The May 1 issue of The Weekly Standard led its “Scrapbook” section with a nice dig at Politico for a story last September touting the strategic genius who mined data for the er, President Hillary campaign. The headline was "Clinton's Towering Fiasco."

Elan Kriegel’s “erasable marker scribblings reminiscent of A Beautiful Mind that amount to some of the earliest drafts of the computer algorithms that underlie nearly all of the Clinton campaign’s most important strategic decisions.”

They didn’t mock Politico’s Shane Goldmacher by name, but did enjoy the sound of his beautiful-mind gush back then:

To understand Kriegel’s role is to understand how Clinton has run her campaign — precise and efficient, meticulous and effective, and, yes, at times more mathematical than inspirational. Top Clinton advisers say almost no major decision is made in Brooklyn without first consulting Kriegel.

The Standard said don’t blame the geek squad. “The reason Hillary Clinton lost, first and foremost, is that Hillary Clinton was the dismalest, dreadfulest of candidates.” So “more mathematical than inspirational” is quite the slogan. As the Standard wisecracked, it “was of a piece with Hillary’s overall awfulness.”

Hillary foes can giggle over passages like this one from Goldmacher:

Now, with Donald Trump investing virtually nothing in data analytics during the primary and little since, Kriegel’s work isn’t just powering Clinton’s campaign, it is providing her a crucial tactical advantage in the campaign’s final stretch. It’s one of the reasons her team is confident that, even if the race tightens as November approaches, they hold a distinctive edge. As millions of phone calls are made, doors knocked and ads aired in the next nine weeks, it is far likelier the Democratic voter contacts will reach the best and most receptive audiences than the Republican ones.

Earth to the liberal media: When you tout an advantage that doesn’t turn out to be advantage? You’ve just written fake news. It’s Wishful Thinking dressed up as “news.” Guess who turned out to be right in this analysis?