Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Optimistic Clinton Backer Predicts W.Va. Blowout

Updated 4:34 p.m.
By Anne E. Kornblut
LOGAN, W.Va. -- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is expected to win big in West Virginia on Tuesday. But 90-10?

One of her supporters suggested the margin might run that high in the primary. State Sen. Harry Truman Chafin (yes, named for the former president), introducing Clinton at an event here, said he hoped the vote would at least split 80-20, and perhaps go higher.

"He did not just say that," one Clinton aide said after hearing Chafin's introduction, in mock horror over the out-of-control expectations management. Campaign spokesman Mo Elleithee sought to bring expectations back down to earth. "We appreciate his exuberance, but we're pretty sure the race will be much closer than that," he said.

Clinton spent Monday winding across the state, driving hours to each stop and pushing the argument that she is more electable than Sen. Barack Obama, seemingly oblivious to the conventional wisdom that she is about to lose the Democratic nomination. Her schedule is mapped out beyond Tuesday, with travel to the West Coast in the offing, suggesting that she is not planning to drop out this week as some had anticipated.

By Web Politics Editor  |  May 12, 2008; 3:56 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Clinton Running Hard in West Virginia
Next: McCain Breaks with Bush on Climate Change

Comments

They voted like 99%-1% in Gary, Indiana for Obambi....

99% to 1%

Who is Racist?

economically similar to many poor rural areas in West Virginia....


But nobody is calling Gary, Indiana the most racist city in the country...


Why do people attack whites who have been supporting Obambi to the tune of 44% of the white vote?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 4:16 PM | Report abuse

They voted like 99%-1% in Gary, Indiana for Obambi....

99% to 1%

Who is Racist?

economically similar to many poor rural areas in West Virginia....


But nobody is calling Gary, Indiana the most racist city in the country...


Why do people attack whites who have been supporting Obambi to the tune of 44% of the white vote?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 4:15 PM | Report abuse

They voted like 99%-1% in Gary, Indiana for Obambi....

99% to 1%

Who is Racist?

economically similar to many poor rural areas in West Virginia....


But nobody is calling Gary, Indiana the most racist city in the country...


Why do people attack whites who have been supporting Obambi to the tune of 44% of the white vote?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 4:13 PM | Report abuse

N.M. Nuen,

You are as delirious as the candidate you support.

Hillary all the Way,

You would support McCain rather than Obama because . . . ? You would support the person with a platform that is the exact opposite of Clinton's rather than the candidate whose platform is almost identical to Clinton's? I find that position absurd. If you support Clinton because of the war, economy, women's reproductive rights, health care, etc, then it seems that voting for McCain would be to cut off your nose in spite of your face. Hope McCain serves you as well as Bush has.

Posted by: Nuffsaid | May 13, 2008 6:13 PM | Report abuse

Well there is no question the only way Obama gets my vote now is if Hillary is on the ticket too, McCain is looking pretty good.

Posted by: Hillary All the Way | May 13, 2008 5:55 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Rodham CLINTON will be the immediate future President of the United States of America, because it's so WRITTEN!Whatever people do, be it popular vote, superdelegates vote etc... won't change that. So my dear American friends, I wish you and your great country a prosperous future in the capable hands of your next President : Hillary Rodham CLINTON.

Posted by: N.M. Nuen | May 13, 2008 5:53 PM | Report abuse

Obamaniacs:

Will Obama supporters help pay down Clinton's $20 million debt?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080513/ap_on_el_pr/clinton_debt

Posted by: JakeD | May 13, 2008 2:13 PM
--------------------------------
JakeD, current laws do not allow one candidate to transfer funds from one campaign to pay down debt for another campaign. I believe what you are referring to is Obama supporting Hillary through fund raisers presumably with Hillary in attendence to help pay down her debt. I've contributed the max to Obama's campaign and have no problem with him supporting Hillary through fund raisers to pay down her debt--oh, was that a na na na na na from you :-)?

Posted by: SingleWhiteFemale | May 13, 2008 5:25 PM | Report abuse

I think that she will win fairly substantially but not that big (90-10.) I'll bet about 18 points. It doesn't matter though. She can not catch up to him. It is time for her to drop out to help party unity.

Posted by: lindaredtail | May 13, 2008 5:20 PM | Report abuse

Billy C. Turner and jeffp:

Are the 92% of African-Americans voting for Obama also "racists"? How about we tone down the rhetoric on both sides?

Posted by: JakeD | May 13, 2008 11:07 AM

------------------------------
Oow oow JakeD can I answer the question?? No, those are the same African Americans who voted 90% for Bill Clinton--does that make them racist? Just asking.

Posted by: SingleWhiteFemale | May 13, 2008 5:09 PM | Report abuse

Is it me, or is Hillary claiming every state since Ohio that she has won as a state that is necessary to win the general? On the other hand, every state that Obama wins is insignificant. I'm so through with this Primary that I have no plans for watching the returns tonight--what a waste of time. Prior to now, it's been an event at my house regardless of who was ahead. This is so yesterday's news. If it will make Ms. Hillary happy, I hope that she wins 99% of the votes tonight...really...

Posted by: Beingsensible | May 13, 2008 5:01 PM | Report abuse

A terrible generalization. I should have said "almost all" or "vast majority".

My original post was supposed to be a rally cry for Democrats, and my point remains.

Posted by: Arbiter | May 13, 2008 3:39 PM | Report abuse

You shouldn't have used the word "ALL" then ; )

Posted by: JakeD | May 13, 2008 3:29 PM | Report abuse

JakeD, I lied. I have to say one more thing.

As far as Republican opinion polls are concerned, McCain started out 2008 with an averaged 1 point lead over his Republican counterparts. Today, he enjoys an averaged 30 point lead (that contiues to grow). Thats what I call "party unification."

-Comparatively-

Clinton started 2008 with an averaged 15 point lead over her Democratic counterparts. Today, Obama now leads by more than 5 points. This is not party unity. Hence, my call for it.

I stand by my statement that McCain has a unified Republican base behind him. 100% backing by every member of your party is unattainable and shouldn't be expected. A majority, however, should.

Posted by: Arbiter | May 13, 2008 3:08 PM | Report abuse

Barak's base of support is probably 20-25% of the national population, at best, and will not grow much from there.

As the previous blogger mentioned, watch out in November!

Posted by: Wot | May 13, 2008 2:28 PM

Thank you for stating your opinion as fact.
Here is something you may want to consider. Half of the the "national population" does not vote to start with. About 40% that number figure to vote republican. When you add in the newly registered democrats this election cycle, I believe Sen Obama's chances are rather good in improving his support. By the way, his first name is spelled "BARACK"

Posted by: Anonymous | May 13, 2008 2:51 PM | Report abuse

Agreed.

I will close in saying that if anyone here thinks that the Republican party will not form a unified base around thier soon-to-be elected candidate, John McCain, they are sorely mistaken. Ron Paul will not win the nomination, nor the presidency, and the party will ostracize him for the sake of controlling this unity. They did it to McCain before. They will do it now.

Posted by: Arbiter | May 13, 2008 2:37 PM | Report abuse

rebecca:

Are YOU "Thomas Jefferson" too?

Posted by: JakeD | May 13, 2008 2:36 PM | Report abuse

Tom Jefferson:

Where did you get the talking point?

Sandy:

It's not Hillary's fault that caucus States don't turn out lots of voters and/or keep accurate track of votes ...

Posted by: JakeD | May 13, 2008 2:30 PM | Report abuse

Arbiter:

My initial posts to you were simply pointing out that the GOP is not "ALL" unified behind McCain -- and, further, that not even total PARTY unity is a pre-requisite for winning in November -- I'm not sure where we went astray in the discussion, but the principle of "diminishing returns" urges us that it's best to leave it as is.

Posted by: JakeD | May 13, 2008 2:28 PM | Report abuse

Barak's base of support is probably 20-25% of the national population, at best, and will not grow much from there.

As the previous blogger mentioned, watch out in November!

Posted by: Wot | May 13, 2008 2:28 PM | Report abuse

HRC can win the hearts and minds of middle of the road America, and unfortunately, BHO cannot! This represents tens of millions of voters in November, and I think tj has a very good point here...

Posted by: rebecca | May 13, 2008 2:26 PM | Report abuse

True, an elaboration on the comment by fortnight. Remember this in November, as it is as realistic a prediction, as the sun rising tomorrow.

Posted by: Tom Jefferson | May 13, 2008 2:22 PM | Report abuse

Popular vote arguement by HRC is phony as hell. Popular vote is fair if all the states held primaries instead of some holding caucuses or mail in primaries. Its not logical to equate caucus vote to a primary vote and moreover four of the state which obama won do not release the vote totals at all.

Posted by: sandy | May 13, 2008 2:21 PM | Report abuse

tj:

I believe it was "fortnight" who posted it first (on an earlier thread, May 13, 2008 11:35 AM):

"Hillary will win the popular vote in this primary, but it will be a few hundred left wing activists who will seal the deal for obama, resulting in a new kind of democracy, that in which preferential treatment reigns supreme over logic."

Where did you get the talking point?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 13, 2008 2:20 PM | Report abuse

You aren't making sense. My original post was about party unity. Not about unity of the american voting bloc as a whole.

For a party to put up a candidate and have that candidate succeed in the general election, you must have unity. Clinton had it in the general in 1992. Democrats flocked to vote for him, even the ones that voted against him in the primaries.

I do remember Ross Perot. I remember how he utterly failed in his attempt for the White House. He didn't have a unified base - and therefore lost his presidential bid.

Posted by: Arbiter | May 13, 2008 2:18 PM | Report abuse

-------------------------------------------
tj

When June comes, Hillary Rodham Clinton will have won a majority of the popular vote, with over 35 million ballots cast, and would logically be a stronger candidate in the General Election.....

However, a few hundred left wing activists and media correspondents will defy reasoning, and hand the nomination to Obama, thereby creating a new form of Democracy, this being a psuedo-government based of preferential treatment of bi-racial candidates. The outcome will be nothing less than a resounding defeat for the Democrats in November, when the capricious notions of the liberal establishment will, as Wright says, come to roost.


tj
-------------------------------------------

Posted by: Tom Jefferson | May 13, 2008 2:16 PM | Report abuse

Obamaniacs:

Will Obama supporters help pay down Clinton's $20 million debt?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080513/ap_on_el_pr/clinton_debt

Posted by: JakeD | May 13, 2008 2:13 PM | Report abuse

Chris:

After you stop laughing, keep reading that post and answer the questions I asked to continue the discussion in an intelligent manner.

Arbiter:

YOU said "no candidate has done it otherwise." And, I was referring to the GENERAL election, so I do see it differently -- Bill Clinton did not achieve a plurality in either 1996 or 1992 -- two words to jog your memory: Ross Perot.

Posted by: JakeD | May 13, 2008 2:12 PM | Report abuse

William JEFFERSON Clinton won the White house without a Unified front?

He took the Democratic primary election by approximately 52% of the vote - compared to his Democratic counterparts Jerry Brown and Paul Tsongas (each getting ~20% of the remainder)

Then the party unified around him garnering a Presidential Election that provided him an approximate 6 point lead. If the 48% of democrats that didn't vote for him in the primaries refused to vote for him in the general, it would have been a loss.

Thats what I call unified. You, however, see it differently?

Posted by: Arbiter | May 13, 2008 2:01 PM | Report abuse

"I'm referring to the kind of "Presidential" experience you get when you live and work with the President of the United States."

:D

:D

:D

:D

I'm trying not to burst out laughing, really I am.

Posted by: Chris | May 13, 2008 2:00 PM | Report abuse

"I'm referring to the kind of "Presidential" experience you get when you live and work with the President of the United States."

:D

:D

:D

:D

I'm trying not to burst out laughing, really I am.

Posted by: Chris | May 13, 2008 2:00 PM | Report abuse

In Clinton-Land, facts should not get in the way.

Posted by: Chris | May 13, 2008 1:56 PM | Report abuse

In Clinton-Land, facts should not get in the way.

Posted by: Chris | May 13, 2008 1:55 PM | Report abuse

Arbiter:

William JEFFERSON Clinton "won" in 1992 without a united front -- thank you for answering my question though -- I was merely pointing out that your claim: "the party has decided to ALL get behind [McCain]" is factually incorrect. Just ask RAT-The ; )

Posted by: JakeD | May 13, 2008 1:44 PM | Report abuse

Yup! And we buy everyone a tank of gas with the leftover campaign funds. What's Barack got...30 or 40 billion?

Posted by: LW | May 13, 2008 1:35 PM | Report abuse

JakeD:

I'm glad you read my post, but apparently you didn't understand it.

Elections are a numbers game. Period. If I recall correctly, the Republican party chooses one, not two candidates to represent them at the August convention. This selection isn't with cauldrons and well wishes, its with delagates won in the presidential primary process. If Ron Paul manages to surpass McCain in delagates, come talk to me about having a differnt Republican choice other than McCain.

Just because another choice exists doesn't mean that individual will win a presidential election. Give Hillary a call. She is more than a good choice, but alas, she isn't going to win. UNIFIED fronts are the only way to the White House. No candidate has done it otherwise.

Posted by: Arbiter | May 13, 2008 1:31 PM | Report abuse

LW:

LOL! And, we call off the election????

Posted by: JakeD | May 13, 2008 1:31 PM | Report abuse

I could live w/ Cheney.

Posted by: LW | May 13, 2008 1:21 PM | Report abuse

crat3 cried:

"Cult leader Obama and his cult superdelegates are now engaged in a desperate end run game to prevent Sen Clinton from winning the presidential nomination at the conclusion of the presidential nomination process in June."
______________

Blah, blah, oink, blah. Typical Hillary fanatic pretending everybody who DARES reject a pathological liar and warmonger as the nominee is in a cult. How'd that work our for her campaign again? Oh yeah. She got spanked by a superior candidate who ran a more positive campaign.

You just keep pretending that twice as many states, hundreds of thousands of voters and scored of super-delegates are the cult as you still pretend you have a chance in hell. Put down the Kool Aid and let's talk about this unfortunate little thing called REALITY.

And keep trying to convince yourself that Hillary can't beat Obama, so she's CLEARLY the right candidate to go against McCain - 'cuz that really makes sense.
You people are hilarious!


Posted by: Shawn | May 13, 2008 1:21 PM | Report abuse

I'm not sure which was worse: her "Insult 50 States" stategy or his "57 State" strategy ; )

Posted by: JakeD | May 13, 2008 1:15 PM | Report abuse

crat3 cried:

"Cult leader Obama and his cult superdelegates have chosen to take the Democratic Party on blah, blah, blah, oink, fart, blah..."
________________

Nice try, Poopsie. The American voters and the Democratic party have chosen Obama as the nominee, and your desperate and delusional insistance on insulting us highlights why Hillary lost. Obama is obviously in a far better position against McCain, as a pathological liar that 60% of Americans hate has no chance in hell. Her "Insult 50 States" stategy failed. But you just keep pretending this isn't over and then ask yourself who the Kool-Aid drinking, brainwashed fanatic really is. Mmmkay? So buh-bye.

Though it's funny to watch Hillary fall further and further behind Obama nationally as she becomes the racist Angel Avenger of White Appalachia.

LOL.

See ya Hill - don't let the door hit your fat ass on the way out.

Posted by: sequoia | May 13, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

sequoia:

It ain't over until the lady in the pantsuit says it is ...

P.S. "Dicy" = "Dick" and "fell" = "feel" (darn spellchecker ; )

Posted by: JakeD | May 13, 2008 1:11 PM | Report abuse

Deeze:

I think us "white" folk fell more politically correct using "African-American" than black that's all. I do understand that the "appearance of impropriety" is gosh-awful when it came to those horrible experiments -- they weren't on the level of Dr. Mengele though -- I am glad to help you understand all of that better though.

Posted by: JakeD | May 13, 2008 1:08 PM | Report abuse


Unfortunately for her, she is sinking further and further behind nationally the more she becomes the White Appalachian Avenger.

*yawn*

It's over Hillary. Please go away.

Thanks in advance.

Posted by: sequoia | May 13, 2008 1:08 PM | Report abuse

LW:

I'm referring to the kind of "Presidential" experience you get when you live and work with the President of the United States. Are you saying that a modern-day White House Chief of Staff has "no experience" in running the Executive branch? Did your wife follow you every day in your job, discussing the intricacies of your job every night, or was she sent aboard Air Force One in your stead? Good point, though, about living VP's who come a whole lot closer to making an experience claim -- except for Gore, who was effectively shut out of the White House. Can we all just agree on Dicy Cheney as the next President of the United States and call off the election?

On your other note, if the Super / "pledged" delegates get over 2,209, then there's little choice for Hillary but to suspend her campaign.

Posted by: JakeD | May 13, 2008 1:04 PM | Report abuse

JakeD - Exactly what kind of "presidential" experience are you referring to? I've been married over 35 years but that doesn't mean my wife is capable of doing my job. It seems to me you are ignoring several living VP's who come a whole lot closer to making an experience claim. On another note, what happens when the "pledged" delegates start switching over to Obama?

Posted by: LW | May 13, 2008 12:55 PM | Report abuse

JakeD,
Read it, thanks for the link and I'll say I was wrong...at the moment lol...I do wanna check more into that though that was an interesting article. however you have to admit (well your grown you don't "have" to do anything lol) that even that level of involvment (or lack thereof) can give rise to the theories surrounding it and the community it affected. I guess my point of my posting was that due to this countries history towards minorities (and African Americans specifically, which by the way I have never been to Africa in my life why am I referred to as African American? I'm from Detroit! so what do you call white Africans who are American?) there is going to be some...uneasiness when blacks are around whites...and vice versa I think...my white friends have said that they sometimes feel uncomftorable when they are the only white person in a crowded room...they've even said to me, wow this is how you must feel...but those are the divisions we need to get over and we can't do that unless we get to know each other and realize that there are bad apples everywhere but that doesn't represent the whole barrel so to speak

Posted by: Deeze | May 13, 2008 12:52 PM | Report abuse

Deeze:

No need to apologize for learning something new.

Posted by: JakeD | May 13, 2008 12:46 PM | Report abuse

To be fair, Hillary DIANE Clinton has a unique Presidential "experience" that none of the other candidates brought to the table. Short of Carter and Bush 41 running again -- or their wives -- there is no one alive with MORE Presidential experience ; )

Posted by: JakeD | May 13, 2008 12:43 PM | Report abuse

Hey JakeD, no I didn't see it that's why I posted it again but thanks for the response! I'll read the article you put up thanks for that but as we all know perception is reality in most cases (sometimes sad but true)and from all accounts and research that I have conducted on that it points to it being true but I WILL read the article you put up and if I am wrong I will come back on here and apologize and admitt I was wrong. One thing you can't deny though is that the CIA has admitted to flooding African American communities with drugs in order to fund some of it's operations. There was a big hearing back in 1996 that John Kerry was involved in when it was admitted by CIA officials

Posted by: Deeze | May 13, 2008 12:40 PM | Report abuse

Besides that, I think the word "experience" is being slung around a little too carelessly... I mean none of them have Presidential experience and all of them are found wanting in some aspect or another (McCain is not experienced on the economy, HRC is not expereinced in foreign policy). I like HRC (although I don't agree with some of her campaign tactics)but I also think that she has based a large portion of her political career based on the name "Clinton" and I almost don't want for Barack to win (I am still undecided but leaning that way) b/c whoever the next President is gonna be is gonna be the scapegoat for not being able to fix this huge mess GW has gotten us into and let's not forget that every new President shouldn't take all the credit or the blame. When Clinton was President he did bennifit from some of the thing Bush Sr. did, he didn't just come in and waive a magic wand and poof everything was all good just like Bush came in and inherited some of the problems that Clinton left for him (although he really took an 8 year nosedive). How many people have graduated from college and worked for a boss who supposedly had "experience" but still didn't know what they were doing or weren't open to the new ideas that you brought on? Experience *can* be a good thing but it *can* also be a bad thing if you are so stubborn and closed off to any ideas other than your own because you feel that someone is too "inexperienced".

Posted by: Deeze | May 13, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse

Deeze:

I read that all the first time you posted. Did you see "The Fact Checker" re: "Some myths are practically impossible to eradicate, particularly when they are repeated by trusted public figures. Long before the Rev. Jeremiah Wright talked about the U.S. government using the AIDS virus as a means of genocide against African-Americans, prominent commentators made equally fallacious assertions about the Tuskegee syphilis study. The list of people claiming that the government deliberately infected African-Americans with syphilis includes Wright, Tom Brokaw, Peter Jennings -- and now Rosie O'Donnell."

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/05/the_tuskegee_experiment_part_i.html

Posted by: JakeD | May 13, 2008 12:31 PM | Report abuse

I gotta make this comment too b/c I've seen this all over about Obama and Michelle being anti-american and unpatriotic...are you serious?!? Now, I'm not for either of these candidates but I am of similar background to Obama (my dad is a black man from Detroit and if you read my earlier post you know he is a Col in the Army and my mom is Indonesian but grew up in Holland). I am dark skinned and have always been treated as the "black kid with 'good' hair" so I've identified more with the African American culture. I understand where Michelle Obama and to some extent Rev. Wright is coming from. Think about the racist history of this country towards all minorities, not just blacks. These people grew up in an era where Jim Crowe reigned supreme, grown men were called "boy" sprayed with water hoses bit by police dogs, unjustly prosecuted, had their churches blown up, police brutality etc. where our leaders and role models are locked up or killed, the Tuskeggee experiments (gov't giving black men syphallus to study the effects w/o there knowledge kind of gives room for people to think that AIDS was made by the gov't when there is a precedence for it don't ya think? , a country where war vets come home to a big fat serving of thanks for nothing (Vietnam for example) so to expect that people don't feel a certain amount of bitterness towards their American experience is, in my mind, ludacris. Have things changed over the years? Yes, and some of those thoughts are a little outdated but let's not all act like the playing field has been leveled...it's 2008 and we're still talking about the firsts: fist black head coach in the NFL to win a SuperBowl (meanwhile Norv Turner just seems to find job after job), first black to own an NBA team (Bob Johnson). AND we have had things in very recent memory ("Jena 6", the 18 year old black H.S. football player sentenced to a mandatory sentence of 10 years for having consentual sex with a 16 year old white classmate and charged with child molestation, less than 10 years ago a black man in Texas was tied to the back of a truck and dragged to death by white men yelling racial slurs the admittance by the CIA that they were pumping drugs into the African American community etc. etc) so yes, there is some bitterness and misunderstanding on all fronts but we still love this country, just maybe not always proud of what this country has done and some of the hypocracy of this country (for so long it was "land of the free...as long as your white and to a large extent a white male). And to suggest that the chickens won't come home to roost is just another way of saying do unto others as you want done to you...now if you look at some of the things America has done to other countries, to assume that there will never be consequences of those actions is a bit of wishful thinking don't you think? What happened on Sept 11th was a tragedy, I was here in DC when it happened but that is nothing compared to what some of these citizens of countries we have "occupied" have had to face and that is just a cold hard fact. So just b/c people aren't proud of all the things America has stood for doesn't mean their not proud to be American and see America for what it could be if we stop all the silliness.

Posted by: Deeze | May 13, 2008 12:27 PM | Report abuse

I think we should do away with the stupid 2 party system...maybe a better way is to do it american idol style and have people call in to vote.
There are a lot of Obama supporters disrespecting Hillary supporters and vice versa and that is NOT what this process is supposed to be about, it's about the issues WAKE UP PEOPLE, THEY PIT US AGAINST EACH OTHER OVER DUMB THINGS LIKE RACE AND FLAG LAPELS AND PREACHERS AND OLD CHILD HOOD FRIENDS SO THAT WE DON'T FOLLOW THE REAL ISSUES!!! America, land of the free? This country spends more money on prisons than on schools, sound likes freedom to me! Every year we find more and more reasons to lock people up for longer sentences to get the free labor of prisoners (slaves) b/c we are so knee deep in debt. Every year the retirement age goes up and up so that we can work longer to pay off the countries debt (more slave labor). Americans take less vacation time than anyone else in the modern world. Health care IS important but I don't want anyone telling me I HAVE to have it if I don't want it...that's not freedom. like car insurance, I pay it every month since age 15 but when I get in an accident at age 25 my rates go up AND I have to pay a deductible?!? what a scam. Anyone with kids knows how expensive child care is, now the average work day ends when, between 4-8 pm while the average school gets out at what 2-3?!? Even getting out that early, it's not even safe for our kids to go to school these days, whether you live in a poor city or the suburbs it doesn't escape you. IF both parents are present they are usually both working to make ends meet. I pay more in gas for a month than my car note?!? But we're worried about flag lapels and pastors and name origins?!? This is the Democracy we push to the world?!? Please wake up and stop attacking each other because in the end, black, white, young, old, "educated" or otherwise (and I put educated in "'s b/c my mom never finished H.S. but she is one of the smartest people I know, speaks 7 languages and has bust her butt to raise a family, my dad is a Col in the Army and went in Enlisted so has served his country proudly for over 30 years) but in the end we all want the same things: a better life for us and our kids. WE might have different ideas on how to get there but we want the same things but we have got to start holding our elected officials accountable, stop letting corporate america run AMERICA, start holding ourselves accountable and stop always pointing the finger when things don't go our way. The government has proven that they don't have our best interest at heart (that's why New Orleans is still in shambles amongst other things), so we have to do it ourselves. But that can't happen if the conversation is "Oh, she needs to drop out of the race because she and her followers are crazy" or "he has a racist pastor (which I don't agree with but that's another post) and doesn't where a flag lapel AND his middle name is Hussein" How about "How are you going to secure our borders, lower crime rates, increase education, stabalize the economy and get us out of debt"???

Posted by: Deeze | May 13, 2008 12:25 PM | Report abuse

Veronica Mangipano:

16.6 million "we the people" voted for her -- the Super Delegates are a small percentage of the total delegates -- how much more "say" do you think there should be?!

Posted by: JakeD | May 13, 2008 12:09 PM | Report abuse

I feel that we the people should have the biggest say in who is going to be our next president. The President is supposed to be for the people, so the people should have the biggest say. Not the politicians. I personally feel that Hilary would make a damn good President. She has the experiance in the White House. I think this country needs some change, and I think that would be one of the best moves we could possibly make.
New Orleans, Louisiana is where I am from. We need to make a differance.

Posted by: Veronica Mangipano | May 13, 2008 12:05 PM | Report abuse

Aelfric:

He only will have the "popular vote" if Florida and Michigan votes are not counted.

IY:

I wasn't aware that asking a simple question to Arbiter was a criteria under the proposed DSM-V. You learn something new every day, I guess.

Posted by: JakeD | May 13, 2008 12:03 PM | Report abuse

Obama will be the Democratic nominee. Unless there's some catastrophic, unforeseeable event (a la Mel Carnahan dieing in a plane crash on the last day), he will be the nominee.

Because the Democratic National Committee and the Superdelegates know: he has the most popular votes, he has the most pledged delegates, he has the most states - and to *not* nominate him would be to tell the primary voters and caucus-goers that they DON'T MATTER. The Democrats go with Obama now, win or lose, because to go against their own voters at this point would be to alienate them from the party for decades.

Obama can (and most probably will) win the White House in November, but to deny him the candidacy is to give up your party base (and pretty much all elections) for a generation. No matter how convincing HRC is in her "I'm the stronger candidate against McCain [W2.0]" plea to the Superdelegates, they won't install her. They have to anticipate the fallout. They have to keep the Party together, and selecting HRC would throw away all the progress they've made.

Once the nominee is declared, HRC and Obama will make nice with each other and work to get all the party voters out in November. And considering their HUGE advantage in new voter registrations, and the popular national anti-W mood, the Democratic nominee will win in a landslide IF they don't flip off their base by defying the election process and installing the candidate who won the second-most votes (that's the Republican way, not the Democratic way).

I genuinely pity McCain. Following any other administration, he'd have a strong chance of winning. He'll get respectable votes, but Obama will take 55%-60%.

Posted by: Aelfric | May 13, 2008 11:57 AM | Report abuse

Who is this JakeD? I have never heard or read such rubbish in my whole life. This person needs to be in a mental hospital. It's so sad to read some of the comments.
Unbelievable that's all I can say.

Posted by: IY | May 13, 2008 11:54 AM | Report abuse

I thought it was too late to re-vote in Florida and Michigan?

P.S. to Arbiter -- I re-read your post just now. You do know that Ron Paul is still "in" the GOP race, right?

Posted by: JakeD | May 13, 2008 11:26 AM | Report abuse

If Hillary wins West Virginia and Kentucky, I strongly suggest that Florida and Michigan should revote before the Democratic convention. Demarcates have to make sure the popular voted candidate get nominated, not let the super delegates to decide who is their nominee. Otherwise, Democrats will be totally in chaos and lose the general election, no matter who is the nominee though Hillary is more likely to win against McCain.

It is not just fair and not democratic that voters in Florida and Michigan are not heard, no matter what happened before the primary and who made the decision to take away the votes from FL and MI.

Let's FL and MI revote, otherwise, let's, the demarcates, not vote at all in general election, or just simply go ahead and vote for McCain.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 13, 2008 11:15 AM | Report abuse

Fred Broos:

Good points, but are you talking about "cement" without any water added?

Posted by: JakeD | May 13, 2008 11:09 AM | Report abuse

Billy C. Turner and jeffp:

Are the 92% of African-Americans voting for Obama also "racists"? How about we tone down the rhetoric on both sides?

Posted by: JakeD | May 13, 2008 11:07 AM | Report abuse

I truly hope Clinton wins extremely huge in West Virginia. I hope she brings this fight to the convention. I hope to God she will prevail and become the nominee for the Democratic Party. Why? number of reasons:
1. Obama is a junior senator, empty slate, nothing to show, no accomplishments.
2. Obama has been treated with kid gloves by most media because God forbid any criticism or serious investigation into his past, less the media that does be labeled "racist"
3. Obama was in Indonesia for some years, ironically during the time that the Indonesian government was engaged in genocide of its own people, killing all christians, now my great uncle lives in a relatively safe, identified, controlled part of Java, where he lives in extreme squaler and hunger even though he has a Doctorate Degree. Nothing is said or reported of and about the muslim activity there.
4. I have studied Obama, watched and listened to him and it gives rise to great concern I have and share with many that all too many voters are infatuated with an "Idea" with the "novelty" of the something new, rather than the person.
5. I have served in the military for most of my life, served four years in Vietnam. I have listened to the sound bites, speeches, of all political candidates, and Obama, like all too many politicians, listen, but do not hear. Say what is needed, but do not feel the outcry of war veterans in dire need of compensable and lost quality of life compensation of Vietnam veterans. Obama, just like the others will give lip service and promote token compensation, but I warn all of our younger wounded for life returning soldiers and veterans, that they will reach a point where they will be wished away, and denied after the dust settles, just like the Vietnam veterans, with the exception that "we" VN Vets truly wish you young vets well and hope and pray you will never suffer the indignity and spite we suffered through back then and still, now. In Clinton, I, as well as all vets I speak with see a "Passion" to right a wrong. I see and believe she truly feels our pain, disgust at the system and the reasons why. If you want the vote from veterans, you can get many through lying, pandering without giving, nodding your head in agreement knowing you will not support any loss of quality of life compensation. I say these things because not many Americans know that most war veterans who can and will never lead a normal life or job, or make use of the degree they've earned because of their experience receive on average 600 dollars a month, and then idiotic studies after studies are done, for the "why" the suicide rate. Not studied or promoted for concern, but in reaction to public. For veterans, you have to have "Heart" to enable the process of understanding their needs, to realize that while a war can be started with a stroke of the pen, that pen seems to run out of ink when the precious prize of the returning soldier comes home, is patted on the back and wished a nice life. Clinton has that heart and that passion.
5. While I am a retired soldier and a man. I have come to believe what my departed mother used to say "Men and women are strong, but when it comes to real strength, men are cement and women are concrete. After time, cement will crumble just as their will and their determination to stay the course in the taking of responsibility for veterans and their RIGHT to a decent monetarily life in return for their sacrafice. Women politicians have the heart and the passion to not only own the problem, address it, but see it through, no matter the cost. After all, they know, above all else, that the cost of sacrafice was never factored in any war. With Clinton, the veterans will win, her determination and the maternal instinct, just like all mothers in the world the veterans will receive their due. Without her, the veteran will fall to the wayside, just like they always have in time.
5. The muslim world will indeed be dancing in the streets in silence so not to be overly noticed if Obama is elected. Why not? Muslims have a strong support for their own.
6. It is in the eyes, look closely enough and you will see. When all bodily movements say this and that to appease you, to move you, to inspire you with seemingly truths, the eyes always speak what the soul cannot hide. The eyes, never lie. Clinton may have many faults, many wrongs, many negatives. But I will encourage all that I can to vote for McCain before I would encourage democrats to stay the party line, for BHO presents a clear and present danger.
Less we be careful and look beyond the "now"

Posted by: Fred Broos | May 13, 2008 11:06 AM | Report abuse

West Virginians will show the world they are church-going, god-fearing racists. Who could ask for anything more!

Posted by: Billy C. Turner | May 13, 2008 11:01 AM | Report abuse

As a minority person, I would never ever never vote for Obama whose supporters play the race card every day at every opportunity. While Obama is a great speech maker, he lacks all experience and will destroy the Democratic Party and lose worse than did McGovern in 1972--whom I worked for. I will do everything in my power to make sure that Obama suffers a worse fate in response to his wife's comment that she was never proud to be an American and Jeremiah Wright's comment that his god damned the US-KKKA for American White People creating AIDS to kill Blacks. What stupidity! Obama is the worse ever to run for president.

Posted by: Dr Arthur Frederick Ide | May 13, 2008 10:54 AM | Report abuse

Hillary may blow out West Virginia. But at this point it doesn't matter, except to indicate how ill-informed and white that state is.

As to blowing anything else, I'll leave that to Mr. Clinton.

SHAME ON YOU CLINTONS. YOUR LEGACY IS NOW ONE SIMPLE PHRASE: CLINTONS; DELUSIONAL, SELFISH, RACISTS

Posted by: jeffp | May 13, 2008 10:51 AM | Report abuse

Whew! Looks like another great day for Hillary DIANE Clinton. Personally, I can't wait for the WaPo registration to come back on-line.

Posted by: JakeD | May 13, 2008 10:21 AM


"Your" 9:53 comment did get a little too close to the bone for comfort, didn't it?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 13, 2008 10:48 AM | Report abuse

azjim:

"Let Hillary have here victory laps among the people of WV and Kentucky, who will surely vote Republican in November."

Did you say the same thing about Obama and all those caucus States which will surely vote Republican in November?

Posted by: JakeD | May 13, 2008 10:36 AM | Report abuse

I hate to quote Cheney, but if Hillary wins big in WV my response will be, "So?" Let Hillary have here victory laps among the people of WV and Kentucky, who will surely vote Republican in November. If she had not gotten Rush's ditto-head crossover voters in Indiana, she would have lost there too.

Posted by: azjim | May 13, 2008 10:30 AM | Report abuse

Whew! Looks like another great day for Hillary DIANE Clinton. Personally, I can't wait for the WaPo registration to come back on-line.

Posted by: JakeD | May 13, 2008 10:21 AM | Report abuse

Iv'e learned these 2 things after reading all the posts WAPO:

1. If you don't vote for Hillary you are a misogynist.

2. If you don't vote for Barack you are a racist.

HOWEVER - "You ain't seen nothin' yet!"

Wait until the voter bloc includes the Republican base. Misogyny and racicm combined will destroy you all if Democrats don't straighten up and get behind ONE Democratic candidate. At this point, Barack has essentially taken the nomination. Settle for him if you have to. The Republicans SETTLED for John McCain - he is NOT a "Republican's Republican" and somehow the party has decided to ALL get behind him because they, unlike you, understand that UNITY CONQUERS ALL.

Stop bickering. You aren't proving your point to anyone. You aren't changing anyone's mind. Be it for Hillary or be it for Barack you are blathering for the sake of blathering and without UNITY the Democratic Party is destined to fall.

I am a disenchanted Republican desperately craving something new. I also understand the poilitcal process and that the most UNIFIED FRONT will prevail. so far that's John McCain. I wan't something different.

Hillary people - everyone is/was calling for your candidate to drop out because MATHEMATICALLY (the only thing that matters) your candidate was out more than a month ago. Hopes and prayers don't win elections. Numbers do. The situation for Hillary was the same as it was over a month ago. Take your loss, get behind the candidate THAT HOLDS ALMOST EXACTLY THE SAME POLITICAL VEIWS AS HILLARY and UNITE for your party.

Take a page from the winning team and UNITE - it's the only path to victory.

Posted by: Arbiter | May 13, 2008 10:17 AM | Report abuse

Why is West Virginia anymore important than any other state? If North Carolina were last would it matter; the order means nothing MRS Clinton has lost.

Posted by: james d granata | May 13, 2008 9:53 AM | Report abuse

Actually, I just don't trust anyone who doesn't look, act, and think like me. I'm smarter than every one of you, and more successful - after all, I can afford to spend daytime hours - and I DO mean "hours" - posting sly, deniably-racist innuendos, and putting down others on this board in ways so intellectually intricate that the poor simpletons are none the wiser.
All hail JakeD, the greatest mind of our times, except for John McCain, who is white and will neither raise my taxes nor challenge the pre-eminence of my gender and ethnicity in society.

Posted by: JakeD | May 13, 2008 9:53 AM | Report abuse

I could be mean and say that WVirginia is a state where crime forensics means nothing because everyone in the state has the same DNA. But the reality of the vote will reflect just how bad the state is really doing, both economically and educationally. The results of this primary could be 90%-10% and it wouldn't surprise me because the level of fear, racism, and lack of education is startling. Hopefully, Obama's policies will even reach WVirginians so that their standard of living truly gets better. But unlike the blowhard Clinton who will feast upon the racism and the lack of education to promote herself in this primary, if she would somehow be President, she wouldn't change a damn thing there. Panderer and racist...what a candidate.

Posted by: Debra | May 13, 2008 9:36 AM | Report abuse

CHARLESTON, W.Va. (AP) - Governor Manchin is taking offense to an upcoming film that uses negative stereotypes of West Virginians.

The horror thriller "Shelter" starring Julianne Moore is recruiting extras with unusual physical features for a scene in a West Virginia "holler." Those scenes are scheduled to be shot starting Sunday.

The casting call says the film is looking for extras who are extraordinarily tall or short, those with unusual body shapes and unusual facial features, and even people with physical abnormalities.

"Why must it be automatically assumed that those who live in the hills and hollows of places like West Virginia are all afflicted with physical and mental abnormalities?" Manchin said.

Posted by: Pete | May 13, 2008 8:31 AM | Report abuse

obama = more affirmativie action, forced busing , reparations, open the prisons, let all the brothers out etc etc
Obama 00never

Posted by: more forced busing | May 13, 2008 7:31 AM | Report abuse

Hillary and Bill are in their zone there in WV and KY, the heart of KKK country. I'm very optimistic for Clinton there. I hope she wins a full 100% of the ballots cast.

The hard-working White American voters, (code word KKK), ought to deliver strong support for one of their own.

Posted by: Reggie Boykins | May 13, 2008 3:09 AM | Report abuse

Hillary and Bill are in their zone there in WV and KY, the heart of KKK country. I'm very optimistic for Clinton there. I hope she wins a full 100% of the ballots cast.

The hard-working White American voters, (code word KKK), ought to deliver strong support for one of their own.

Posted by: Reggie Boykins | May 13, 2008 3:08 AM | Report abuse

Hillary and Bill are in their zone there in WV and KY, the heart of KKK country. I'm very optimistic for Clinton there. I hope she wins a full 100% of the ballots cast.

The hard-working White American voters, (code word KKK), ought to deliver strong support for one of their own.

Posted by: Reggie Boykins | May 13, 2008 3:04 AM | Report abuse

She will win big in WV because the people there know they need to help Hillary win.

They are also concerned about "the empty vessel" Obama winning the nomination.

Very simple.

Posted by: Hillary Simply the BEST | May 13, 2008 2:15 AM | Report abuse

hillary hemroid is becming a pain in the butt!

Posted by: gcubitt | May 13, 2008 2:13 AM | Report abuse

Hillary had a good plan to win the nomination and in fact it would have worked if she were not running against Obama. He had a plan to add voters to the rolls and to go after voters that Hillary did not think would be in the voting population. He had the organization to mobilize that vote and skills to attract the educated voters.

After it became apparent that her plan was not going to work she hoped to convince superdelegates that she had a good plan to win in November. In fact she probably did have a good plan. Her problem was she can only win in a close election in the fall because her negatives are so high. Because of her narcissism and her overconfidence in her own abilities as a politician she has not been able to grasp what Obama was trying to do and she overspent in the Iowa campaign and did not get the financial support she expected out of an Iowa victory.

She won most of the states that she thought she would win, maybe VA and MO were on her win list I don't know. But because Obama brought out voters that she had not counted on voting particularly in caucus states she was caught in a delegate deficit. Obama showed superdelegates that he could bring more voters into the polls which is an inducement to those lower down on the ticket. Obama had a better plan

This same strategy should work in the general election with the added benefit that he has the tailwind of this country is moving in the wrong direction. This should be obvious to superdelegates by now but loyalties to the Clintons need to be overcome. That is what is happening now.

The Republicans think that "the change you deserve" is a good slogan. Seems to me if we deserved it why didn't we get it in 2004 or thereafter. They followed Bush like puppies. They should be thrown out for being such wimps in cowering to Bush.

Posted by: Ron M | May 13, 2008 2:09 AM | Report abuse

what a bunch of pin head racists. There was a time in my life that I thought like that,then one day I woke up and I saw the light. I believe that a lot of you are church going people, and hypocrites. Time to stick a fork in her, cause she is done. You could never vote for anyone that is not like you. A bunch of toothless wonders. loneliness is a dentist in west virginia. You know what the average IQ is in West Virgina? 10. Your state is probably the most insignificant one in the country. what a bunch of cracker headed peckerwoods.
Now that that is out of the way, I don't really think this way. You speak of "Obama" not having experience, just what is Hillaries experienc? How to divide, demean, tear down....etc etc......I surprised she hasn't said she has lived in your fine state as she does of most of the states she campaigns in. you fear Obama and his relation with his pastor, who is Hillaries pastor? I grew up as a southern bapstist, and I sure as hell don't agree on all the stuff my pastor said. You want 4 more years of the same crap that we have just had, you vote for Hillary or McCain. What's McCains experience? Being a POW? He is an angry old man with an ax to grind, and a hair trigger. What is with Joe Lieberman? He is a traitor to his party, and a pet monkey for McCain. If you want change vote obama, and no he is not a Muslim, and shame on you for perpetuating this myth.Probably by Hillary. Why do the Clinstons think they are owed anything? Her husband did more to dishonor the presidency than the current moron, atleast your daughters are safe around him. When this is all over you won't see the Clintons or McCain again... Peace

Posted by: Anonymous | May 13, 2008 12:39 AM | Report abuse

bumbs are still bumbs.

throw the bumbs out.

Vote Obama '08

Posted by: eljefejesus | May 13, 2008 12:31 AM | Report abuse

This whole process can be over tomorrow
if the super delegates want it. I so tried
of hearing "is good for the party". They
have no clue........the party is hurting,
and McCain will win because of our own
lack of judgement.

Posted by: Patsy | May 13, 2008 12:18 AM | Report abuse

hillary will win the nomination.

Posted by: oscama hater | May 13, 2008 12:10 AM | Report abuse

Keep dreaming Hillary!

Posted by: JD | May 13, 2008 12:01 AM | Report abuse

Oh yes, and Clinton backers just remember all the Republicans that voted for your FLAWED candidate will turn on her big time if she was the nominee. It's a damn shame when a Democrat has to kiss Rush Limbaugh's behind, pathetic.

Posted by: skinsfan2 | May 12, 2008 11:47 PM | Report abuse

I laugh at these so called "hard working whites" who think Hillary is their savior. She doesn't care anything about you and never will. She has played you all for fools. It will be hilarious all when you vote for McCain in the general election and he wins. The "Keating 5" criminal will continue the downward spiral of the country. All the baggage the Clintons have is insane compared to Barack. It is true that as a black person in the spotlight he is held to a higher standard. All the scandals that the Clintons have been through is staggering, have fun in the fall.

Posted by: skinsfan2 | May 12, 2008 11:44 PM | Report abuse

hey clinton and obama supporters,
complaining about how the other side is so wrong on this or that, etc. just keeps the vicious cycle going. let's all cool it please.

Posted by: ,xxd | May 12, 2008 11:39 PM | Report abuse

It is amazing how arrogant and ridiculous the statemnents are from the Obamopaths.
The assumption that they know what is best for everyone and that everyone else is wrong is so unbelievably offensive. Anyone who says anything about their candidate such as "um...he has raised half his money from bundling- including from Bank execs, oil execs and lobbyists" is said to be practicing the politics of personal distruction, even as Barak and his advocates attack HRC on all sorts of personal levels- look on this board- how many posts about her income (from speeches/books as is his), how many posts about her "narcissism" (clearly it's not narcissistic to state, after 2 years in the Senate, you are the only person who can make changes in DC); how many references to 90s disproven scandals; how many times is she called emotional or whiney?

The Obamites have felt so entitled that calls for her withdrawl started in mid February. Meanwhile, he will likely win with 50.5% of the popular vote to 49.5 for her. If caucuses, which inherently favor students and professionals over every day folk were not counted in this she would unquestionably be leading- he does not have a mandate from the party- he is going to just squeak by.

What I'm saying is: Try to play nice. It is hard enough for most of us to turn around and help him out and vote for him after he has run a brilliant campaign, but one that was largely based on further demonizing her and playing on the myogyny that exists in the country while claiming to be above the fray and accusing anyone who was not on board with the snake oil salesman of being ignorant or otherwise unenlightened.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 12, 2008 11:39 PM | Report abuse

Obama Supporters:
It's extremely offensive that some of you continue to stereotype West Virginians. Similarlly, your argument that it's the poor and undereducated who support Sen. Clinton is offensive--as is the argument that those of us who fail to support Sen Obama are racists.

These different arguments that you make are divisive and will drag the Democratic Party to a resounding defeat in November.

Posted by: Wilson | May 12, 2008 11:21 PM | Report abuse

WV no matter, Obama will be the president for all Americans including the most regressed. Eventually, even the regressed will elevate themselves and reconcile with the new generation of Americans.

Posted by: Jake | May 12, 2008 11:17 PM | Report abuse

It is absolutely amazing how Obama people think they are above Clinton Supporter. This is from bunch of people who believe one black guy is going to change Washington. May I remind you that he is playing the same old politics as he is taking oil money far beyond anyone else. Why do you think he is adamantly against anything that relates to oil company. He also plays this game of "lets don't play dirty politics unless it is me who is doing it". What a hypocrite.

Posted by: Jim Richmond | May 12, 2008 11:04 PM | Report abuse

If Obama wins the nomination, I plan on voting for Senator McCain because I believe experience and good judgment are far more important than being a good orator speaking of "change." I cannot in good conscience vote for someone who has so little experience for the job. More importantly, I cannot in good conscience vote for someone who had such poor judgment to continue attending a militant, African-centrist, racist, and divisive church for the past 20 years while subjecting his wife and children to the same environment.

My only consolation is that it is my belief the Democrats will get win their filibuster-proof majority in Congress. As a result, a McCain presidency will be far mild compared to what we've had to put up with from Bush.

Posted by: InSearchOfTruth | May 12, 2008 10:57 PM | Report abuse

So much for Obama getting the majority of Hillary supporters to unite behind him. Guess he should not have been so cocky to say such a thing earlier on, eh?

Posted by: InSearchOfTruth | May 12, 2008 10:56 PM | Report abuse

It's so amazing to read so many pro-Hillary and pro-McCain supporters on here practicing the politics of personal destruction and distraction.

Obama in 08!

Posted by: AJ | May 12, 2008 10:42 PM | Report abuse

Race riots? Now that is absolutely ridiculous! I refuse to be threathened with a race riot if Obama loses. If race riots are being held over our heads, then that's all the more reason why America is not ready for Barack Obama. If we all want to judge him on who he is as a person, as a Presidential candidate - fine. But let's not threathen race riots if he doesn't get elected. That's immaturity at its best!

Posted by: Christina | May 12, 2008 10:40 PM | Report abuse

Okay, as an Obama supporter. I give Hillary the blowout win in West Virginia. Having lived and worked in West Virginia for about 4 years of my life as a transplant, the state is one of the lowest in terms of education and highest in terms of poverty. The average life-style of the people statewide is like 10 to 40 years behind the national average No JOKE!

Posted by: AJ | May 12, 2008 10:40 PM | Report abuse

If Obama wins the nomination, I plan on voting for Senator McCain because I believe experience and good judgment are far more important than being a good orator speaking of "change." I cannot in good conscience vote for someone who has so little experience for the job. More importantly, I cannot in good conscience vote for someone who had such poor judgment to continue attending a militant, African-centrist, racist, and divisive church while subjecting his wife and children to the same environment.

My only consolation is that it is my belief the Democrats will get win their filibuster-proof majority in Congress. As a result, a McCain presidency will be far mild compared to what we've had to put up with from Bush.

Posted by: InSearchOfTruth | May 12, 2008 10:32 PM | Report abuse

IT'S ABOUT ELECTABILITY !!!

MY FELLOW "BITTER", STUPID, WORKING CLASS PEOPLE :-)

If you think like Barack Obama, that WORKING CLASS PEOPLE are just a bunch of "BITTER"!, STUPID, PEASANTS, Cash COWS!, and CANNON FODDER. :-(

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think Barack Obama with little or no experience would be better than Hillary Clinton with 35 years experience.

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think that Obama with no experience can fix an economy on the verge of collapse better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) led the greatest economic expansion, and prosperity in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think that Obama with no experience fighting for universal health care can get it for you better than Hillary Clinton. Who anticipated this current health care crisis back in 1993, and fought a pitched battle against overwhelming odds to get universal health care for all the American people.

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think that Obama with no experience can manage, and get us out of two wars better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) went to war only when he was convinced that he absolutely had to. Then completed the mission in record time against a nuclear power. AND DID NOT LOSE THE LIFE OF A SINGLE AMERICAN SOLDIER. NOT ONE!

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think that Obama with no experience saving the environment is better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) left office with the greatest amount of environmental cleanup, and protections in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think that Obama with little or no education experience is better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) made higher education affordable for every American. And created higher job demand and starting salary's than they had ever been before or since.

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think that Obama with no experience will be better than Hillary Clinton who spent 8 years at the right hand of President Bill Clinton. Who is already on record as one of the greatest Presidents in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think that you can change the way Washington works with pretty speeches from Obama, rather than with the experience, and political expertise of two master politicians ON YOUR SIDE like Hillary and Bill Clinton..

You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you think all those Republicans voting for Obama in the Democratic primaries, and caucuses are doing so because they think he is a stronger Democratic candidate than Hillary Clinton. :-)

Best regards

jacksmith... Working Class :-)

p.s. You Might Be An Idiot! :-)

If you don't know that the huge amounts of money funding the Obama campaign to try and defeat Hillary Clinton is coming in from the insurance, and medical industry, that has been ripping you off, and killing you and your children. And denying you, and your loved ones the life saving medical care you needed. All just so they can make more huge immoral profits for them-selves off of your suffering...

You see, back in 1993 Hillary Clinton had the audacity, and nerve to try and get quality, affordable universal health care for everyone to prevent the suffering and needless deaths of hundreds of thousands of you each year. :-)

Approx. 100,000 of you die each year from medical accidents from a rush to profit by the insurance, and medical industry. Another 120,000 of you die each year from treatable illness that people in other developed countries don't die from. And I could go on, and on...

OBAMA AIDE: "WORKING-CLASS VOTERS NOT KEY FOR DEMOCRATS" :o

p.s. I have been under heavy attacks for some time now. But it wont stop me. :-)

Posted by: jacksmith | May 12, 2008 10:30 PM | Report abuse

I like the black guy.

Posted by: hammerdown | May 12, 2008 9:41 PM | Report abuse

Actually, JakeD, I'm an Obama Supporter, and I am pro Life.
I don't take the typical stances, though. I do not agree that the government should ban Abortion, not until it is no longer necessary. A poor teen who finds herself pregnant, in our society, is a virtual dead woman walking and her baby is bound for prison.

There are exceptions, of course, but many "Pro Lifers" do not value that baby beyond the birth. Suddenly, it's no longer an Innocent Baby, but a Black youth, a gang banger, a criminal. Well, that baby became those things because Society makes it abundantly clear that he is not important. He better be out for himself, because no one will care if he crawls under a bridge to freeze to death. Poverty aint fun. I think our problem, regarding Abortion in the US, is that we ultimately do not value Life.

This goes hand in hand with our knee jerk reaction to BOMB anyone who doesn't do what we said. We call foreigners who will kill "Collateral Damage." We call those who attack us "Terrorists." We call our "martyrs" "heroes." It's all semantics. What it comes down to is "Kill or Be Killed." Babies are no exception.

WE are Good. THEY are Bad. Why? Because WE are WE, that's why.

I think the way we toss everyone in prison who can't afford decent representation is a travesty of unspeakable proportions. I think the fact that a bank can throw a family out of a home in the dead of winter, that you can pay somebody $7 an hour while the owner makes a million a year is disgusting, immoral, and unethical.

I wish abortion were not a better choice than trying to navigate our indifferent society. We don't CARE about eachother, JakeD.

We sure don't ACT like we do.

Posted by: LeftWithNoChoice | May 12, 2008 9:28 PM | Report abuse

As, we learn more about Obama it is evident that he is not ready to be President. He may have a Harvard degree but he is not as smart as a fifth grader. During a speech in Oregon, he stated that he had visited 57 states and there were 2 he would not visit.

It was reported today that one of Obama's staffers met with Hamas.

I believe, Obama has promised Hillary something if she stayed in the race until West Virginia and Kentucky. Think about it, if Hillary had dropped out after Indiana, how would it look to the Superdelegates if Obama lost Kentucky and West Virginia and the only competition was against himself.

Posted by: tdl62 | May 12, 2008 9:17 PM | Report abuse

I find it very confusing that so many of the supporters of Clinton claim that if she were to suspend/stop her campaign voter's won't be heard.

I was a Edwards supporter, I live in CA by the time Feb 5 rolled around he had withdrawn. I voted for my second choice. Such is life. I don't consider my voice unheard, my vote wasted etc.

As primaries go on, the field gets winnowed and many of us realize a vote for our first choice, sometimes second and third choice is no longer viable so we move on.

I didn't leave the Democratic party, I didn't whine about the press doing him in, I didn't complain the other candidates supporters were cultists, ___bots or whatever. I just voted and I worked the polls to ensure that at least one precinct would be run well, fairly and by the rules.

I didn't vote for Bush, I didn't want Bush, but he is still my president. I didn't leave the country I didn't stop paying taxes, I didn't stop working for things I cared about. I accepted that this is how elections work. Sometimes your choice is the winner, sometimes they are not.

For all of you out there whining about MI and FL and the popular vote, think about working to change the Electoral College so that maybe someday in this country we can actually have "one person-one vote" in this country. Because currently we don't. A vote in Wyoming counts more than a vote in CA and where the vote is cast counts more than how the vote is cast. (If those 534 Bush votes for FL in 2000 were cast in any other state he would have lost.)

It's nice to have your candidate win, but by definition all candidates can't, there is only one winner and for every primary, every election a large percentage of people see their candidate (who they obviously believe is the superior choice) lose.

Welcome to democracy.

Posted by: k2k | May 12, 2008 8:37 PM | Report abuse

Bravo Hillary Clinton and BOO! HISS! Down
With Loser Cocaine Addict,Empty Suit,Liar
Phony Barack Hussein Obama And Down With
Do Nothing Madame Speaker Nancy Pelosi,and
Howard Dean and Harmless Harry Reid and
the Worthless Lying Do Nothing Democratic
Controlled Congress!

Posted by: Claudine | May 12, 2008 8:31 PM | Report abuse

Also, are your "White Mom and Gramda Ma" STRONGLY pro-life?

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 7:53 PM | Report abuse

P.S. to General Election Math:

Use 58% for Dem turnout and 99% for GOP turnout ; )

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 7:38 PM | Report abuse

(We'll see if the Bradley effect is lower)

The term "Bradley effect" or "Wilder effect" refers to an explanation advanced as the possible cause of a phenomenon which has led to inaccurate voter opinion polls in some American political campaigns between a white candidate and a non-white candidate. Specifically, there have been instances in which such elections have seen the non-white candidate significantly underperform with respect to the results predicted by pre-election polls. Researchers who have studied the issue theorize that some white voters gave inaccurate polling responses because of a fear that by stating their true preference, they might appear to others to be racially prejudiced.

The theory suggests that statistically significant numbers of white voters tell pollsters in advance of an election that they are either undecided, or likely to vote for the non-white candidate, but that those voters exhibit a different behavior when actually casting their ballots. White voters who said that they were undecided break in statistically large numbers toward the white candidate, and many of the white voters who said that they were likely to vote for the non-white candidate ultimately cast their ballot for the white candidate. This reluctance to give accurate polling answers has sometimes extended to post-election exit polls as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_effect

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 7:37 PM | Report abuse

W Virginia is great! Go Hillary! The ONLY qualified candidate and a champion for ALL of the American people! But I still think he is confused. He is quoting the projected vote for McCain 80 v Obama 20, respectively, if Obama is the nominee.
And MSNBC was just up to their usual Obama bias! The "professional political minds" that ALL have said NUMEROUS times that "Obama cannot carry the white vote" and "has a problem with the white vote," called Hillary Clinton a racist for saying that she carries the blue collar white voters! The "analyst" also added THEIR words to her comments resulting in them saying a black man cannot be elected! SHE never said this as pointed out by ONE of their 5 political minds! They said it! And the fact is, Obama cannot carry middle class or blue collar white voters! And that is a fact. And Hillary has nothing to do with it. Obama brought this down on himself. And he is doing all the hypocritical things he can do and say to try and change this. But he cannot! A black man would be great! But NOT this black man. He has already said enough racist comments that he should be DISOWNED by the Democrat Party. And enough following for 20 years, and WRITING of his own of Anti-American rhetoric to be disowned by Americans that expect, and rightfully so, an experienced and Patriotic American to run America. Someone you KNOW you can trust. Being PROUD to be an American, ALWAYS, is important. And wearing a flag pen NOW will not do it! No Obama come November. The Democrats have done it again! Even in the worst economy and the Iraq War, the Dems find a way to lose! And you bet West Virginia matters. It proves that if Obama is the nominee, he LOSES in November. Yes, 80/20.

Posted by: Core Democrat | May 12, 2008 7:36 PM | Report abuse

In late February 2008, Limbaugh announced [phase two of] "Operation CHAOS", a political call to action with the initial plan to have voters of the Republican Party temporarily cross over to vote in the Democratic primary and vote for Hillary Clinton, who at the time was in the midst of losing 11 straight primary contests to Barack Obama. The previous month, Markos Moulitsas of Daily Kos suggested a similar idea to have Democrats cross over to vote for Mitt Romney in Michigan in order to lengthen the Republican primary, in which Mike Huckabee and eventual presumptive nominee John McCain were seen by Moulitsas as being in the lead.

Limbaugh has also cited the open primary process in the early primary states of New Hampshire and South Carolina, which allowed independent voters to cross over into the Republican primaries to choose John McCain over more conservative candidates (such as Fred Thompson), as an inspiration.

At the point in which Limbaugh announced his gambit, Obama had seemed on the verge of clinching the Democratic nomination. However, Clinton subsequently won the Ohio primary and the Texas primary (while losing the Texas caucus and the overall delegate split) with large pluralities from rural counties; thus reemerging as a competitive opponent in the race. Statistics released by the state of Texas show Hillary Clinton won the primary due to a large number of Republicans crossing over to vote for her.

Whether those voters were Operation CHAOS Operatives or simply Republicans who like Hillary is impossible to tell at this point in time.

On March 27, 2008, Limbaugh said "The dream end of this [of Operation CHAOS] is that this keeps up to the convention, and that we have a recreation of Chicago 1968 with burning cars, protests, fire, and literal riots and all of that, that is the objective here [of Operation CHAOS]."

On April 29, 2008 Limbaugh declared an "operational pause" in Operation CHAOS, saying that Obama's defeat in the 2008 Pennsylvania primary and fallout from statements from Obama ally Reverend Jeremiah Wright could have damaged his campaign to the extent superdelegates would shift to Clinton's side. Determining Obama had weathered that storm, Limbaugh lifted the pause the next day and renewed his call for his listeners to vote for Clinton in the upcoming Indiana and North Carolina primaries. Obama won the North Carolina primary but was narrowly defeated in Indiana, where Clinton won decisively in rural counties that normally vote Republican in presidential elections. According to CNN exit polls in Indiana, 13.4% of Clinton primary voters would vote against Clinton and for McCain in the General Election, if Clinton is the nominee (compared to 4.5% of Obama voters who would vote for McCain in a hypothetical matchup between McCain and Obama).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rush_Limbaugh_Show#Operation_Chaos

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 7:35 PM | Report abuse

I can use any turn our and the percent is the same.

Since Obama is only half black the Bradley effect will be lower.

Posted by: General Election Math | May 12, 2008 7:30 PM | Report abuse

CLINTON OBAMA
WOMENS RIGHTS WORKERS RIGHTS

Posted by: Anonymous | May 12, 2008 7:26 PM | Report abuse

General Election Math:

You are assuming 100% of registered voters turnout in November AND are completely ignoring the Bradley effect ("racists" who are lying to pollsters) -- what about the "nefarious" Operation CHAOS influence -- you think those voters are going to vote for Obama?!

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 7:25 PM | Report abuse

ANY STRON PRO LIFE FOR HILLARY?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 12, 2008 7:23 PM | Report abuse

Any other STRONG pro-lifers who intend to vote for Obama?

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 7:20 PM | Report abuse

General Election Math

51% lean Dem -14% McCain
33% Lean GOP -8% Obama

Using 150,000,000 as base

Obama 51% 76,500,000 +8% gop + 3,960,00 -15%McCain 10,710,000 = 69,750,000 OBAMA

McCain 33% 49,500,000 +15% 10,700,000 - Obama - 3,960,00 = 56,250,000 McCain


Dems Base to big to worry about 15%

GO OBAMA

but interesting experiment thanks

Posted by: General Election Math | May 12, 2008 7:20 PM | Report abuse

Have a good day, Billw : )

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 7:19 PM | Report abuse

The newest Washington Post / ABC news poll shows who is presently more electable... and it is not a the ever deeper-in-denial Clinton clan.

Hillary learned well from Ladies Man Bill that the worse things look the harder you deny. At least until you can't anymore.

Posted by: DonJulio | May 12, 2008 7:18 PM | Report abuse

JakeD said:

"Recall that YOU started this, Billw, with your 5:22 PM post to this thread:

"OBAMA''S STATUS

Obama is where he is due to racism (polls show 92% of blacks for Obama), and media bias where the networks don't want to risk the race card accusation. In other words racism has been highly in Clinton''s disfavor. Otherwise Obama would be history. Not something he or America should be proud of."

P.S. I "changed" it to see if that would help you understand and answer the question, but I didn't "retract" anything -- nationally, in 1996, Bill Clinton received 84 percent of the African-American vote but 92% of the African-American vote in the District of Columbia. Both sets of questions are valid. "

You have now gone full-circle, changing your original question, what it pertained to, and now reposting my original statement, saying I started it. YOU started your erratic, if not devious efforts at discussion of the issue. Have a good day.

Posted by: Billw | May 12, 2008 7:16 PM | Report abuse

I'll take that as "no" : )

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 7:09 PM | Report abuse

Strong Womens Rights - Workers Rights

Nursing and Union Family

Posted by: OBAMA family | May 12, 2008 7:06 PM | Report abuse

To Jake:
They where German balanced budget GOPs

very disappointed with Bush

Posted by: delegate math | May 12, 2008 7:04 PM | Report abuse

OBAMA family:

Are you strongly pro-life?

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 7:03 PM | Report abuse

delgate math:

That was addressed in the TIME magazine link (below) re: one Pew poll where as many as 14 percent of Democrats say they will vote for McCain, compared to eight percent of Republicans who say they will vote for Obama.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1739251-2,00.html

Your relatives must not be strongly pro-life.

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 7:02 PM | Report abuse

Have a great day Jake

White 50 and ready for OBAMA + extended fam of 20

Posted by: OBAMA family | May 12, 2008 7:00 PM | Report abuse

My White Mom and Gramda Ma left the GOP for OBAMA

finally after years of not listening to me they love OBAMA

Posted by: delgate math | May 12, 2008 6:58 PM | Report abuse

Recall that YOU started this, Billw, with your 5:22 PM post to this thread:

"OBAMA''S STATUS

Obama is where he is due to racism (polls show 92% of blacks for Obama), and media bias where the networks don't want to risk the race card accusation. In other words racism has been highly in Clinton''s disfavor. Otherwise Obama would be history. Not something he or America should be proud of."

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 6:55 PM | Report abuse

P.S. to Billw -- I "changed" it to see if that would help you understand and answer the question, but I didn't "retract" anything -- nationally, in 1996, Bill Clinton received 84 percent of the African-American vote but 92% of the African-American vote in the District of Columbia. Both sets of questions are valid.

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 6:50 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 6:47 PM | Report abuse

To JakeD:

You changed your question and also assigned it to pertain to the DC area, but don't address this when brought to your attention. Then you say:

" "Feel free to answer either, or neither, set of questions ... "

How generous of you. You lose credibility on everything you post with this type of behavior.

Posted by: Billw | May 12, 2008 6:47 PM | Report abuse

Billw:

Feel free to answer either, or neither, set of questions ...

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

Not at all (and you still haven't told us your name). I never said that five people, alone, will bring about defeat for a Clinton candidacy in November. It will be much bigger than that. I was asked "Who is it you expect to "race riot'?" and I simply gave just a few examples that I can recall. Would-be rioters rarely post their real name (coicidence) and home address.

Nonetheless, if you fail to accurately read the under-current on line from many already-angry Obama supporters, you are in for the shock of your lifetime if she manages to steal the nomination. Chicago 1968 will look like an afternoon tea party.

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 6:36 PM | Report abuse

The Hillary camp is going overboard with this politcal tactics. They are really using everything in the game book. There is no doubt that she is going to win W. Virginia, but to make people think that the margin is 90-10 is absolutely ridiculous. First of all, there are more than 10% of black people that live in W. Virginia, and you know if he can get any vote its the black vote. So, this non-sense from the Hillary camp needs to stop. She is not going to win the nomination. She is just trying to bring down the entire party with her. And this type behavior is appauling. I am going to say it, but if for some reason, when hell freezes over, and she were to win the election, I assure you I will not be voting.

Posted by: Jasmine Velazquez | May 12, 2008 6:35 PM | Report abuse

JakeD asked:

"I did ask first: "Was it 'racism' when exit polls showed 92% (90%) of African-Americans voted for William JEFFERSON Clinton (Gore)? That was not in his 'disfavor' was it?"

You CHANGED your question. Our disagreement was based on your first version. Much like Obama's addressing the Wright issue (change as needed to "look good). I think you should stop pushing for an answer.

Also you retracted to:
"I was actually thinking of just the D.C. vote, in particular, when I asked those specific questions."

Again you change. Now where have I seen that word CHANGE before here lately.....

Posted by: Billw | May 12, 2008 6:34 PM | Report abuse

Anonymous at 6:18 PM:

Keep reading -- I posted a few links to 1/2 dozen -- let me know if you have any other questions. And, your name ; )

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 6:22 PM


5 people, 4 of unknown race, "race rioting" in the streets will bring about defeat for a Clinton candidacy in November? That's a fairly weak argument you make there. One might think you're trying to slip out of a heavy handed and rather racist insinuation of inferior civility among Sen Obama's African American supporters. Getting a little too cute for your own good there, JakeD?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 12, 2008 6:30 PM | Report abuse

Anonymous at 6:18 PM:

Keep reading -- I posted a few links to 1/2 dozen -- let me know if you have any other questions. And, your name ; )

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 6:22 PM | Report abuse

I've been voting for 40 years and only voted for one Republican Presidential nominee, Ronald Reagan. I'm about to vote for my second. It's disgusting the way Hillary Clinton has been treated by liberals and the MSM. The last straw was the failure of the DNC to correct their foul up on the Michigan and Florida primaries by not insisting on a revote. After years of donations and campaign volunteering, I'm out. The Democrats deserve what they're about to get.

Posted by: Michigan Man | May 12, 2008 6:21 PM | Report abuse

...you know, the ones with the regard.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 12, 2008 6:20 PM | Report abuse

Amerika dont want Nigrazz fir prezidint. Amerikins want reel peepil like Hilirree. She nose that intilekshoeills ar jist stoopid an they hayt Jeeziss and the flag.

I em prowd to be in Hilirreez coalishun of deesint peepil who will keep the Nigraz frum steelin the WHITE haus.

Posted by: West Virjineea Votir | May 12, 2008 6:19 PM | Report abuse

In other news:

McCain's 7 Steps to Beating Obama

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1739251,00.html

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 6:19 PM | Report abuse

"I don't think it's undue speculation that the lowest of the low (regardless of race) would riot given the slightest excuse
Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 5:29 PM "


...race riots.

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 4:25 PM


That may be true, but I'm interested in who your "lowest of the low" "race rioters" are. Enlighten us.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 12, 2008 6:18 PM | Report abuse

Billw:

I did ask first: "Was it 'racism' when exit polls showed 92% (90%) of African-Americans voted for William JEFFERSON Clinton (Gore)? That was not in his 'disfavor' was it?"

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 6:17 PM | Report abuse


JakeD said:

"Keep in mind that you are, in no way, obligated to answer my questions. Don't expect me to answer your questions, though, either."

Well, you ask first...

Posted by: Billw | May 12, 2008 6:16 PM | Report abuse

Wait till the day after the election when people begin to reach under their seats for the promised "Goody Bag" and all they get is the "OprBama Gift Tax". Won't that be a kick in the fanny.

Posted by: sam51 | May 12, 2008 6:13 PM | Report abuse

Billw:

As a control sample, in 2004, John Kerry received an estimated 88% of the African-American vote, according to exit polls. Keep in mind that you are, in no way, obligated to answer my questions. Don't expect me to answer your questions, though, either.

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 6:06 PM | Report abuse

Just read the part 1 of Evelyn Pringle "Bombshell". aka "lady finger explosion". It is a great review of corruption in our government connecting to the mess in Iraq. and then she begains a long chain trying to connect Obama.

I believe Kevin Bacon's name came up sixth as usual and Obama's came in around 15th due to someone's contribution to his campaign.
Don't you know you have to be responsible for every word that someone else says that you know and you have to investigate every contributor to your campaign. If you don't, you will have some wana-be-journalist trying to make a name by slinging mud.......

Posted by: Dave Purkerson | May 12, 2008 6:00 PM | Report abuse

Billw:

I would lend you my copy of the book, if you don't want to buy it ...

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 5:57 PM | Report abuse

I was actually thinking of just the D.C. vote, in particular, when I asked those specific questions. Nationally, in 1996, Bill Clinton trailed Bob Dole among whites 46 to 43 percent, but got 84 percent of the African-American vote and won the election handily. In 2000, Al Gore won an historic 90 percent of the African-American vote, which was critical to his success in the popular vote.

http://www.blackcommentator.com/75/75_guest_brazile.html

So, if it helps you to answer my questions, substitute "Gore" for "Clinton" and "90%" for "92%".

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 5:56 PM | Report abuse

To JakeD:

Nowhere in your reference do these searchwords come up:

92%
Blacks
African
African-americans
polls
"voted for"

What are you here for, to troll?
Anyone else care tell me what JakeD is here for?

Posted by: Billw | May 12, 2008 5:54 PM | Report abuse

Obama won't win the presidency against McCain either. Check the polls:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statewide_opinion_polling_for_the_United_States_presidential_election%2C_2008#Predicted_results_.28using_latest_polling_when_available.29
There you can see Clinton vs. McCain, Clinton wins by quite a few electoral votes, while if you scroll down you see Obama vs. McCain, and who wins is McCain by quite a few electoral votes.

Posted by: Someone again | May 12, 2008 5:52 PM | Report abuse

Anyone want to make any guesses why Clinton is still running?

I say it's either to save face, given her claims that she's "in it til there's a nominee" or...

Clinton Deadline Looms for Recouping $11 Million Personal Loan
http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20080512/pl_bloomberg/as5a58ks7ky8

Posted by: jencm | May 12, 2008 5:51 PM | Report abuse

Obama has the stupidest, lowest IQ supporters; yes those that are crying because Clinton hasn't quit yet. And I agree with some; just because he is winning doesn't means other states don't have the right to give their opinions. Oh and, the math will go for Clinton in the popular vote by June 3rd even without MI and FL. Just you wait.

Although, I don't vote, I don't live in the US mainland, and I hardly knew the candidates before these primaries; I always knew Hillary Rodham Clinton was the best possible candidate.

Posted by: Someone | May 12, 2008 5:49 PM | Report abuse

Lynn said:

"Hillary Democrats will now go for McCain!!!!!"

Agreed. The Democrats will lose the Presidency with Obama. In this case the democrats will not get what they deserve.

Posted by: Billw | May 12, 2008 5:48 PM | Report abuse

Billw:

For a comprehensive review of African-American exit poll data, try here:

http://www.amazon.com/1996-Presidential-Election-South-Southern/dp/0275959511

Now, can you answer my questions?

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 5:44 PM | Report abuse

Anonymous at 5:20 PM:

Here's another one:

"JakeD...

Yes! this 46 year old white male will RIOT IN THE STREETS if superdelagates steal the election from Obama, and FLOUT the will of the electorate.

Then I will go out and vote AGAINST the opaque, lobbiest-owned lawyer named hillary!

Note that she is running a dishonest campaign? Feeding McCain attack lines to use? Refusing to remove her name from the ballot when all the other dem candidates did as they were asked by the party? Trying to shove "her turn" down our throats? Misrepresenting his policies and record? Taking every dime offered by any lobbiest?

That's what would-be crooked politicians do in an election.

VOTE FOR PRESIDENT OBAMA!"

Posted by: onestring | February 14, 2008 04:47 PM

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/02/14/clintons_primary_gift_1.html

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 5:39 PM | Report abuse

Here's my proof (CNN News) that 92% of blacks voted for Obama. Show me yours, otherwise you are busted.

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/04/92-of-african-americans-for-ob.php

Posted by: Billw | May 12, 2008 5:38 PM | Report abuse

Billw:

Was it "racism" when exit polls showed 92% of African-Americans voted for William JEFFERSON Clinton? That was not in his "disfavor" was it?

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 5:32 PM | Report abuse

Anonymous at 5:20 PM:

I don't think it's undue speculation that the lowest of the low (regardless of race) would riot given the slightest excuse. There were at least FIVE votes for rioting over on this thread: http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/02/14/former_ri_sen_chafee_endorses_1.html

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 5:29 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Democrats will now go for McCain!!!!! You watch it!!!

Posted by: Lynn | May 12, 2008 5:27 PM | Report abuse


OBAMA''S STATUS

Obama is where he is due to racism (polls show 92% of blacks for Obama), and media bias where the networks don''t want to risk the race card accusation. In other words racism has been highly in Clinton''s disfavor. Otherwise Obama would be history. Not something he or America should be proud of.

Posted by: Billw | May 12, 2008 5:25 PM | Report abuse

"seemingly oblivious to the conventional wisdom that she is about to lose the Democratic nomination"

Holy mackerel, I do believe Anne Kornblut is a writing idiot savant because that may be the stupidest thing I've ever read, and considering the quality of thought one generally finds on this blog, that's saying something.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 12, 2008 5:24 PM | Report abuse

~

I am already so sick of this guy Obama.

I wish that he had never come along.

I'd certainly rather than McCain than Obama.

~

Posted by: DickeyFuller | May 12, 2008 5:22 PM | Report abuse

"crat3:

It seems more likely that SHE would lose in November if she steals the nomination and there are race riots.

Posted by: JakeD "

It seems you have an unfairly low opinion of the maturity and self restraint of some group of people. Who is it you expect to "race riot"?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 12, 2008 5:20 PM | Report abuse

Do John McCain or conservative republicans respect the moral foundation of this country? The U.S. Constitution was actually designed, among other things, to protect the people of America from misguided government.

U.S. Constitution: Amendment I - Freedom of Religion
Right now, for the first time ever, your tax dollars are funding religious groups you may not agree with. To add insult to injury, conservative judges have ruled that taxpayers do not have a right to challenge this expenditure.

Amendment IV - Search and seizure
Under the guise of court action against abortion, Conservative republicans had John Ashcroft subpoena all the medical records of literally thousands of women just like you and members of your family. Conservative republicans are invading your privacy every day. Unfortunately for all of us, they don't appear to care about our U.S. constitution, or by extension, the people of our great country.

Amendment X - Powers of the States and People
John McCain and conservative republicans have tried consistently to overturn States Laws. They used your tax dollars to destroy the will of the people of Oregon, and the famous "Death with Dignity" law; they lost, but undoubtedly will try again. Conservative republicans and John McCain do not respect States Rights.

Amendment VIII - Cruel and Unusual punishment
Would you rather die, or support a government which supported and sanctioned torture? The founding fathers would rather have died, and in fact they were proud to fight and die for our government: A government which specifically outlaws cruel and unusual punishment for very important reasons.

John McCain and the conservative republicans are destroying the moral foundations of our country. I urge you to keep this in mind in the coming election as we rebuild our nation together by voting Democrat.

Posted by: Frank US | May 12, 2008 5:19 PM | Report abuse

West Virginia deserves to be heard as does the other states. Regardless if Obama gets the nomination these states deserve the right to vote and be considered. Everyone needs to be patient and allow the process to continue. Blasting Hillary for staying in this does NO ONE any good. I am glad she is still in it as I voted for her in FL (of which my vote currently DOES NOT COUNT) I didnt make the rules the politicians did - my vote should count - period. Whether you are for Obama or Clinton or McCain have the decency to allow everyone's voice to be heard including states that have yet to vote.

Most of the people pushing for Obama have been rabid foaming at the mouth because Hillary hasnt dropped out yet. She has that right - to stick with it until the nomination is official. Respect her as you would respect anyone else. I respect Obama and have contributed to his campaign. I will warn you all that if the Anti-Hillary Sentiment does not stop... I will vote for McCain since his supporters appear to have their wits about them.

Posted by: Scott in Tampa | May 12, 2008 5:18 PM | Report abuse

I forgot the "Bee-yotch!!"

Posted by: Anonymous | May 12, 2008 5:17 PM | Report abuse

"Campaign spokesman Mo Elleithee sought to bring expectations back down to earth. "We appreciate his exuberance, but we're pretty sure the race will be much closer than that," he said"

To which anne kornblut raised her face from the floor long enough to reply "F*** YOU! I'm putting "90-10" in the Washington Post! Try to beat THOSE expectations!!"

Posted by: Anonymous | May 12, 2008 5:15 PM | Report abuse

Billary Clinton and their cult followers are just incredible. In a way, we can see why America has landed herself in this political and economical mud bath recently. Those so called Regan Democrats are a bigger problem than the Republicans.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 12, 2008 5:07 PM | Report abuse

West Virginia, what a bloody big deal! Nobody except for the Clinton supporters, gives a hoot.

Clinton will probably win by 30% tomorrow and so what ?

Will she try to say that this is now the game changer? She is desperate so will probably say something stupid like that alright.

The game's over. You can win West Virginia by 50% if you like, Hillary, it is not going to change any thing now, you fool.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 12, 2008 5:03 PM | Report abuse

Who cares about West Virginia at this time of the primary? Only Hillary and Bill Clinton and their half baked friends of course.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 12, 2008 5:00 PM | Report abuse

West Virginia? Too little too late to save Hillary.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 12, 2008 4:59 PM | Report abuse

I have been to West Virginia. Talk about backward a$$ country fu

Posted by: Joe | May 12, 2008 4:53 PM | Report abuse

Dream on John Ryskam :D..

Posted by: john | May 12, 2008 4:48 PM | Report abuse

It's time for the superdelegates to pull the trigger and end this continued smear campaign by Clinton's surrogates against Obama.

Posted by: politicjock | May 12, 2008 4:39 PM | Report abuse

crat3:

It seems more likely that SHE would lose in November if she steals the nomination and there are race riots.

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 4:25 PM | Report abuse

Cult leader Obama and his cult superdelegates are now engaged in a desperate end run game to prevent Sen Clinton from winning the presidential nomination at the conclusion of the presidential nomination process in June.

This end run maneuvring was the reason for the cult superdelegate endorsements on Friday, Saturday, and Monday, and this subversion will continue in repudiation of the Democratic nomination process.

Cult leader Obama and his cult superdelegates have chosen to take the Democratic Party on the path to a train wreck in November. This is entrenching votes for McCain. Cult leader Obama will crash and burn in November if he swipes the nomination.

Posted by: crat3 | May 12, 2008 4:22 PM | Report abuse

GO HILLARY DIANE CLINTON!!!

Posted by: JakeD | May 12, 2008 4:13 PM | Report abuse

I've always been impressed by how W. Virginia is a perfect representation of America. It's a model for how America should act, think and otherwise carry itself. Pu-leeeeze!

Posted by: thebob.bob | May 12, 2008 4:11 PM | Report abuse

Evelyn Pringle has just published her long-awaited bombshell article on Obama's criminal complicity in the Rezko/Auchi/General Mediterranean criminal enterprise.

Obama is going to jail for a VERY long time. It's all here: names, dates, places, amounts, schemes.

Obama supporters: read it and weep. Your guy is just a little punk hood.

Curtain Time For Barack Obama - Part I

http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_evelyn_p_080512_curtain_time_for_bar.htm

Posted by: John Ryskamp | May 12, 2008 4:11 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company