The folks over at FiveThirtyEight.com, also known as 538, produced a breathless editorial recently claiming "Senator Sanders, You're No Barack Obama" in which they proceeded to construct a straw-man argument showing the inevitability of Hillary Clinton and the shortcomings of Bernie Sanders.

Only one problem. The editorial is full of shit.

There are a number (pun intended) of problems with the editorial, which purports to show that in 2015, Hillary Clinton is doing better than she was in 2007. Setting aside the fact that the editorialist keeps mixing in numbers and claims from both 2007 and 2008 (this is 2015, which is equivalent to 2007, dodo), the biggest problem is the editorialist's use of selective data and selective memory.

Consider this: Between November 2006 and February 2007, seven major Democratic candidates opened their campaigns. They were Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Dennis Kucinich, Chris Dodd, Barack Obama and Bill Richardson. In addition, Tom Vilsack and Mike Gravel were also running by then.

That selective memory, friends, is where the editorial falls on its face. The reason Hillary's numbers were lower in 2007 than in 2015 is that she was competing against an entire field of heavyweight contenders. Does anyone besides me remember the John Edwards and Dennis Kucinich fervor running rampant on Daily Kos back then?

Consider this, too: Bernie Sanders did not announce his candidacy until May 26, 2015. Prior to that, Hillary was just about the only game in town. It's no wonder her 2015 numbers are stronger -- she had no competition until recently.

So for all those at 538 wishing to write off Bernie Sanders and hoping to grease the skids for a Hillary Clinton nomination, shame on you. You're not going to get your wish by fudging the numbers to suit your agenda. Sorry, it just doesn't work that way.