00:01:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 13
**Author:** ![EddyTeddyFreddy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eddyteddyfreddy/32/18796_2.png) [@EddyTeddyFreddy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EddyTeddyFreddy)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fork-hillary-3-the-final-forking/441726/241 "2008-03-25T01:18:03Z")
[QUOTE=DSeid] to the degree that she is able to blow him away by 20 plus in PA [/QUOTE] That may be less likely than first thought. [Teresa Heinz (Kerry) has written a glowing op-ed](http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08083/867043-109.stm) in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette enthusiastically endorsing Obama. > [@](#): > > **Barack Obama understands working families, offers realistic proposals to help them and has the vision to re-inspire America, says philanthropist TERESA HEINZ** > > [snip] > > Pennsylvania needs a president like Barack Obama, someone who understands the tough times Pennsylvanians are facing. Raised with much love but in challenging circumstances by a single mom and grandparents, he knows firsthand the stress and financial pressures families face. When he beat the odds and put himself through college, he could have made good money with a big-name law firm anywhere in the country, but he chose the gritty streets of Chicago’s South Side where, as a community organizer, he worked helping families like his build better lives. > > Mr. Obama’s work taught him what happens to families and communities when factories shut down and jobs go overseas. He knows firsthand the devastation and despair the global economy can bring – and how important hope is in overcoming setbacks and getting lives and neighborhoods back on track. > > But there’s more to Mr. Obama than hope. There’s a practical approach to economic recovery. > > [snip] > > In the bicentennial year of 1976, Pennsylvania took a chance on a smart, hard-working and optimistic young congressman named John Heinz and made him their senator. They made a wise choice. He worked across the aisle to tackle the tough problems of the 1970s and 1980s – saving Social Security, reforming nursing home care, demanding fair trade, offering new solutions to environmental problems. He proved that, when you love people and put their interest ahead of politics you can make a real difference. > > That is the spirit I see in Barack Obama and why I look forward to voting to make him our 44th president. THK is highly regarded in Pittsburgh for her extensive charitable work and deep commitment to the city and its people. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fork-hillary-3-the-final-forking/441726/242 "2008-03-25T01:19:04Z")
Please answer the questions asked. Leave it at that she hopes his support collapses as she reasonably points out why he would not be an adequate president and why she would be, if that makes it more acceptable to you. She won’t do anything negative in any way. But negative somehow happens. But is that the scenario you see, her winning so handily from here and him being so damaged that the supers can go against a pledged delegate lead of over a hundred by a two to one margin, without her having convincingly won the popular vote either? The questions that followed are still awaiting your answers. “…at what point would you believe it becomes so unlikely that continuing the race has more potential to cause the party harm than a realistic chance to get your favored candidate the nod? Is there such a point in your mind? Or are the party’s best interests immaterial at any point? Or is the possibility of an Obama candidacy so horrible that potentially harming the party is a lesser risk?” ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fork-hillary-3-the-final-forking/441726/243 "2008-03-25T01:22:43Z")
[QUOTE=Bosstone] I’m pleased to see that you have such confidence in him.It’s also not in the interest of the DNC. They allow the rulebreaking states to be seated and next time it’s even worse, now that everyone knows they can get away with it. That’s part of why the whole ‘leadership’ argument has been amusing me; it takes strong leaders to enforce the rules, rather than just letting the people supposedly bound by the rules do what they want. And if it really, truly was the Republican legislatures trying to screw over the Democrats, and next time around they try it again? That will be a clear sign that the rules do need to change to prevent such mucking about. Right now it’s not that obvious. [/QUOTE] WI and FLA were won by GWB by tiny % in the last election. it is entirely within the best interests of the GOP to see that the voters of both states are pissed at the DEMs, and it should be within the best interests of the DNC to see that they mollify the voters (not the State Legislatures; but the voters, who did nothing wrong but were still disenfranchised) otherwise the Dems will lose the General Election. Indeed, the Dems in the FLA Legistlature were conned into this move by the GOP and are dumber than a bag of hammers. I still don’t see why anyone would want to punish the **VOTERS** by disenfranchising them. Again, it’s not the fault of the Democratic Voters in those states at all, they had no say in the matter. Obama has enough Delegates that he could get the Fla delegates seated if he so choose. He does not so choose, as that gives his opponent more Delegates. Thus, he may win the Nomination, but if so, he will surely lose the General election. **DSeid** …“My understanding was that her team works on undermining him (by keeping up associating him with a scary sounding Black preacher, etc.)…” It’s _his_ preacher. Obama’s choice and Obama has not dis-associated himself. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 1:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fork-hillary-3-the-final-forking/441726/244 "2008-03-25T01:31:01Z")
[QUOTE=ElvisL1ves] For pity’s sake … There aren’t many competing interpretations possible there. [/quote] What, that actually campaigning makes a difference, especially for the guy who’s less familiar to the voters? It hardly stacks up as an ‘accusation’ against the intelligence of FL/MI voters, unless you’re going to say the same about [SC voters](http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/sc/south_carolina_democratic_primary-234.html) (avg 7.5% lead 10 days out, won by 29), [VA voters](http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/va/virginia_democratic_primary-507.html) (avg 16% lead 5 days out, won by 28), [WI voters](http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/wi/wisconsin_democratic_primary-270.html) (avg 4% lead a week out, won by 17), [MO voters](http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/missouri-primary.html) (avg 9% deficit 3 days out, won by 1)…want more? I’m saying the good people of Michigan and Florida are just like the residents of Missouri, Virginia, Wisconsin, South Carolina, and a bunch of other states. The only thing that differed was the campaign, or absence of one, in their respective states. That’s not much of an ‘accusation.’ Unless, of course, you think that the residents of all those _other_ states are, in your phrase, “just too dumb or ignorant to have their views count anyway.” But the latter is a necessary condition to believing I’m ‘accusing’ the residents of FL and MI of being less than with it. Like I said: your accusation, in your words. Enjoy. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fork-hillary-3-the-final-forking/441726/245 "2008-03-25T01:38:17Z")
[QUOTE=DSeid] Please answer the questions asked. [/quote] Only if they’re grounded in reality. You’re not off to a good start there. Now can you assess Obama’s campaign without blaming everything that goes wrong with it on “The Monster” or can’t you? Who else would you find to blame things on if he were President? The use of bogeymen is a traditional Gingrich-Atwater-Rove tactic, now unfortunately becoming an Obama tactic as well, as your own example shows. Well, what exactly is it you expect to win if you win it \*that \* way? You know the rest, and I’ve been clear enough. The problem Obama faces is the deflatiing of his bubble - and that’s under his own control. > [@](#): > > "…at what point would you believe it becomes so unlikely that continuing the race has more potential to cause the party harm than a realistic chance to get your favored candidate the nod? Subjective, can’t assess before it happens, probably not until the convention - by then, we’ll know just how much helium is left in the balloon, won’t we? > [@](#): > > Is there such a point in your mind? Or are the party’s best interests immaterial at any point? Or is the possibility of an Obama candidacy so horrible that potentially harming the party is a lesser risk?" That’s your idea of asking “serious” questions? :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fork-hillary-3-the-final-forking/441726/246 "2008-03-25T01:42:53Z")
[QUOTE=RTFirefly] What, that actually campaigning makes a difference, especially for the guy who’s less familiar to the voters? [/quote] To the point where a vote taken in an uncampaigned-in state doesn’t even _count_, as you said? Just how uninformed do any people have to be for you to make \*that \* claim? Please. > [@](#): > > That’s not much of an ‘accusation.’ Unless, of course, you think that the residents of all those _other_ states are, in your phrase, “just too dumb or ignorant to have their views count anyway.” That’s what inevitably follows from your statement. Please. Try accepting responsibility for it, willya? > [@](#): > > Like I said: your accusation, in your words. Enjoy. Ain’t enough of these :rolleyes: in the world for that bit of contortionism. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 1:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fork-hillary-3-the-final-forking/441726/247 "2008-03-25T01:44:38Z")
[QUOTE=DrDeth] WI and FLA were won by GWB by tiny % in the last election. [/quote] Nitpick: while you’re correct about WI, GWB won FL by 5% in 2004, which isn’t huge, but it’s nonetheless on the very outer edge of swing-state territory. Eleven states were decided by closer % margins than FL. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fork-hillary-3-the-final-forking/441726/248 "2008-03-25T01:53:53Z")
[QUOTE=ElvisL1ves] To the point where a vote taken in an uncampaigned-in state doesn’t even _count_, as you said? Just how uninformed do any people have to be for you to make \*that \* claim? Please. [/quote] Well, how should we count it? I’ve established that Obama made up considerable ground very quickly in many states where he campaigned. So what should we do with FL - close the gap by 13%, apportion it somehow amongst the CDs, and see what we get delegate-wise? And the same in MI, only replacing ‘Uncommitted’ with ‘Obama’? Once we get into that, it’s YHO v. MHO v. anyone else’s HO; there’s no canonical way to project Obama’s gains from campaigning, only to not do so would be more wrong than to do so. > [@](#): > > That’s what inevitably follows from your statement. Please. Try accepting responsibility for it, willya? > > Ain’t enough of these :rolleyes: in the world for that bit of contortionism. Dude: saying a statement and its contrapositive are equivalent isn’t contortionism, except in your world. In ours it’s truth. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fork-hillary-3-the-final-forking/441726/249 "2008-03-25T01:57:42Z")
Oral surgery time. If Hillary fails to blow him away in PA does she still have enough of a chance? What if (highly unlikely) she lost PA? If she loses NC by a margin close to what she wins PA by so nets very few delegates, does she still have enough of a chance? If he over the next two weeks the poll numbers fail to show much long term impact from “Pastorgate” does she still have enough of a chance? If she loses Indiana does she still have enough of a chance? Would you be in favor of taking it to a floor fight under any circumstance in which neither already has enough delegates ahead of time? ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fork-hillary-3-the-final-forking/441726/250 "2008-03-25T02:09:51Z")
Or if we’re talking popular vote, that’s a 62,300-vote edge for Hillary in FL, and 12,800 in MI. ---
**Author:** ![Merkwurdigliebe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/74df32/32.png) [@Merkwurdigliebe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merkwurdigliebe)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 3:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fork-hillary-3-the-final-forking/441726/251 "2008-03-25T03:07:19Z")
Answer the question **ElvisL1ves** … Obama’s path to the nomination is clear. How does Hillary win? Surely you must have some strategy in mind. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 3:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fork-hillary-3-the-final-forking/441726/252 "2008-03-25T03:14:14Z")
[QUOTE=DrDeth] Thus, he may win the Nomination, but if so, he will surely lose the General election. [/QUOTE] How does one follow from the other? Surely not. ---
**Author:** ![DoctorJ](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doctorj/32/2904_2.png) [@DoctorJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DoctorJ)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fork-hillary-3-the-final-forking/441726/253 "2008-03-25T04:04:23Z")
The DNC has to take a longer view than a single election. Say they allow FL and MI to have a do-over–what’s going to happen in 2012? Half the States in the Union could move their primaries up to January so that they’re in on the early action (in the media race, at least, if not the actual race). Then if it isn’t decided by springtime they can have a do-over. There’s no downside other than paying for two elections. Meanwhile, Iowa and NH would probably have to move to December, given their state rules that automatically move their elections if another state tries to move ahead. Other states would follow, and the whole process would repeat in a giant game of electoral leapfrog until the Iowa caucus is held on the day after the previously elected President is sworn in. The DNC needs to be in control of the calendar, and if there are no consequences at all for breaking the rules, then they aren’t in control at all. I never heard Obama actively speak out against do-overs in MI and FL; he just deferred the issue to the DNC. This, IMO, was exactly the right thing to do. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 5:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fork-hillary-3-the-final-forking/441726/254 "2008-03-25T05:31:53Z")
An [interesting analysis.](http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/25/opinion/25brooks.html?_r=1&oref=slogin) I don’t quite agree with all of it but it gets to the point that I am trying to get to with **Elvis** - > [@](#): > > Last week, an important Clinton adviser told Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen (also of Politico) that Clinton had no more than a 10 percent chance of getting the nomination. Now, she’s probably down to a 5 percent chance. > > Five percent. > > Let’s take a look at what she’s going to put her party through for the sake of that 5 percent chance: The Democratic Party is probably going to have to endure another three months of daily sniping. … For the sake of that 5 percent, this will be the sourest spring. About a fifth of Clinton and Obama supporters now say they wouldn’t vote for the other candidate in the general election. Meanwhile, on the other side, voters get an unobstructed view of the Republican nominee. John McCain’s approval ratings have soared 11 points. He is now viewed positively by 67 percent of Americans. A month ago, McCain was losing to Obama among independents by double digits in a general election matchup. Now McCain has a lead among this group. > > For three more months, Clinton is likely to hurt Obama even more against McCain, without hurting him against herself. And all this is happening so she can preserve that 5 percent chance. > … > The only question is whether Clinton herself can step outside the apparatus long enough to turn it off and withdraw voluntarily or whether she will force the rest of her party to intervene and jam the gears. > > If she does the former, she would surprise everybody with a display of self-sacrifice. Her campaign would cruise along at a lower register until North Carolina, then use that as an occasion to withdraw. If she does not, she would soldier on doggedly, taking down as many allies as necessary. My unanswered question remains - is there a point at which the long shot is so long, and the potential for overall harm so great, that even her steadfast supporters would believe she should stop? ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 1:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fork-hillary-3-the-final-forking/441726/255 "2008-03-25T13:43:06Z")
I think that she will stop when it is clear she can’t lock up enough superdelegates to win nomination. Which probably won’t happen until very close to the convention. Folks, look. This is what the Democratic Party asked for with their decision to add “superdelegates” to the mix. They were lucky they didn’t go through this in 1984 with Mondale/Hart, which, as you may recall, was not completely decided at the time of the California June primary. This year’s difficulties are the price that will be paid for a decision to rely in close contests upon the party heavyweights to make the choice. One of the things the people who support Sen. Obama say that bugs me the most is this repeated assertion that Sen. Clinton should stop trying to win the nomination using the superdelegates, or that if she manages to win the nomination that way, that somehow she will have “stolen” the nomination. Look, neither she nor Sen. Obama set this screwy thing up this way. If she wins nomination using the mechanism the party put in place over twenty years ago, more power to her. She hasn’t “stolen” anything; she’s played the contest the right way, and achieved the same result Sen. Obama wants to achieve. I do not believe for a minute that, were the roles reversed, Sen. Obama would be stepping aside at this point. If anyone has a complaint with the possibility of Sen. Clinton being nominated, given the primary/caucus results to date, they should take that complaint directly to the Democratic Party. Otherwise, if you support Sen. Obama, stop whining about the situation, and make persuasive arguments for why superdelegates should support him, other than “because more people have voted for him.” There are plenty of good arguments to make. Make them. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fork-hillary-3-the-final-forking/441726/256 "2008-03-25T13:54:13Z")
She will keep going because it helps her both in the short and long term. There are four possibilities of how this ends up, and I think her order of preference would be as follows: 1- Hillary beats McCain. Well that’s obvious. Of course she wants to win. 2- McCain beats Obama. This would set her up for her “I told you so” run in 2012. 3- McCain beats Hillary. Clearly inferior to #2 from her point of view. She’d have to run either as a rematch against McCain (which never works for the challenger) or as a defeated nominee against a fresh GOP choice in 2012. 4- Obama beats McCain. Her nightmare scenario. This would make another run for her impossible until 2016 at the age of 68, with an incumbent but unfriendly Democratic president. Moreover, if Obama’s veep choice runs in 2016, she’d be bucking the establishment candidate. Her number one goal is to make sure outcome 4 does not happen. If she can’t have the nomination, she wants to be damn sure it is worthless. So from her point of view, continuing the fight and crippling Obama makes perfect sense. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fork-hillary-3-the-final-forking/441726/257 "2008-03-25T14:11:40Z")
[QUOTE=DSYoungEsq] I do not believe for a minute that, were the roles reversed, Sen. Obama would be stepping aside at this point. [/QUOTE] Oh, I do. If Obama had lost 11 primaries in a row, lost more total states, consistently lagged in delegates and in the popular vote, he would have been vilified as a spoiler who was damaging the party. Don’t for a minute believe that Obama would have been treated with the same deference as Hillary if he had the same dismal record. If the roles were reversed, Obama would have been savaged by the Clinton machine and by the press at large. ---
**Author:** ![EddyTeddyFreddy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eddyteddyfreddy/32/18796_2.png) [@EddyTeddyFreddy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EddyTeddyFreddy)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 2:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fork-hillary-3-the-final-forking/441726/258 "2008-03-25T14:17:49Z")
[QUOTE=Fear Itself] Oh, I do. If Obama had lost 11 primaries in a row, lost more total states, consistently lagged in delegates and in the popular vote, he would have been vilified as a spoiler who was damaging the party. Don’t for a minute believe that Obama would have been treated with the same deference as Hillary if he had the same dismal record. If the roles were reversed, Obama would have been savaged by the Clinton machine and by the press at large. [/QUOTE] Not to mention that the superdelegates would have thundered over to Clinton in droves well before this point. ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 2:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fork-hillary-3-the-final-forking/441726/259 "2008-03-25T14:18:36Z")
[QUOTE=Fear Itself] Oh, I do. If Obama had lost 11 primaries in a row, lost more total states, consistently lagged in delegates and in the popular vote, he would have been vilified as a spoiler who was damaging the party. Don’t for a minute believe that Obama would have been treated with the same deference as Hillary if he had the same dismal record. If the roles were reversed, Obama would have been savaged by the Clinton machine and by the press at large. [/QUOTE] Oh, please. Gary Hart ran all the way to the “end” and he had a much more dismal chance than Sen. Obama would have if the roles here were reversed. And people weren’t “savaging” him for it. ---
**Author:** ![stolichnaya](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bcef8e/32.png) [@stolichnaya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stolichnaya)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fork-hillary-3-the-final-forking/441726/260 "2008-03-25T14:38:13Z")
Aside from party pressure which would surely be there were the roles reversed, from a purely practical perspective, I think Obama would have stepped aside by now to preserve his future chances- he is a young man. The reason why we’re seeing what we’re seeing from Hillary is that she has very little personally to lose in most scenarios (in a way what \*\*BobLibDem \*\* was pointing out). I don’t really buy the idea that Hillary not pulling back or dropping out would be permanently damaging for the party. It’s not the greatest situation, but assuming that the result is an Obama win, and it looks like it will be, we might as well hit this stuff and air it out now, while there are months and months to prepare and respond and dry out the laundry. It also gives Hillary the opportunity to realize on her own that she pulled out all the stops and just straight got beat, which will let her clear her head and get behind Obama in the general. If she felt forced out in any way, this would be less likely. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fork-hillary-3-the-final-forking/441726.md?page=12) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fork-hillary-3-the-final-forking/441726.md?page=14)