Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Clinton: Not Going Anywhere Anytime Soon

Following Sen. Hillary Clinton's (N.Y.) convincing victory tonight in West Virginia she delivered a defiant speech in which she insisted that the outcome of the Democratic nomination fight remained very much in doubt.

"I am more determined than ever to carry on this campaign until everyone has had a chance to make their voices heard," said Clinton at her victory rally in Charleston, West Virginia. "I can win this nomination if you decide I should."

Clinton also reiterated her argument that she is the better candidate to win back the White House in the fall. "I am in this race because I believe I am the strongest candidate," she said, adding: "The White House is won in the swing states and I am winning the swing states."

Regardless of which candidate you support, does that argument move you? Why or why not?

By Chris Cillizza  |  May 13, 2008; 11:00 PM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2008  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Democrat Wins Mississippi Special Election
Next: Next Moves for Team Obama

Comments

The Clintons are poison to the Democrats and always have been. When Bill was president the Dems lost both houses of congress to the Republicans...the are a drag on the any democrat running for the Senate or House.

True the Clintons have their supporters but they have a even larger number of haters and people that really just despise them in general.
Hillary is the defintion of devisive...even over half the Democrats don't seem to want her(lately she has actually done a good job of making some of them hate her). Now add almost all the Republicans and a good share of Independants and there is no way she can beat McCain if he runs even a halfway effective campaign.Not only will she lose but she will drag along with her to defeat a lot of Democrats in close congressional.The only way us Dems should take a sip of that poison is if we want to commit suicide.

Posted by: Jim G. | May 18, 2008 2:08 AM | Report abuse

Obama supporters like to point out that he has won more states ... they even post his winning percentages versus Hillary's percentages. But they fail to recognize that the percentages are only those of the people who voted, NOT of the number of voters in that state who are likely to cast votes in November. When you look at those numbers, the states Obama won will, for the most part, go Red in the general election, not blue.

Posted by: voice of reason | May 15, 2008 6:17 PM | Report abuse

See what opposition can do for you, if misused and abused. In life, lessons are learnt and everything is for a reason. You do good, you reap good. You do bad, you reap bad. The choice is yours. Make a wise choice in all that you do, because it will not only affect you. E=mc2. With Hillary being a graduate from such a prominent university, I wonder what she learnt. Or did she alter her educational course to accommodate that which she knew not to do. I am appalled and hurt to know that she wants to stay in and further destruct her future chance to gain support from those have witnessed such a mess already, Hillary needs to change her light bulb, it's a bit dim as is her chance at winning this election. Hillary is to oppositional to bring unity. And she is too blind to recognize the signs of time. America is a diverse world. Globalization at a high, a large melting pot have manifested, times have changed from some 20 or 30 years, her era is just about extinct, she's out of touch, so what's left. A twisted Hillary stuck on yesterday's mentality trying to lift this heavy burden into the future of tommorrow, she don't have the strength.

Posted by: Nisey01 | May 15, 2008 9:58 AM | Report abuse

Clinton: Not Going Anywhere Anytime Soon

Sad to say, Hillary can't afford to go anywhere anytime soon. She is up to her neck in debt. She has loaned her campaign millions, now she has the audacity to look to those whom she have deceive to deceive more. She is lying in her ability to win so that the American people can pick up her tab. The same way that you go into a situation is the way you normally comes out of a situation. On that note, she went in lying and now she is lying on the way out. What a heck of a campaign. I am appalled. How can she help anyone, when she can't even help herself. Had she ended her campaign earlier, it would have been a lot better for her, now the American public have to be played by her to help foot her bill. How stupid she has made the American people look, it's apparent that she has no remorse, because she refuse to step down and end this foolishness. Wow, how amazing. God bless America.

Posted by: Nisey01 | May 15, 2008 9:31 AM | Report abuse

From what I know is that Nick Colvin is still Obama's aid and rumors around D.C. are that they are having an affair together...

Posted by: Anonymous | May 15, 2008 2:18 AM | Report abuse

I heard about Colvin in D.C. that they ere more than just friends...

Posted by: Anonymous | May 15, 2008 2:16 AM | Report abuse

We just had eight years of a president who was a rookie. I'm not voting for this one either.

The rest of you are grounded.

Posted by: Kate Sheahan | May 15, 2008 12:38 AM | Report abuse

I hope she stays in it till the convention. It's soooo entertaining to watch the Obamautomatons foam at the mouth.

The audacity of staying in the race! Shocking! Monster! Disgusting! Racist! Appealing to idiots and morons! Cut-throat! Compulsively mendacious! Delusional! This is not Camelot! Morally inferior! Etcetera....

For supporters of a candidate who excoriates "the old politics" they sure are moved to practice the "politics of personal destruction".

To me, that viciously expressed lack of respect for the former first lady of a successful Democratic administration is one of the main factors that will motivate HRC supporters to stay home on election day.

Eventually a lot of these folks will grow up when they get into their thirties, and/or when they see the fruits of their labors result in four more years of McBush.

Posted by: Paul | May 14, 2008 11:06 PM | Report abuse

If you've read this far, you're an idiot...

Posted by: jeeemusna | May 14, 2008 9:31 PM | Report abuse

actually you can read about the DNC being required to seat the FL and MI delegates on the web (link of the Florida Democratic Party web site). Experts have said that a judge not forcing the DNC to seat them would be "inconceivable".

Posted by: | May 14, 2008 2:37 AM
__________________________________________

That's one way to rally Democrats: sue to win an election.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 9:09 PM | Report abuse

Hey, Clinton has once again demonstrated that the less education folks have, the more they support her. With a large majority of votes from old lily-white West Virginia hillbillies who dropped out of grade school more than half a century ago, she can forge ahead and win the general election!

Yeah, right.

Posted by: oldhonky | May 14, 2008 9:04 PM | Report abuse

Hillary's WV victory only indicates she is strong with white people who fear diversity through a lack of exposure and education. It does not mean she can win the White House and Obama can't. It is not a mandate to continue. Hillary wins with ignorant white people. Woot. If she wants to stay in the race to reduce her debt, so be it. It's time for everyone else to move on.

Posted by: FormerMarylandRepublican | May 14, 2008 9:01 PM | Report abuse

Here's something everybody needs to remember:

Clinton will stay in this until after the last primary. After that, there will be no mathematical possibility for her to attain the nomination. Her campaign has said this. Wins in WV and Kentucky put her in a better position to raise the money to repay her debts. Everybody knows (including the Clinton campaign) that these wins are numerically meaningless, from a delegate perspective and from every other possible metric, including the popular vote.

When somebody like James Carville says that Obama is the presumptive nominee, it is *over*. When Ed Rendell starts talking about how he thinks Obama should pick Hillary for the VP slot, it is *over*. When Hillary stops the negative attacks on Obama, as she has for the most part, it is *over*.

Yeah, we'll wait until the bitter end. And Obama will win the nomination. And he will win the general election, especially if Hillary's supporters can actually try for a moment to find out why so many of us support Obama.

And to those who ask why white people would vote for Obama, I submit to you the results from states such as Iowa, Colorado, Washington, the upcoming primary in Oregon, and many others -- he has substantial support among white voters. Just not racist white voters.

Posted by: Gonzeaux | May 14, 2008 5:40 PM | Report abuse

Be ever vigilant posts:
"US CENSUS (2000)

Total population - 281,421,906 100%
White 77.1% NOT 83%
Black 12.9%
Amer. Indian 1.4%
Asian 4.2%
Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 6.6%"

Funny, I thought we had an immigration problem based on Hispanics. Yet your "numbers" indicate that there are no Hispanics in the US. I imagine that would come as a great surprise to the millions of them that have responded to the Census.

Actually, when you went to the US Census site, you forgot to look at the second table which reflected Hispanics vs. the rest of the population:

HISPANIC OR LATINO
Total population - 281,421,906 100.0
Hispanic or Latino - 35,305,818 12.5
Not Hispanic or - 246,116,088 87.5

According to the Census Bureau site, "The federal government considers race and
Hispanic origin to be two separate and
distinct concepts." So, Hispanics are generally considered under the White category in general, but are a separate subset when compared to the whole. The reality is that they don't think, act or consider themselves as White, for the most part, so lumping them in with Whites when making categorical statements leads to major inaccuracies when projecting group considerations.

Of course, the bottom line is that regardless of how you slice and dice the numbers, Obama could not have the most popular votes without having had a large number of non-AA votes.

Posted by: JK5432 | May 14, 2008 5:19 PM | Report abuse

Dems always lose NH. It's a weird state like that.

Posted by: Mason | May 14, 2008 5:00 PM | Report abuse

And for those of you saying you will vote for McCain if Clinton isn't the nominee.
Just add her 16.9 million to McCains 7 million and as you can see gives you a total of not quite 24 million votes.

Doesn't bode well for Clinton or McCain now does it.

Posted by: Math doesn't lie. | May 14, 2008 4:46 PM | Report abuse

16.9 million out of 209 million gives her less than 1/12th of the entire country that is over 18 and able to vote. Estimates say about only half 104.5 million are registered to vote so that leaves her less than 1/6 of the entire voter base, which leaves the other 5/6 either voting for McCain or Obama which leaves 87,083,333 voting in the General election who didn't vote for Clinton.
McCain has roughly 1/12 of those, maybe less, and he loses more every time he opens his mouth. That leaves roughly 80 million people voting for Obama in november. Can you say "landslide".

Posted by: Math doesn't lie. | May 14, 2008 4:34 PM | Report abuse

Of course the U.S. census means nothing. What is important is the percentages of voters within each state. The presidential candidate MUST win the swing states.

Posted by: mo | May 14, 2008 4:23 PM | Report abuse

Well, if Clinton is "clinically cuckoo," then I guess 16.9 million or so voters are as well.

Posted by: Denise Mary | May 14, 2008 3:57 PM | Report abuse

icgirl,

You want might want to read on in Matthew, also read Daniel and Revelations. Before you make the decision to vote for Obama.

Posted by: Be ever vigilant | May 14, 2008 3:50 PM | Report abuse

OOOOOOPs typo on my part

Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 0.3%
Other 6.6%

Posted by: Be ever vigilant | May 14, 2008 3:48 PM | Report abuse

icgirl wrote:

"The evangelicals are starting to look at Obama."

Well, as a Christian minister myself, I hope evangelicals take a really GOOD look!

Which of the three possible candidates has consistently demonstrated that they live by the following:

"Blessed are the peacemakers." Matthew 5:9

For they shall be called children of God...

(And, btw, Jesus didn't qualify that statement by requiring the peacemaker to have a specific religious affiliation, either.)

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 3:42 PM | Report abuse

Bill B wrote:
"It's showtime and Barry Hussein Obama ain't ready for primetime."

Good grief, is it possible that you're this adolescent? I suppose you must think that Bush is real man's man, too.

Go read a novel or eat a strawberry, and please stop behaving like the stereotype of a paranoid, xenophobic American so fearful of the world around them that they've frozen their own moral compass.

Believe it or not, you are more capable of getting along with others than you might know.

Posted by: Emlyn | May 14, 2008 3:32 PM | Report abuse

US CENSUS

White 77.1% NOT 83%
Black 12.9%
Amer. Indian 1.4%
Asian 4.2%
Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 6.6%

Seeing the numbers in black and white might help people understand that he could not have won by the % he has won or lost by the % he lost strickly on a division of black and white Clinton and McCain are not getting all of the "white" votes and Obama is not getting only the "black" votes.

Also judging by the fact that McCain lost WV to 2 candidates not even in the running, he only got 1% of the WV votes.

This is not about race, as hard as everone is trying to make it that way.

Let this race run its course and then stand behind your party based on your "beliefs".

Posted by: Be ever vigilant | May 14, 2008 3:32 PM | Report abuse

You poor pitiful Obamabots.

You really have no clue what's in store for you come November.

There's now ay in hell Obama can win.

Obama will lose OH, FL, adn NH.

When Mccain picks Romney as his VP the GOP will pick up Michigan as well.

The Dem primaries are just about over.

It's showtime and Barry Hussein Obama ain't ready for primetime.

Posted by: Bill B. | May 14, 2008 3:23 PM | Report abuse

One thing I haven't seen anyone else mention here is if Sen. Obama can beat the Clinton team, then he's the strongest candidate the Democrats have. Sen. Clinton had everything - money, fame, status - locked up; she had EVERYONE - big donors, party insiders, even the media convinced - that she was "inevitable." And all that's just gone away....

The real question every Democrat should be asking themselves is: Did Barack Obama defeat Hillary Clinton? Or did she SELF-destruct?

Either way, she'd lose the general election (given the FACT that past performance is the best predictor of future accomplishment).

Posted by: Carmen Cameron | May 14, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

Look out everyone. The evangelicals are starting to look at Obama. He has a big new mailing out in Kentucky about his faith. And they are already paying attention. As one Christian blogger says, "He has a story to tell about how Jesus came into his life, and we can expect to hear a lot more about it in Kentucky and in the fall." Don't forget Hillary's high negatives. When Obama really starts to talk about who he is, McCain will evaporate. Obama has more to offer more Americans than any other candidate. Totally nice guy, lovely family, really smart but with a good heart, and a great spirit. He's assembled an amazing team. He's American through and through, and he's going to take the country by storm. It's not about Kool-Aid, or radicals. It's about one nice, totally centrist, decent man who has led an extraordinary life and is asking for our help to make him our president. We need him right about now, I'd say.

Also, why is no one talking about the LOW TURNOUT in W.Va. yesterday? Chuckie Todd says it was around 150,000 below everyone's pumped-up estimates. It helped Hillary very little, after all the talk about how she would come back in terms of the popular vote. She's just staying in because there's no way to flee now and save face. She'll stay through the final races. Obama will take Oregon, come close or win Kentucky outright, take Montana, S. Dakota, and I predict he'll even win over her in Puerto Rico! Take that Howard Wolfson! Dems, we have a nominee. Get over yourselves and let's get behind him.

Posted by: icgirl | May 14, 2008 3:15 PM | Report abuse

How ironic! The legions of faithful devotees to the TV show 'Survivor' are now watching the real-life show. Beyond all the hoopla and spin that media places on each and every word uttered, cheeky, fake grins photographed and all of the whistle stops made to patronize the 'real folks' by both candidates just magnifies the correlation between TV staging and reality. Isn't it a shame that we've been tuning in to watch this game of Survivor drag on between two candidates of the same party, wasting time, efforts and money? Too bad the viewing public is subjected to the constant honing in on the superfiicial minutia and many seem blinded to the big picture because of the drawn out drama. Hillary and BILL (don't forget they ARE a package deal, like it or not) will NEVER give up selling their souls to get back into the White House. They are narcissicists driven by personal agendas cloaked in allegiance and self-sacrifice for 'the People'. They are not servants of the people but polished and very astute, very WEALTHY, POLITICIANS....oh yes, that's experience all right. I don't buy their Saviour Schtick one bit. Hillary will spend all of the campaign money (and remind us of her own personal debt for the 'cause'),will step on whomever she needs to if in her path and will drag Billy Boy down Memory Lane to satisfy her/their unyielding, self-aggrandizing ego. Hey Hillary...what WON'T you do just to avoid being voted off of the island?

Posted by: rdiah | May 14, 2008 3:03 PM | Report abuse

I find it interesting that 91% of blacks voted for Obama in a recent primary. If 91% of whites voted for Hillary Clinton in a specific primary there would be a "march on Washington." Al Sharpton would be out with Jesse and the boys. Interesting........We won't be a "color blind" nation until we are up in arms when 71% of blacks vote for a black candidate let alone 91%.
I'm a moderate Democrat. Not a peace/love guy. Not a march in the street affirmative action guy. Not an "Obama reminds me of a young JFK guy." None of that B-S. Moderate. Middle class. A wife, 2 kids and a dog.I always felt Fox News and other "right wing" claims that there is a "liberal bias" was false but I found out this year that it isn't false at all. I've been a Hillary supporter. I have been absolutely aghast at the Press coverage she has recieved as compared to the Press coverage Obama has recieved. CNN is unbelievably pro Obama. The New York Times. The Washington Post. The Boston Globe. The major networks. My homepage is Yahoo.com and you should see the "tone" of the daily headlines re: Obama as compared to Clinton. "Clinton wins in W. Virginia but it won't help." as compared to "Obama loses W.Virginia but confident regarding Oregon."..........I remember the day Ted and Caroline Kennedy endorsed Obama. There was a panel on Charlie Rose that night. I thought Charlie Rose was gonna start crying. He talked about how "this was a great day in America. One of the greatest days if his lifetime." etc. etc. etc. I almost threw up...........I'll vote for Obama when push comes to shove but this whole "thing" has opened my eyes and left a very BAD TASTE in my mouth.

Posted by: Neville | May 14, 2008 3:00 PM | Report abuse

"Due to HIS use of the race card, he has divided the party"

You're lying

Posted by: DDAWD | May 14, 2008 2:56 PM | Report abuse

I am leaning toward Obama mainly because Clinton is playing dirty politics. Although some might say that Obama's minister may have seen his opportunity for his moment of fame and ran with it, I think he was put up to it. There is more to it than meets the eye. I'd bet on it.
Its not just Hillary but Bill and Hillary if she is elected. Remember Bill is a past president and as such can attend anything that involves presidential matters. Who is to know that he will stick his nose into her affairs? Do we want Bill back in the White House for four more years? I don't. Hillary wants to use Ms. as if whe was no longer married. Then why is Bill still hanging by her coattails? Kinda strange don't you think?

Posted by: GaryH | May 14, 2008 2:52 PM | Report abuse

You hillary supporters that claim they will not vote for Obama are truly morons. As much as I hate queen hillary, given the choice between her and a bush third term I would vote for her while trying not to vomit. You idiots would sooner destroy the country than get over your idiotic stupid prejudices. The more I read the comments of you lame hillary followers the more convinced I am that the demographics showing most of her supporters to be undereducated is accurate and a great argument for mandatory IQ testing before being allowed to cast a ballot.....

Posted by: hippy49 | May 14, 2008 2:40 PM | Report abuse

One correction:

""Obama has turned me off even more each day. If Hillary does not get the nomination, I will be among millions of Democrats writing her name in on the ballot."

AND when you do that, and get enough other Zealots to go along with you, you will be electing McBush guarenteeing 4 more years of our Soldiers dying in Iraq. I'd like to hear you explain to the mother or father of a Kid killed after McCain's win that you voted for HILLARY as a write in Candidate thus allowing McCain to win, because you couldn't get your way. I DARE you."

Posted by: Hold_That_Tiger | May 14, 2008 2:39 PM | Report abuse

In response to Darleneanne - "Hillary didn't get in the way of Obama winning W. Virginia - he did."

There were only 330,552 people voted in W. Virginia - big deal, and the spin continues for lier Hillary and company. Your candidate is demeaning you guys by saying that the uneducated are voting for her. Lier Hillary is in the way of Obama moving forward not the other way round. I don't call her continued campaigning strength, I called it selfish. Obama will prevail in all those states that lier Hillary won....give me a break. It's time to wake up or McBush will be your next President.

Posted by: ob08 | May 14, 2008 2:32 PM | Report abuse

"dont worry florida or michigan voters we democrats here will get even with obama when we help him lose in november our vote will count in november ha ha"

YEP get revenge for those Michigan Voters a whopping 40% of whom voted for "uncommitted" rather than check Mrs Clinton's name.
=====================================================================================

"Okay .....so Obama supporters do you really think the 17% black vote and the kid vote can win an election?"

OF COURSE not, but the vote of this 52 year old "kid" and millions of others like her can.
====================================================================================

"was going to publicize evidence showing Obama to be gay/bi-sexual"

You GOP trolls are so obvious, the stink of defeat is wafting through my computer; why don't you toddle off and support McCoot, with that "foreign" Policy of his, and his nonsenical "Economic" plan he is going to need all the "yes men" he can muster.
==================================================================================

"Due to HIS use of the race card, he has divided the party...what a uniter! "

LET"S play a game shall we? who said:

"...he is living in a Fantasy Land" where only the "Jesse Jackson" crowd would vote for him..

He is Not a muslim "...as far as I know..."

LBJ is almost single-handedly responsible for Civil Rights Legislation passed in the '60's (has the speaker never heard of Martin Luther King?)

"hard working" Americans, "WHITE Americans" won't vote for him.
======================================================================================

"No wonder Hillary's had it so hard; she's up against women who hate that they are women"

YEP that Hillary has had it hard alright, that is if you discount her charmed life; Wellesley Valedictorian, Yale Law, Marriage to a man equally ambitious (although he is an admitted philanderer), high flying Rose Law Firm Lawyer, stints as "First Lady" in AR and the White House, easy carpet-bagged win to the NY Senate, now in a tight race with a bi-racial guy abandoned by his father at 3, raised by a single White Mother, who went through an identity crisis in his youth that might have turned his life in a completely different direction, but pulls himself up by the bootstraps to get a Harvard degree, then eschews high dollar law career to become a community organizer in the poor neighborhoods of south side Chicage, then the Illnois Senate, to the US Senate to where we find him today. If Hillary's gender presented a "glass ceiling" and I agree that her intelligence, and the work horse ambition that got her there, is very admirable, as a post-feminist woman myself, I appreciate her drive, however, Obama had./has an even bigger hurdle to get over: race. Hillary has one asset that Obama never did; her whiteness, and it would be foolish not to acknowledge the advantage it has given her.
================================================================================================

"Consider: Another presidential candidate--Lincoln, a fine orator, though politically inexperienced--was similarly branded as unqualified, yet his presidency was arguably a turning point for America."

GREAT minds think alike, this is a comparison that I have been making for weeks; Obama and Lincoln have about the same experience in the IL legislation; is there any rational American alive who would question the wisdom of electing the President who saved our Republic despite his "lack of experience," and based on the beauty of his words to boot?
================================================================================================

"Better the devil you know than the devil you don't know" is what has held American politics hostage for generations."

I couldn't agree more. As the great Sam Cook sang "a change is gonna come."
=============================================================================================

"This is so funny. The Obama kids are appear to be desperate for Hillary to quit (which she will not). This means they fear she can still win."

Not this 52 yr old "kid," I don't fear a win by Clinton because, at this point, she CAN'T win.
=====================================================================================================

"Obama has turned me off even more each day. If Hillary does not get the nomination, I will be among millions of Democrats writing her name in on the ballot."

AND when you do that, and get enough other Zealots to go along with you, you will be electing McBush guarenteeing 4 more years of our Soldiers dying in Iraq. I'd like to hear you explain to the mother or father of a Kid killed after McCain's win that you voted for him because you couldn't get your way. I DARE you.
====================================================================================================

"If loud cheering by Internet blowhards were the criteria, Hillary would already be president."

OH yeah.

Posted by: Hold_That_Tiger | May 14, 2008 2:30 PM | Report abuse

"No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President"

Is McCain - an artificially born Citizen??

Posted by: Ray Lee | May 14, 2008 2:24 PM | Report abuse

So who are you getting even with? Your the one going to be stuck with Mccain, years in Iraq, $8.00 a gallon gas (and that is not a guess it will be a reality in less then 24 months). So who have you gotten with? Obama will make tens of millions speaking and writing books. People like me who are retired and have plenty will just go on. Reminds me of strikers once who thought they had the owner of a plant over a barrel. He just closed the plant and retired. He was worth a billions dollars and had been doing them a favor keeping it open. Yea, they showed him.


(((((((((((((((
how can obama win when so many hillary supporters will vote for mccain to me it doesnt add up obama supporters say they dont need hillary supporters i guess we will find out in november when obama loses because of democrat voters voting for mccain dont worry florida or michigan voters we democrats here will get even with obama when we help him lose in november our vote will count in november ha ha

Posted by: dixieb | May 14, 2008 1:23 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Since when is America 83% white?

Posted by: ek | May 14, 2008 2:14 PM | Report abuse

So what, he is the nominee like it or not.

(((((((((((((((
Okay .....so Obama supporters do you really think the 17% black vote and the kid vote can win an election?

Hillary Dems are saying they will write her name in on the ballot. NOT that they will vote for McCain...that McCain can easily defeat Obama because they will not vote for him. He scares the crap out of us for multiple reasons, his lack of experience just for starters and we are suspect of his massive media support as well.

Your Obama thing has been pie in the sky. A country that is 83% white will not elect a black president. Wait until the demographic is 83% black, then you will have a black president for sure.

Didn't you notice 90% of all blacks voted for their skin color? why wouldn't white voters do the same thing?

Posted by: g | May 14, 2008 1:16 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 2:08 PM | Report abuse

Right now it is looking like Dennis Kucinich could win if he had the nomination. A Democratic leaning ficus would probably win. There is no right or wrong candidate. A game of rock, paper, scissors is just as valid as the strongest candidate among white, blue-collar voters.

The only question for super delegates is this: The devil you know or the devil you don't?

Posted by: muD | May 14, 2008 2:03 PM | Report abuse

I am a high school drop-out, so there is no snobbishness to this post.

Does anyone who relies on the under-educated to support them guarantee MY vote? I think not.

Perhaps that's my problem. Even with a limited formal education, I was taught how to think.

A leader of the uneducated does not automatically represent me.

Mike Farrell
Cagayan de Oro

Posted by: Mike Farrell | May 14, 2008 1:53 PM | Report abuse

dixieb wrote:
"i guess we will find out in november when obama loses because of democrat voters voting for mccain dont worry florida or michigan voters we democrats here will get even with obama when we help him lose in november our vote will count in november ha ha"

Democrats who would switch allegiances purely out of spite are obviously not Democrats, nor are they apparently concerned with the future of their country.

My guess is that these individuals more likely form the hordes of "undecided voters" and "swing staters" who, given that they could so effortlessly contemplate a vote for that military monomaniac McCain, evidently have not yet found their moral compass.

So much for the Common Good; they're no better than the Limbaugh Yes Men.

Posted by: Emlyn | May 14, 2008 1:48 PM | Report abuse

It doesn't matter that some white voters voted for Obama in the Democratic primary...now start thinking strategically about a general election as Hillary Dems have all along. We picked Hillary because we know she is the only one who can beat McCain and she is the best and most experienced candidate for the job.

The average white voter, 83%, of the total will not vote for Obama. Period. There are so many other problems with his electability for the average American voter. His Muslim name, his racism, his pastor.

Blacks votes for blacks, 90% voted for their own skin color. Whites are going to do the same when it comes down to it.

I'm not agreeing with this paradigm but this is the way things work. Why not face reality instead of setting it up so that the Dems lose once again to a Republican?

Posted by: g | May 14, 2008 1:47 PM | Report abuse

i have no idea what the Obama campaign is afraid of. This primary campaign is only helping the Democratic Party despite the spin obama and the media are trying to put on it. I don't get it. he's the most fearful presumptive nominee I've ever seen. maybe there really is something to be afraid of? And - the spin the media is putting on the comment about white, working-class is truly amusing - and sad. She is in the way of his getting that vote in the same manner as he is in the way of her getting the Black working-class vote. but nobody minds when that is mentioned. And - we certainly can't say anything when a media person says, "Obama got 93% of the Black vote in that town." Is that a racist thing to say or - just the truth? Some very thin skins running around this primary campaign. Hillary didn't get in the way of Obama winning W. Virginia - he did.

Posted by: darleneann | May 14, 2008 1:45 PM | Report abuse

I disagree with the contention that this primary, along with PA and OH, shows that Obama can't win these and similar swing states. After all, Obama was not running against a Republican but against the Clintons and often against the party establishment such as the formidable Ed Rendell and his allies.

homer www.altara.blogspot.com

Posted by: Homer Hewitt | May 14, 2008 1:39 PM | Report abuse

I have a pointed question to ask all of you; given the exit polls in all the states do you believe that a black person can be president in this country?

Posted by: Pam | May 14, 2008 1:39 PM | Report abuse

g:
Your premise that white voters will not vote for Obama is false based on other states with large white populations primary results: See Idaho; 80% to Obama, 17% to Clinton (nearly costing her any delegate allocation there), Alaska 75% to Obama, 25% to Clinton, Kansas 74% to Obama, 26% Clinton, North Dakota 61% to Obama, 37% to Clinton, Nebraska, 68% to Obama, 32 % to Clinton, Utah 57% to Obama, 39% to Clinton.

Hard to argue these facts, g. I'm sorry you have a problem with a black candidate. But not everybody does.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 1:34 PM | Report abuse

She should have said "I am in this race because of race."

After this display, we don't just need her out of this race, we need her out of the Senate. I'd rather see D'Amato come back. $2300 to any primary challenger, just let me know who to write the check to in '12 (FOBs need not apply).

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 1:31 PM | Report abuse

She should have said "I am in this race because of race."

After this display, we don't just need her out of this race, we need her out of the Senate. I'd rather see D'Amato come back. $2300 to any primary challenger, just let me know who to write the check to in '12 (FOBs need not apply).

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 1:30 PM | Report abuse

I'm thinking if Clinton's supporters are ignored and Hillary is locked out of the ticket.


Obama will go down like Dukakus. It will be so bad, he'll have to retire.

Posted by: toby | May 14, 2008 1:27 PM | Report abuse

how can obama win when so many hillary supporters will vote for mccain to me it doesnt add up obama supporters say they dont need hillary supporters i guess we will find out in november when obama loses because of democrat voters voting for mccain dont worry florida or michigan voters we democrats here will get even with obama when we help him lose in november our vote will count in november ha ha

Posted by: dixieb | May 14, 2008 1:23 PM | Report abuse

"But what strikes me is I have never read a proper analysis of this argument. Is losing the Democratic primary in a (swing) state an indicator you are likely to lose the general election in that state? And if at all, how strongly?"

It's pretty hard to say for sure. The last two elections were close, but presidential elections are typically blowouts. Furthermore, primaries don't usually go on this long. I'm not sure the last time the Ohio or Pennyslvania primaries were especially meaningful. (One could make the argument that Pennyslvania wasn't meaningful THIS time either)

Posted by: DDAWD | May 14, 2008 1:21 PM | Report abuse

Okay .....so Obama supporters do you really think the 17% black vote and the kid vote can win an election?

Hillary Dems are saying they will write her name in on the ballot. NOT that they will vote for McCain...that McCain can easily defeat Obama because they will not vote for him. He scares the crap out of us for multiple reasons, his lack of experience just for starters and we are suspect of his massive media support as well.

Your Obama thing has been pie in the sky. A country that is 83% white will not elect a black president. Wait until the demographic is 83% black, then you will have a black president for sure.

Didn't you notice 90% of all blacks voted for their skin color? why wouldn't white voters do the same thing?

Posted by: g | May 14, 2008 1:16 PM | Report abuse

I heard about Nick Colvin as well. I know about Larry Sinclair and Obama....and Donald Young the Gay Choir boy being murdered because he was going to publicize evidence showing Obama to be gay/bi-sexual

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

If the Dems expect to win elections, they need to nominate candidates who are HONEST, rather than SLICK. If progressives had all voted for Kucinich (the only viable progressive) in the primaries, instead of listening to the constant "conventional wisdom" that was repeated over and over like a mantra by his competitors for the nomination (i.e., "He can't win!!") we wouldn't be faced with a mediocre/corporatist nominee (no matter whether that nominee turns out to be Obama or Clinton).

The Dems have become too damned comfortable with their "Lesser Evilism" strategy. What we need--and deserve!--is a president we can vote for without holding our noses. It's obvious that the DNC is incapable of providing such a candidate this year...or, perhaps, any time in the foreseeable future.

Once again, I will suffer the slings and arrows of "loyal" Democrats who will chant another common mantra--"Any Democrat is better than a Republican!" That may or may not be true; but whether it is true or not, it sets a ridiculously low 'standard' for a president of what we would like to think of as "The Best, Free-est, Fairest" Nation in the world.

So far, I'm leaning toward Ralph Nader, at least until I see whom the Green Party nominates. We should ALL be supporting candidates (like Nader) who will represent the interests of 'We The People', as opposed to candidates who "can win" due to the money they have raised from the darker side of America.

NB: The "can't win" mantra has worked so well in the past in dismissing candidates like Dennis Kucinich from serious consideration, you can see that Ms. Clinton has pulled it out of her 'trick bag' to use against Barack Obama...for the most heinous reasons.

Wake Up America....you have become "chumps" to whatever strategy the Democratic Party apparatchiks decide to con you with.
---------------------------------

"And the day came when the risk it took to remain tight inside the bud was more painful than the risk it took to bloom." ---- Anais Nin

Posted by: Joseph Hill | May 14, 2008 1:12 PM | Report abuse

Well we know Hillary is gay that goes all the way back to her collage days and people who knew her then. I seriously don't think Obama is gay.
====================

Is the relationship between obama and nick colvin (his aide) just sexual or are they in love?

Posted by: Obama Sexual Prefrerence | May 14, 2008 1:07 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 1:10 PM | Report abuse

Don't even get me started what a no good turd that guy is. He will get ripped to pieces in the election. He is an indefensible candidate worthless in every way.

)))))))))))
John McCain was an honorable naval officer the son and grandson of admirals. After he ditched the wife who stood by him while he was a PoW he married a rich sweet young thing and used her families money to carpetbag to AZ and run for Office. McCain as a senator is a sad joke. As President he would be a disaster.

Posted by: Walter M | May 14, 2008 1:04 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 1:08 PM | Report abuse

Is the relationship between obama and nick colvin (his aide) just sexual or are they in love?

Posted by: Obama Sexual Prefrerence | May 14, 2008 1:07 PM | Report abuse

John McCain was an honorable naval officer the son and grandson of admirals. After he ditched the wife who stood by him while he was a PoW he married a rich sweet young thing and used her families money to carpetbag to AZ and run for Office. McCain as a senator is a sad joke. As President he would be a disaster.

Posted by: Walter M | May 14, 2008 1:04 PM | Report abuse

It's doesn't matter anymore. he has stopped campaigning against Hillary about a week ago. Hillary can do what she wants as she puts a match the the hard earned money of her supporters. Her supporters are the ones really getting screwed. Not to mention all the vendors she has stiffed for millions. So much for her caring about the hard working americans just trying to run a business who were unfortunate enough to have come in contact with her. I know one guy who did a sound system who she owes $3000.00 They don't even return his calls after like 2 months. By the way, they were stiffing people even before the money crunch. They just don't pay. She doesn't give a s**t about working people other then their votes.


)))))))))))
If Obama is as strong as some have commented here, and is a "sure thing" to beat McCain, it should be no problem for him to wait until the convention to get the nomination.

Posted by: Georgetowner1 | May 14, 2008 12:57 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 1:03 PM | Report abuse

Even if Hillary were considered the more electable candidate because of her ability to win primaries in the swing states of PA, OH, WV, etc., her nomination by the Democratic party would result in the wholesale defection of Black Americans and the massive numbers of young voters who support Obama. It is one thing to be disappointed when your candidate is defeated, and quite another when the nomination is stolen away by backroom deals. Hillary was the initial front-runner and she blew it. Let's not destroy the party over her failed bid for the presidency.

Posted by: bob | May 14, 2008 1:01 PM | Report abuse

If Obama is as strong as some have commented here, and is a "sure thing" to beat McCain, it should be no problem for him to wait until the convention to get the nomination.

Posted by: Georgetowner1 | May 14, 2008 12:57 PM | Report abuse

The reason Obama is not getting some of the white working class vote is that Hiliary is in the way

Posted by: larry zachary | May 14, 2008 12:57 PM | Report abuse

I voted for Hillary in the primary, although I made my final decision in the voting booth. If my primary were today instead, I would vote for Obama. There is something "Snake Oil" about Hillary. I believe Obama cares about the USA more than himself. I can't say that about hillary. That said, whoever wins the nomination will get my vote in November. I can't fathom how a Hillary supporter can say if she doesn't get the nomination, they will vote for McCain. That's like, if I can't be the quarterback, I am taking my ball and going home. It makes no sense. None.
Both Obama and Hillary are great candidates. I truly believe that, but I know the Republicans would relish a chance to defeat the Clintons. They hate them with a vengance I don't understand, but they do. We won't win over the Republicans that are sick of Bush's politics with Hillary. Obama has won the popular vote, and the majority of delegates. Why would he not get the nomination? More people voted for him...where he was actually on the ticket. I bet you wouldn't hear a word from the Hillary campaign about counting the Michigan & Florida votes if she were winning. How can you change the rules after the game is over? Come on. It just reaks of politics as usual.

Posted by: biggirl | May 14, 2008 12:54 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is only catching up with national debt.She hasn't moved me all year. I still remember the land deal Bill & Hillary split out of.

Posted by: mrjustjohn | May 14, 2008 12:54 PM | Report abuse

Mean time she will need 8 out of 10 to move her way to even have a chance, thats 80% of the remaining. In the last week she has managed less then 2% and that probably changed in the time it took me to write this post. It's over in every posable way she could have won other then Obama going down in a plane crash. At some point you have to take your head out of the sand, other then the fund raising, "IT'S OVER".


)))))))))))
As her supporter I expect her to fight till the end! Obamabots don't see to realize alot of people have buyers remorse and no longer want this unknown 20 minute senator with his black theology mindset and questionable relationships in the office! The RULES (Obamabots love quoting the rules!) state that the supers can choose the best candidate for the general election! When the supers get enough spine to do so, she will have won by the rules, not stealing as the Obamabots like to scream. The threat of riots in the streets are nothing new, we all know that blacks support their own even when it isn't right to do (O.J., Micheal Jackson etc.)Neither candidate will have the math to win without the supers! Rules are they can pick the best candidate to win, if the "educated" would use common sense they would know BO can not win without the core of the dem party! Due to HIS use of the race card, he has divided the party...what a uniter! What a joke he has turned out to be!!!!

Posted by: Sherri | May 14, 2008 12:24 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 12:53 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is hanging on by her fingernails hoping for a miracle.

She will not quit as long as she any money to run on.

That is the only thing that will stop her -- running out of money.

Posted by: AdrickHenry | May 14, 2008 12:51 PM | Report abuse

I liked how Bill and Hillary helped the last two Democrats win the presidency. Have her supporters forgotten this? Why didn't she run against the shrub? Me thinks that if they had done their job, we wouldn't have had to endure the last eight years of crap.But low and behold they were nowhere to be seen or heard. what was up with that? That is the problems with the Democrats,they are about themselves. When you first heard Obama speeches it was always "we", Clinton was always "me", not until later did she change. As a Democrat, I will support whoever the nominee is. I can't survive 8 more years of this crap. We will take over congress, senate, and once we get together we will install a new president. As stated earlier in this blog, what was "lincolns" experience? I might say he did a "good" job arguably. What I think scares a lot of the older generations is the fact that Obama is bringing a new generation to the political scene. They have differing ideas on what they feel or want, and most of the older generation likes to cling to the past. Hell I would like to go back to the old days, but realized that ain't a happenin. I'm 58, white, educated, some money, bitter sometimes, a church goer (baptist), cling to my gun (only when I go hunting or target practice) and voting for Obama. If by some weird chance that Hillary is the nominee, she will get my vote. First and foremost I set aside my feelings and will vote for the person that will best represent the change this country needs/wants, lets all bury the rhetoric and stand behind our nominee and kick some Republican a$$!Bring our troops home, restore our reputation abroad, take care of our own people and get this country on it's way again. To my blue collar friends, do you really think that sitting this out will serve you well? Peace

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 12:49 PM | Report abuse

Numbers don't matter? You sound like some of those dopes who got those creating mortgages and are now losing their houses. Trust me, numbers matter. By the way, have you sent your donation to the "Pay off Hillary's debt fund today" Have you donated ANY money to your candidate? If not you may be part of the problem. It takes more then wishes to win and that is all Hillary has left thanks to her so called supporters. I am afraid it is just too late, she ran a terrible campaign, of of the worst possibly ever and just no longer deserves to win. The loss can be laid at Hillary's feet and no one else. Want to get mad at someone, get mad at Hillary for blowing it. I don't feel sorry for her at all.

)))))))))))))
No she isn't going anywhere and she is in it to win it!!! Thank you West Virginia for keeping our greatest hope for November alive and well. I'm so sick of "do the math". It was less than 3 months ago the pundits said Obama cannot win by math alone. Thump, 41 points, thump, West Virginia. You do the math. Obama cannot win in the general election. We Democrats need to do the right thing and nominate Hillary. She can win in November without Obama and he can't win without her (not that he would ask or she would accept). Just like men, pundits, DNC, news media, to ask the woman to make him President. Please wake up, voters left and superdelegates, it's not over yet, and Hillary will win and prevail in the end!!! Also, please donate to Hillary at:

www.hillaryclinton.com

Posted by: Mary O'Bryan | May 14, 2008 12:21 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 12:45 PM | Report abuse

Am I the only one noticing the woman hatred by Obama female voters? They project their gender self loathing onto Hillary Clinton. No wonder Hillary's had it so hard; she's up against women who hate that they are women. This is the same dynamic that happened when the Suffragettes attempted to instill equal rights for women. Their fiercest opponents were scores of women hating women! Blacks don't hate themselves yet far too many women do.

Posted by: Nexxus7 | May 14, 2008 12:42 PM | Report abuse

Sen. Clinton continues to be a shrill and angry harpy, unwilling or unable to accept the fact that she is not going to be the Democratic presidential nominee. It seems she would rather destroy the Party than withdraw gracefully.

Posted by: B. W. | May 14, 2008 12:34 PM | Report abuse

...I'm sending her a donation today. I have never donated to a political figure before (I'm pretty much a starving artist, albeit a college educated one) but since i can't stand the injustice I have seen against Hillary Clinton.... I will be sending a donation to help fight the political corruption against her.

Posted by: Nexxus7 | May 14, 2008 12:29 PM | Report abuse

Women supporters of Clinton: Your candidate lost. Show a little class and get over it. Being vindictive is not helping your cause and maybe just reinforncing reasons why women are not qualified to hold higher office.

Posted by: vtr08 | May 14, 2008 12:29 PM | Report abuse

Chris,as I read these comments I experience a huge feeling of disappointment
in my fellow Americans. Is not the objective of our entire primary system to select the candidate the most citizens want. Unless I have lost the ability to read or comprehend information...it appears the registered Democrats have been doing just that! You don't like the outcome? Too bad, sometimes you don't get your way!

I have been a registered Republican for many years and have supported the party's nominee. However, the Republicans have squandered all their goodwill and made a total laughingstock of their principles - can anyone possibly see Senator McCain elected in November? (Actually it's too bad Senator McCain is saddled with his party and the "can of worms" they've created - he has served his country honorably and with distiction for many years.)

I will vote for a Democrat this November and I sincerely hope it is Barack Obama. Senator Obama has shown the ability to bring back some of the "pride in country"
that has grown stale in the hearts of Americans. Truly he inspires the belief:
That as Americans united we can and will do anything!

Voting for Hillary would be a painful experience. I am still tormented by her "vast right-wing conspiracy" response when the "Lewinski" story broke - not sure that is the kind of gut reaction I want our President to have when they answer the phone at 3 AM - but if forced...

Folks this is not a football game...the decision we make is not for a trophy to be awarded. The results are the very livelihood of our citizens and the fate of our nation. Let's make the best decision possible and stop calling one another and our leaders names. People respond best to kind words and progress together when each carries part of the load.

It appears the people have chosen Senator Obama as the Democrat's standard bearer in a traditional democratic process; let's make certain the peoples choice is victorious this November!

Posted by: vagaf31 | May 14, 2008 12:26 PM | Report abuse

Hannah wrote:
"...voters are assessing the pragmatic strengths of the candidates to turn around the mess Bush leaves. "Popularity" is giving way to hiring an executive. The times have changed. The devil you know..."

"Popularity" is, in fact, only the measure by which Senator Obama's success over Senator Clinton can be gauged. Voters have recognized, after all the mud-slinging, character assassination, and political grandstanding, that he is, in fact, the more qualified candidate to bring about determinative change in this country.

Consider: Another presidential candidate--Lincoln, a fine orator, though politically inexperienced--was similarly branded as unqualified, yet his presidency was arguably a turning point for America.

"Better the devil you know than the devil you don't know" is what has held American politics hostage for generations.

Indeed, times are only ABOUT to change as is dawns on the Clintons and Clintonites alike that the politics of old just don't fly with a responsible and informed citizenry. The numbers don't lie.

Posted by: Emlyn | May 14, 2008 12:25 PM | Report abuse

As her supporter I expect her to fight till the end! Obamabots don't see to realize alot of people have buyers remorse and no longer want this unknown 20 minute senator with his black theology mindset and questionable relationships in the office! The RULES (Obamabots love quoting the rules!) state that the supers can choose the best candidate for the general election! When the supers get enough spine to do so, she will have won by the rules, not stealing as the Obamabots like to scream. The threat of riots in the streets are nothing new, we all know that blacks support their own even when it isn't right to do (O.J., Micheal Jackson etc.)Neither candidate will have the math to win without the supers! Rules are they can pick the best candidate to win, if the "educated" would use common sense they would know BO can not win without the core of the dem party! Due to HIS use of the race card, he has divided the party...what a uniter! What a joke he has turned out to be!!!!

Posted by: Sherri | May 14, 2008 12:24 PM | Report abuse

No she isn't going anywhere and she is in it to win it!!! Thank you West Virginia for keeping our greatest hope for November alive and well. I'm so sick of "do the math". It was less than 3 months ago the pundits said Obama cannot win by math alone. Thump, 41 points, thump, West Virginia. You do the math. Obama cannot win in the general election. We Democrats need to do the right thing and nominate Hillary. She can win in November without Obama and he can't win without her (not that he would ask or she would accept). Just like men, pundits, DNC, news media, to ask the woman to make him President. Please wake up, voters left and superdelegates, it's not over yet, and Hillary will win and prevail in the end!!! Also, please donate to Hillary at:

www.hillaryclinton.com

Posted by: Mary O'Bryan | May 14, 2008 12:21 PM | Report abuse

This is so funny. The Obama kids are appear to be desperate for Hillary to quit (which she will not). This means they fear she can still win.

Why not just take her words at face value. She says she can win and she means it. She will continue on until a winner is declared. Why do Obama supporters fear the completion of this race?

Posted by: Nexxus7 | May 14, 2008 12:16 PM | Report abuse

It is the same argument that the Clintons have been using for some time. There are two: 1) Ready to lead on day one and;
2) More electable in select large and swing states.

The campaign has abandoned the first after the demise of Mark Penn, and it arguably did little to help her bid.
The second is wearing thin - polling shows that Obama still wins big blue states, and is competitive in purple states that Hillary has little chance to win.

The more honest evaluation of the situation is that both candidates would likely beat John McCain, and Obama has been chosen by the Democratic party to represent them.

Posted by: RJS | May 14, 2008 12:10 PM | Report abuse

CHRIS
What did you expect here to say? You actually think she believes what she was saying? It was a speech you give after a win but other then an attempt to raise a little money, I don't think anyone, even her or Bill thinks they have any chance to win. Chris, I don't think you are very perceptive, it was a concession speech.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 12:06 PM | Report abuse

HILLARY SAYS IT'S OVER

I just listened to Hillary's speech from last night. I taped it and just had a chance to listen to it. It was like you hearing a speech and then seeing sub titles running along the bottom. It was, regardless how she seemed to deliver it, saying it is over and she knows it. You didn't even have to read between the lines she comes out and says it. She just doesn't have it in her after all this time to just quit but she will let the clock run out hear the buzzed and that will be it. the speech was very telling.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 11:57 AM | Report abuse

So, all the votes must be counted. But in the end those votes will not count?

Posted by: jean | May 14, 2008 11:55 AM | Report abuse

I must say I have been a Hillary supporter for the last year or so but what I have seen in this race for the nomination has really impressed me. This lady is not only a problem solver but she's STRONG. She's has gained even more of my admiration. Before I was a Hillary supporter, now I am an ardent Hillary supporter.

I remember when Al Gore would not give in to the corrupt hacks asking him to step down in his race for the US Presidency... (I am a huge Al Gore supporter). Gore proved to me that he would not let our country down and that he is a fighter. I see this same quality in Hillary Clinton. She has faced the most unjust media bias, she has remained strong despite the questionably high contributions to her opponents campaign chest.

(When Kerry dropped out even before the votes were counted I was very disappointed in him.)

Obama has turned me off even more each day. If Hillary does not get the nomination, I will be among millions of Democrats writing her name in on the ballot.

Posted by: Nexxus7 | May 14, 2008 11:54 AM | Report abuse

Clinton's plan was to have it wrapped up by Super Tuesday. She made minimal plans for states voting after then. Spent all her money and effort to win by Super Tuesday. When it didn't work out as hoped, her team's planning deficiencies popped out loud and clear.
Do we want this type of managerial talent as President?
And, remember, it was the folks from WV who put w into office. Now that's a good performance. I don't want to see it repeated.
bouttime

Posted by: bouttime | May 14, 2008 11:49 AM | Report abuse

I concur with the blog title whole-heartedly. Hillary is not going anywhere anytime soon. She is not going towards the nomination and she is not quitting. She is more in a status quo position, how fitting. The only direction Hillary is moving to is more campaign debt. Hopefully, her supporters will give her more money to reduce her campaign debt so that she can exit the presidential race gracefully.

Posted by: AJ | May 14, 2008 11:47 AM | Report abuse

Since you "Hardworking Whites" support Hillary so much, why don't you give her some of your hard-earned money?

I keep hearing how popular Hillary is with "Real Americans". Are real Americans just misers, is that it? Where's the money to back up this support?

If loud cheering by Internet blowhards were the criteria, Hillary would already be president. But it's not. I keep hearing what a fighter she is. But even that clown Romney invested far more of his money on a much longer shot.

Neither Hillary nor her supporters put their money where their mouth is. Money talks, bullsh1t walks, and the Hillary campaign is walking off into the sunset.

Posted by: B. Kaufmann | May 14, 2008 11:42 AM | Report abuse

If you want to understand the folks in WV & the mountain south, you need to read "Born Fighting" by Senator jim Webb (D-VA). Just bitter folks clinging to God & guns.

Picking on African Americans for their ethnic heritage--not PC
Picking on Scotch-Irish Hillbillies for their ethnic heritage--PC
Picking on Women like Clinton for their gender--Not PC
Picking on geezers like McCain for their age--PC.

Posted by: TartanMarine | May 14, 2008 11:40 AM | Report abuse

" but it is never the less true that the election is won in the swing states and Clinton is stronger in those states."

Among mostly Democratic Voters that is; who will moderate Republicans and Independants vote for? Lost in all the "sexy time" punditry about Obama's "loss" of white blue collar workers, is the fact that he DOES have appeal to independants, and moderate Repulbicans...evidenced by his endorsements from Eisenhower's grand-daughter, Lincoln Chaffee and others.

"So Democrats be ware- if we go ahead and nominate Obama- it will be a tough fight with no guarentees."

Are you say that Mrs Clinton with her high "Negatives" among the general electorate would be a shoo-in for the Presidency? Methinks that you have been listening to one too many Clinton campaign speeches...

Posted by: Hold_That_Tiger | May 14, 2008 11:35 AM | Report abuse

Hillary's failure to give Obama the extra few weeks for campaigning against McCain is mean spirited.

Her behavior in the face of personal crisis and the political certainty of Obama's nomination suggests that she is not qualified to be President of the United States.

Compare Obama who, at all times, when faced with failure, political crisis and racism has remained cool, cautious, gentlemanly, graceful and dignified. Personality and character are the two most vital ingredients in a good President because the translate into inspirational leadership. That's what this country needs now after eight years of self-ruination.

Posted by: Leigh | May 14, 2008 11:30 AM | Report abuse

How many ways can you say it is over?

1. Elvis is dead, no really, I know you spotted him in McDonald's in WV, but he really is dead.

2. If you keep campaigning like this you will give Bill another heart attack, but I know you love him and this is not your plan, right? I said, right?

3. You can't win while losing.

4. Winning is not in the eye of the beholder, you really are losing.

5. The remaining states have set up road blocks to keep your motorcade out.

6. Macy's is having a sale on pantsuits and scarf's in every possible color and variety, and if you hurry you can still make it.

7. Chelsea is too old to bring out the young voters on college campuses, they like Obama instead, yep...no...it is true...yep...so stop sending her there.

8. Just because you have checks in your checkbook does not mean you have spending money...put the Dunkin Donuts back, Bill. You too, Hillary, nope...you are broke, I said no more donuts...don't make me chase you!

9. Can't you just go home?

10. You don't get everything that you want out of life, no matter how you change the rules in the 4th inning.

11. If you drop out now, I promise to run interference when the bill collectors call.

12. Look, up at the sky, PIGS are flying! Sike! Made you look!

13. Don't attempt to adjust the TV...that really is Barack being sworn in.

14. It's over....It's over....It's over....no we don't want to look at any more fuzzy math...you can stop telling the SD to consider adding Mexico as the 51 state...it's so over.

15. Ok, you can come for visits at the White House, and Barack will let you sit in the BIG chair for a spell, won't that be fun? You can even twirl yourself around...and you can use the phone to make crank calls to Bill's new girlfriend.

16. We promise to elect you President of Fl and MI!

Posted by: Nena | May 14, 2008 11:21 AM | Report abuse

There is a huge logical hole in Clinton's argument about swing states. Her argument goes, "I am winning the swing states in the Democratic primary. The Democratic nominee needs to win the swing states to win the general election. Therefore, I will have a better chance as the Democratic nominee." The problem is that there is no reason to believe there is any correlation between the results in the Democratic primary and the results in the general election.

Does Clinton really think that if she were the nominee, she'd win Oklahoma in the general election? Does Clinton really think that when Obama is the nominee, McCain will win New York in the general election?

Does Clinton really think that if she were the nominee, McCain would win DC in the general election? Does Clinton really think that when Obama is the nominee, Obama will win Idaho in the general election?

Unfortunately for Clinton, this argument doesn't even matter. Mathematics will catch up to her, sooner rather than later. About 25 superdelegates have committed over the last seven days. Obama's getting about 90% of them. Project that out to June 3rd, when Montana and South Dakota are the last two states to vote, add in a conservative projection for Obama's pledged delegate wins between now and then, and you'll see that Obama will easily have made it to 2025 by then.

There's no hurry for Clinton to drop out of the race. She can stay in as long as she likes, but it doesn't matter: Obama will be the nominee.

Let me add as a postscript another reminder that anyone posting here who claims to be a Democrat but doesn't support Obama in the general election should be assumed to be a Republican under a false flag.

Posted by: Seeing the Inevitable | May 14, 2008 10:56 AM | Report abuse

Emlyn and Robin S., you are so right. I wanted to see a woman of my generation become President and now it is unlikley I will. It's sad to see Hillary out there in her fantasy world and know she has no one but herself to blame for the way she ran her campaign and the way her message has turned off so many Democratic voters, me included. The gift of grace, yes: may God grant it to Hillary.

Posted by: greyparrot | May 14, 2008 10:45 AM | Report abuse

A little conspiracy theory

We all know the Clintons have made a lot of money over the past recent years. I have a theory that Bill Clinton who has been paid tens of millions of dollars has been influence peddling. I have NO doubt that he has been all but promising Hillary would be president as he made who knows what kinds of deals with God knows who. It is very possible he has gotten himself mixed up with some bad people, the kind of people who don't like being Bu** S**ted. I also think they may wish to take matters into their own hands telling Hillary to never quit as they go about getting the chance to assassinate Obama bring the thing to an end and assuring Hillary would be president protecting their own interests. These unknown powers would then have a puppet in the white house under their thumb. Sound nuts? Don't be so sure and watch as events play out over the next few weeks. Bill and Hillary have a very bad history and are capable of a level of dishonesty and treachery that is mind boggling. I would say for them, murder would never be off the table to get what they want. I think they want Obama dead, that is what they are waiting for, not some scandal, they want him dead.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 10:43 AM | Report abuse

The fact that what Clinton says is true may or may not have an impact on the nomination but it is never the less true that the election is won in the swing states and Clinton is stronger in those states.

Democrats just need to ask Al Gore how important it is where you win your votes and not how many total votes you get.

The other thing that is made clear by Clintons wins in Ohio, PA, WV, NJ, Arkansas, and next week in KY is that she and Bill will be much more important to secure a win for Barack Obama than will be the likes of Ted Kennedy or John Kerry who couldn't even deliver MA for Obama.

I am an ardent Clinton supporter and once the nomination is finally decided if the nominee is Obama I will be an ardent Obama supporter, but in reality my vote won't matter. I vote in DC and Obama will in there handily so I am only one more vote.

This race will be one of two candidates the press love. Who do they love more may be the determining factor. When the Washington Post editorializes over John McCains weak climate control statement we may be seeing the answer.

John McCain is not a threatening Repbublican and the conservative wing of the party will come out if they see the chance to beat the most "liberal" Senator in the Senate. And you can be sure that tag will stick.

So Democrats be ware- if we go ahead and nominate Obama- it will be a tough fight with no guarentees.

Posted by: peter DC | May 14, 2008 10:27 AM | Report abuse

The fact that what Clinton says is true may or may not have an impact on the nomination but it is never the less true that the election is won in the swing states and Clinton is stronger in those states.

Democrats just need to ask Al Gore how important it is where you win your votes and not how many total votes you get.

The other thing that is made clear by Clintons wins in Ohio, PA, WV, NJ, Arkansas, and next week in KY is that she and Bill will be much more important to secure a win for Barack Obama than will be the likes of Ted Kennedy or John Kerry who couldn't even deliver MA for Obama.

I am an ardent Clinton supporter and once the nomination is finally decided if the nominee is Obama I will be an ardent Obama supporter, but in reality my vote won't matter. I vote in DC and Obama will in there handily so I am only one more vote.

This race will be one of two candidates the press love. Who do they love more may be the determining factor. When the Washington Post editorializes over John McCains weak climate control statement we may be seeing the answer.

John McCain is not a threatening Repbublican and the conservative wing of the party will come out if they see the chance to beat the most "liberal" Senator in the Senate. And you can be sure that tag will stick.

So Democrats be ware- if we go ahead and nominate Obama- it will be a tough fight with no guarentees.

Posted by: peter DC | May 14, 2008 10:26 AM | Report abuse

How does one define a swing state? Did Obama not win his share of swing states too? Remember, states like Illinois used to be swing states. Who's to say Illinois would not be rather insulted that after their Senator won the popular vote, pledged delegate vote, # of states won, leads in the national polls, and throroughly trounced his opponent in fundraising (something that will pay the Democratic party dividends for years to come), that the state wouldn't go for McCain in the general election. Electoral maps are not stagnant.

Posted by: CC | May 14, 2008 10:17 AM | Report abuse

The punditry is continuing to pound on Obama's trouble with "blue collar workers" (code speak for po'white folk.) I'd like to say a couple of things about this line of thinking. Number one, Obama has won in plenty of nearly all white States, including my own, WA. In all the other States that Mrs Clinton has won, Obama has also won significant numbers of white voters. But let's look at his complete failure last night in real terms.

Anyway, about WV (my dad was born and raised there, BTW, but he was a pretty unusual man; although uneducated, I know that he would have voted for Obama if he were still alive, because he would have had a daughter who would have explained to him why it would be in his best interest to do so.) Anyway, West Virginia is one of the poorest, least educated, oldest populations in the Country. West Virginia has one of the most homogenous populations in the country: almost all white christian. I know that the WV was touted as a Hillary Win, but I can guarantee you, if it were John Edwards as the opposing Candidate he would have won, in fact I honestly believe that ANY white alternative to bi-racial Obama would have taken the State.

Exit polls indicate that 21% of the voters said that "race was an Issue." That is right folks, nearly a quarter of the voters wouldn't vote for a "black" man. Scary I know. Also, people ask WHY would the voters go for Clinton when statistically she can't win? Again look at the unfortunate educational level of WV. Mrs Clinton, Chelsea, Bill practically camped out in WV; Hillary sold the fantasy that she could win, and WV bought it. Obama essentially didn't campaign there (a mistake, IMO.) But again, I say we need to look at the demographics in the States where Obama did win, and even the States where he didn't...most of these States, Iowa, WA, WI, etc. are nearly all white, and most have healthy blue collar workers. Even in the States he lost such as IN, plenty of white blue collar people voted for him. But the pundits clearly think that it is "sexier" to play up the supposed "racial" divide between him and older, uneducated, blue collar people and women. If Obama chooses his running mate carefully, he WILL overcome the endemic racism in some of these small rural states.

One more comment, remember that the Democrats are opposing someone tainted with the stench of the failed Bush presidency. I think that with hard work the Democrats will prevail.

Posted by: Hold_That_Tiger | May 14, 2008 10:17 AM | Report abuse

Impeachment, Whitewater, Pardons, "is," Hillarycare, right-wing conspiracy, etc. Still, Bill and Hillary came out on top.

The GOP is now on the ropes, why give them what they want most: a chance to defeat the Clintons. Sure, they will work hard to beat the new guy, but nothing will unite them like the Clintons. We need to move beyond the '90s. Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton deos not move me.

Posted by: BC | May 14, 2008 10:11 AM | Report abuse

if obama wins the nomination, mccain will be president. i myself will vote GOP bec. the presidency of america cannot be entrusted to an inexperiences, silken-tongued obama reading speeches written by highly paid writers.

my candidate is sen clinton. wake up superdelegates!

Posted by: mikel | May 14, 2008 10:04 AM | Report abuse

If Hillary cannot win the democratic nomination by the votes by democrats, how is she going to win the general election?
I think a lot of women are supporting Hillary because she is a woman and because of the Clinton name. Let face it, you can't just keep changing the rules as you go along, the rules are the rules, and this gives you an idea of what kind of presidency Hillary would be. If Hillary would be president, I guarantee we would almost all regret that choice. She is Bush/Cheney lite. Hillary knows she won't win the nomination, but she wants to have a say or is seeking leverage for something she wants from Obama should he be president. She is playing to the end to bargain for a desparate need she and Bill Clinton only knows...most likely it is a favor due her close friends or cronies...

Posted by: Lathan | May 14, 2008 10:04 AM | Report abuse

Hey Blert,

Ever figure out that the folksy image of the Republicans is just a gimmick to win votes? They're pretending to be part of rural America while implementing policies that actually hurt rural America. This is the party of oil barons and Wall Street. The Republican elite is laughing up its sleeves at rural America. Wake up!

Posted by: randy | May 14, 2008 9:50 AM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton's persistence in the primary races has gotten to the point where her inability to see the reality of the inevitable is much akin to President Bush's refusal to see the futility of staying in Iraq.

Posted by: Howard | May 14, 2008 9:50 AM | Report abuse

Hey Blert,

Ever figure out that the folksy image of the Republicans is just a gimmick to win votes? They're pretending to be part of rural America while implementing policies that actually hurt rural America. Republicans are laughing up their sleeves. Wake up!

Posted by: randy | May 14, 2008 9:49 AM | Report abuse

Yes Clinton's argument of being able to win in the fall moves me. I'm not the biggest fan of Clinton but at the same time I absolutely despise McCain. I can't handle another republican in the white house. Lewis Black, a comedian, said it best..."At first I gave George Bush a little rope, and then he hung us all with it." That's what McCain will continue to do. Somebody who says we'll stay in Iraq for 100 years if necessary is saying to me "I don't have what it takes to get the job done and make sure Americans are safe." I don't think the president of the United States should even joke about bombing another country let along singing about bombing Iran. I refuse to vote for a man who is in my opinion, just as unqualified to be president as George Bush is.

Posted by: Dan | May 14, 2008 9:21 AM | Report abuse

Let's see, Hillary wins the rural white high school educated racists. Gong the bell, please!

Posted by: Great | May 14, 2008 9:01 AM | Report abuse

What a bunch of sexist and racist blather. Too bad we are that divided. These comments show how divided people are- and give me the feeling people won't vote for Hillary because she's a woman and a Clinton. Most of the sexism is veiled, but it's there. They won't vote for Obama because he's black. That's not veiled.

As for the primary process- If you need a clear reason why HRC should not be president, its because of her inability to understand and act on the reality around her. Someone who is this out of touch with the state of the primary shouldn't be president of the State.

Posted by: Dan | May 14, 2008 8:29 AM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton's main messages -- that she can win the nomination if she gets enough votes; that she can carry the swing states in the general election, and that she'd make the best president -- are so baffling it's hard to wrap my wits around her reasoning.

1. There just aren't that many more votes to get;
2. winning swing states in a primary -- against a member of your own party -- doesn't mean you're uniquely qualified to carry the state in a general election; and
3. although she could be an okay president, there's a dwindling basis for claiming she's the best choice.

The third reason above is the one that concerns me most: her unrelenting optimism about her chances of winning has become alarming. Each time she projects her certainty about it, she seems more and more out of touch with reality.

It's that break with reality that's gut wrenching. Watching her carry on as a winner, while her campaign is gasping for air, is approaching Shakespearean proportions. A once very likeable and capable woman appears to be losing her mind, and we're having to watch it happen. I wish her the swift gift of grace.


Posted by: Robin S. | May 14, 2008 8:25 AM | Report abuse

Emlyn, with American Idol syndrome waning with the economy, voters are assessing the pragmatic strengths of the candidates to turn around the mess Bush leaves. "Popularity" is giving way to hiring an executive. The times have changed.

The devil you know...

Posted by: Hannah | May 14, 2008 8:19 AM | Report abuse

Hannah wrote:
"This historic candidacy of the first woman with a real chance to be president is such a mirror of society now. She's written off, dissed, passed over and she simply endures, getting stronger and better. She's being made more presidential by this campaign."

I categorically disagree with this assessment.

Senator Clinton's blatant political opportunism is precisely why she is losing. People didn't write her off or "diss" her because she was nice, but because she was NOT nice: Employing the worst type of politics.

Look around; nobody wants 4 more years of that kind of "presidential" behavior.

Whether her resilience to the inevitable return fire that she herself instigated is somehow evidence of her electability is irrational; low-ball campaigns come from low-ball candidates.

Either you recognize why it is that she lost her popularity or you don't. But any attempts to manufacture strengths from the transparent weaknesses of her corrupt moral compass is disingenuous.

Posted by: Emlyn | May 14, 2008 8:05 AM | Report abuse

Clinton is too closely aligned with the McCain policies without the sincerity to win in November.

Posted by: Oscar | May 14, 2008 8:01 AM | Report abuse

This historic candidacy of the first woman with a real chance to be president is such a mirror of society now. She's written off, dissed, passed over and she simply endures, getting stronger and better. She's being made more presidential by this campaign.

A woman has to be twice as good as a man and even then men won't want her in the boys club. Despite the infatuation of the male media for Obama, the people who respond to her are the vast middle who choose the president.

If the Dems want to win in November, they're going to have to swallow their macho and acknowledge that their strongest candidate is a girl who's taking it to the convention.

I can't wait to see her delegates parade.

Posted by: Hannah | May 14, 2008 7:46 AM | Report abuse

After another four years of waiting to nominate a candidate from the Democratic party for POTUS we are chosing someone who was in the Illinois STATE senate in 2005? This is our MOST QUALIFIED person? And we thought Bush was stupid. We deserve to lose this election!

Posted by: Stupified | May 14, 2008 7:36 AM | Report abuse

Hillary is offering the same spin she always has--only the states I've won matter, only the constituencies that have supported me matter. I'm tired of hearing it, especially in WV (and KY) where voters are admittedly racist. I am angry and insulted that WV (and KY) would be given any weight at all. People like that should not be accommodated.

Anyway, I wish Hillary had been more gracious to Obama througout the campaign. A joint ticket would be unbeatable, I think. But as it is, Hillary doesn't match Obama's message of change, and she would look like a hypocrite if she took a place on Obama's ticket now.

I can't wait until June 3rd. The fat lady is clearing her throat.

Posted by: Seneca | May 14, 2008 7:31 AM | Report abuse

Chris, a suggestion for a more appropriate title for this subject, one based on how Clinton and her people conducted their campaign... "Clinton burns cross on Obama's lawn" or, how about "Clinton partisans lynch Obama in WV". They, afterall, based their campaign and appeal to racism and false rumors so these titles have the advantage of being descriptive

Posted by: MikeB | May 14, 2008 7:02 AM | Report abuse

West Virginia, huh?

The only weakness that Senator Clinton's (mostly pointless) win might suggest about Senator Obama is that he must overcome not just political loyalties, but racial prejudice as well.

It's like passing up Michael Jordan or Halle Berry. Sigh. Old habits die hard.

Posted by: cbmtrx | May 14, 2008 6:42 AM | Report abuse

Obama= Dukakis redux.

Posted by: Denine | May 14, 2008 6:40 AM | Report abuse

If the W.VA. primary happened before Hillary's narrow win in IN and defeat in NC, would she be acting the same way now? I don't think so. It seems to me throughout this campaign she has been a sore loser and a sore winner. I don't care if she stays in as long as she displays graciousness. I haven't seen that so far except on rare occasions, so I am hoping for the best.

Posted by: Anne | May 14, 2008 6:05 AM | Report abuse

Interesting that she said "I can win the nomination if YOU decide I should." Who was she talking to, the superdelegates?

Posted by: Jerome | May 14, 2008 6:05 AM | Report abuse

Elitist,

Of course this is part of the problem with Democrats in rural America. The wine-sipping, cosmopolitan elites in the party (who, by the way, ideologically disdain "elitism" even as they practice it) look down on Red states, rural lifestyles, etc., and regard people in those categories as uneducated hicks who are not capable of making rational, informed decisions. I mean, how else to explain that these people would vote Republican? It certainly can't be that these people have brains enough to realize when they are being mocked, can it?

Posted by: blert | May 14, 2008 5:51 AM | Report abuse

I haven't read all of the expressed convictions below, as I'm not a US citizen myself (it would seem to me that as a US citizen, I would have a desire to focus more on who would be the better president, rather than on who could win it against McCain). But I have been following the campaign closely since January, and I realize the argument is one that the Clinton campaign has repeatedly put forward.

But what strikes me is I have never read a proper analysis of this argument. Is losing the Democratic primary in a (swing) state an indicator you are likely to lose the general election in that state? And if at all, how strongly?

The other point that seems important to me is: supposing the Clinton campaign is correct, weren't there a few other swing states (or states that could be won from the Republicans) where the assumption would hold in the opposite sense, i.e. that only Obama can win them? Virginia (not W.-Va.) comes to my mind, here, but I'm not sure overall.

Posted by: Florian | May 14, 2008 5:24 AM | Report abuse

Just a comment. There are alot of jokes about how WV doesnt matter or that it is "cosmopolitan." Dont you think this attitude is one reason why Democrats have trouble in the heartland and blue collar voters?

Posted by: Elitist | May 14, 2008 5:13 AM | Report abuse

Odd how white voters voting for Hillary is seen as just the way it is, whereas black voters voting for Obama is down to racist blacks.

Jeez well done HRC supporters for trying to turn America back 50 years and promote segregation.

Why not just ask for a bill to be introduced to take away the votes from people of color.

Obama is half-white- whoops, I guess he would still be entitled to run, even in segregated America.

HRC supporters using sexism as a valid reason for HRC to keep going, do you see any Obama supporters using racism as valid reason for Obama not to quit?

Yet HRC supporters continue to discuss skin colour as a viability factor for the Presidential candidate.

Shame on you (White HRC Supportering) Americans, G-D you Americans (yes-I'm white and I can say it too)!

Posted by: Alex | May 14, 2008 5:03 AM | Report abuse

Clinton's argument about swing states is hollow. Obama has won in potential swing states like Missouri, Colorado, Virginia, Wisconsin, Minnesota, etc. In Michigan, Clinton could barely get more than half of the vote when she was the only major candidate on the ballot.

Clinton has won several important swing states...in the Democratic primaries. Kerry and Gore won those states, too, and other Democrats before them, but this is hardly a guarantee of winning in the fall. The results of a Democrat running against a Democrat say nothing about how either of those Democrats may match up against a Republican.

Democrats have made their decision about who they think looks strongest in the fall, and Clinton is merely holding on now in hopes of forcing Obama to pay her mounting debts.

Posted by: blert | May 14, 2008 5:01 AM | Report abuse

Swoosie--you are so right on. Race is THE CARD that Obama plays most efficiently. All the while he is clearly the racist. The world is flat.

Posted by: bob | May 14, 2008 4:43 AM | Report abuse

Obama and his crew will never "rehab" me into voting for him. If Hillary is not on that ticket, I won't trust him with the country.

Posted by: susan | May 14, 2008 4:42 AM | Report abuse

It is so interesting to see how every single time Clinton wins one big, that old race card is pulled out of the deck to demean her. Why is that? I think it must be that the OBama team does this to distract from the truth about him. He is more polarizing than they want to supers to believe. The race card freaks out the typical left-wing of the party. Doesn't matter how it is played, but when it is played, they jump and freak out and run. Obama's team is expert with the card. Who else could demean Hillary, Bill, Ferraro, Stephenopoulous, Gibson, Maggie Williams, all the republicans, and so on and so forth. It is a big problem, this race card. I know that Obama is the racist who plays it best and he was taught by the master---Rev. Wright. The bigot supreme.

Posted by: swoosie | May 14, 2008 4:39 AM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton is ONLY still in this nomination battle because of the slim chance something horrific would happen to Obama. If that is not Clintonesque I do not know what is.

Senator Obama, you sir need to remember the kind of people you are dealing with here. This clan from Arkansas can fabricate a tragedy if they felt this was their last chance to attain power. Does the name Vince Foster mean anything? How about the Rose Law Firm, Whitewater, burning flags during wartime on foreign soil, Jennifer Flowers and cigars used on kids that could
easily have been their daughter? That is the white trash you dealing with and I would be very mindful of truly angering the Clintons.

Hillary has convinced herself she will stay in this until the end and pick up another state or two and make it look as if she is handing you the nomination thus taking the moral high ground. After Hillary throws all her support to Obama she will once again be be well liked by the black voters (though she has already destroyed Obama's chance at a general election win) and she will stand back while Obama goes ahead and takes the nomination (as if Hillary just gave it to her)and then loses the general election. Then she will say "I told you so" and she will just come around in 4 years and take her swing at McCain. If she did not have 4 years from now as her big "power grab" she may well cause that horrific mistake and make Obama lose the nomination...Who knows just what these people are capable of! But Obama should be OK!

ps
Senator Obama, please do not do anything stupid! We want you to win!

Posted by: Roger Cossack | May 14, 2008 4:08 AM | Report abuse

Facts
What has Clinton done to earn our vote, lie, cheat, and cover up.
Her only claim to fame is that she use to live in the White House and even there she tried to tell the American people what "she" wanted for them and the last time I knew she was a nobody who wanted to be in her husbands shoes.

Senator Barack Obama, who is he, what has he done in his very short time in office. His mom is a marxs and raised him in a church that is glad that American got bombed as we got what we deserved according to his minsters teaching at the church were Obama never missed hardly a Sunday.

Posted by: P. Duncanson | May 14, 2008 4:05 AM | Report abuse

Obama is the patron of a well-documented racist, the Reverend Wright. Hillary Clinton didn't spend her Sundays listening to this racist, nor take her daughter to hear this racist. To suggest that Hillary is a "racist bigot" as some of the comments below do is the lowest form of race-baiting, and the more Obama supporters make these accusations, the less likely Clinton supporters will vote for Obama in the general election.

And let's not forget Michelle Obama either.

Posted by: Jonathan | May 14, 2008 3:45 AM | Report abuse

Hillary, your victory tonight is hollow because you have encouraged division and racial overtones to our party. You should be ashamed of yourself. You are so self-absorbed that you are willing to sacrifice the election to further your own lust for power. You will not win now and you will not win 2012. You will be exposed for the fraud you are. You racist bigot.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 3:37 AM | Report abuse

To the naysayers, not only have Obama shown he can attract the white vote (over 30% in "racist" West Virginia...apparently McCain wouldn't have fared any better), he has shown his influence at congressional levels is beyond Teflon, its potent -- cite the back-to-back Republican congressional losses in Illinoia, Louisiana and Missippi -- in spite of the increasingly anachronistic Republican attack machine demonizing Obama every chance it got.

Look closely at the details, my friends, and especially be wary of the CNN, Fox, MSNBC ratings-driven propaganda. It's in their interest to drag this thing out as long as possible. This race ended in February; even the Rev Wright non-story made no difference.

Senator Barack Obama is destined to be the next POTUS. This is history in the making on many levels. Americans everywhere should be proud.

You're on the verge of being envied again by the rest of the world.

Lastly, as the gas tax holiday flop showed, Obama not only has a grasp of macroeconomic, he is willing to be honest to US voters and not resort to pandering.

Camelot is coming, America. Even if you can't see it, you're on the verge of a new era of greatness.

Vote Obama 08

Posted by: CanadaForObama.CA | May 14, 2008 3:19 AM | Report abuse

Folks, I tell you...emotions most be the only fuel driving Clinton voters here.

When a voter goes into a voting booth and casts a ballot that:

Firstly, does not advance the likely flagbearer of their party

Secondly, is wasted on a candidate that will never win

It can only mean that voter wants the party to fail in November! Period.

Posted by: Duerga | May 14, 2008 2:59 AM | Report abuse

WV results are 99% in and Hillary won by 41% and 145,000 votes. Two of the must win states are Ohio and Pa. that most agree Hillary will win among others including Fla. The way to 270 EC votes are almost impossible for Obama when we look at each state by its self and how over many years the results of the GE has been and the current trends.

Posted by: lylepink | May 14, 2008 2:57 AM | Report abuse

The argument is weak. Obama losing to Clinton in some states does not imply that he will lose to McCain in those states, any more than his wins in some states implies that she would lose those states to McCain.

My own assessment of relative electability runs as follows:

a. However tight the current polling looks, either Democrat is a formidable favorite in the fall. Incumbent parties just don't retain power with the "heading in the wrong direction" numbers polling the way they are. The results in MS are a big reminder of just how much trouble the Republicans are really in. Nor is McCain's personal popularity enough to offset that -- his age, and his proneness to gaffs are going to cut those positives when the spotlight finally shifts away from the interminable Democratic race. And that picture of him embracing Bush pretty much closes the deal. The disunity among the Democrats in the spring will be a distant memory by the fall. This means that the democrats don't have to sit here and split hairs about who is more electable. Any difference one way or the other is negligible compared to the factors which have historically been decisive. (Ask any economist about who wins when the economy is in the tank). Clinton's argument relies on a static mindset that somehow imagines that 2008 will be a replay of the close elections of 2000 and 2004. But that just isn't so.

b. If we must turn to the issue of relative electability, Clinton's case is not obvious. On a straight-up comparison of who is better at managing a campaign, Obama creams her. More money, better strategy, less drama. Race will hurt him. Gender will hurt her. Her high negatives are well-entrenched and not going anywhere. It's too soon to tell if his negatives (the un-American too liberal too elite thing) will stick with Obama, but there's a good chance they won't so much. He's likeable, and exposure usually raises his positives. Throw in the fact that Obama actually isn't a 60's style anti-patriotic guy and that he's not hardly an elitist, and the Republicans risk the problem that in overreaching (tagging him with all three) they miss on their one good shot (liberal voting record). If they think they are fighting Dukakis/Kerry redux they are missing the appeal (hint: Obama has charisma, something the other two were lacking).

c. Bypassing Obama to get to Clinton hurts her electability that much more. It would also betray the party's principle, since it would essentially be a concession that the party should cater to the whims of an electorate that is supposedly too racist to elect a black man even in these auspicious circumstances. I still think the points in (a) means she'd win. The cost would be that the Democrats would lose the loyalty of the young generation and there would be consequences in the coming decades.

They should stick with Obama. He's far more likely to win than not. And the Democrats sew up the loyalty of an entire generation that will be voting for the next several decades.

Posted by: Maggie | May 14, 2008 2:55 AM | Report abuse

I did not hear any "defiance" in Hillary's speech tonight. I heard her say that she would support the Democratic candidate "with all her heart".
As we all know by now, Hillary is not going to win this nomination. She knows that the odds against her winning are astronomical.
Yet, she goes on. Does it EVER cross anyone's mind that millions upon millions of people in this country wish to see her fulfill the candidacy of the first woman? NOooooo, it just doesn't seem to be part of the mindset of the men who cover her.
It doesn't matter that she will lose. It matters that she put herself in the position to run at all and that she has managed to garner the votes of many millions of people.
It would be a huge disappointment to the many millions who have yet to vote if she deprived them of that opportunity.
Did anyone pay attention to the part of her speech tonight when she spoke of the elderly woman in hospice who asked her daughter to bring her an absentee ballot so she, who lived through the time when women could not vote, COULD vote for a woman?
Most males think this is entirely inconsequensial. Who cares about an old woman voting for her? She won't be alive for the November election anyway, so who cares, huh?
Well, news flash, the WOMAN thing, the WOMAN vote is huge for WOMEN.
HIllary, of all people, knows this. For that reason alone she should continue her quest and give the women, at least, in all the remaining states the opportunity to know that for one bright shining moment one of their own ascended to these heights.
There are many divides in this country and one of them is the gulf between men and women. Period. Still.

Posted by: cms1 | May 14, 2008 2:52 AM | Report abuse

well then you guys missed CNN. Clintons campaign strategist was very clear that Clinton can win and that after tonight, delegates are going to begin flocking back to her. The Unions are still behind her as well. Don't forget she has won the states that matter in a general election AND her WV win just shook all confidence in Obama being able to get the votes in these swing states. Her case to the superdelegates is that she is the strongest candidate to win against McCain. When FL (critical state with Hillary win) and MI are counted...she has the strongest case for winning the GE.

Nope, Hillary is confident she can win the nomination...why else would record numbers of WV Dems come out to vote for her? Because they think she lost? The media has been shoveling crap down our throats and we're not listening.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 2:49 AM | Report abuse

"If you think I'm making this up...listen to the Republicans, they have known that only Hillary can defeat McCain for a while now. It is not rocket science."

Don't 68% of those fellows think Bush is doing a good job?

Posted by: DDAWD | May 14, 2008 2:40 AM | Report abuse

"But she obviously doesn't think she can win the nomination. The words she said about Obama establish that very clearly."

Agreed. She was uncharacteristically gracious

Posted by: DDAWD | May 14, 2008 2:38 AM | Report abuse

actually you can read about the DNC being required to seat the FL and MI delegates on the web (link of the Florida Democratic Party web site). Experts have said that a judge not forcing the DNC to seat them would be "inconceivable".

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 2:37 AM | Report abuse

There is no constitutional right to vote in a primary. Florida and Michigan, should they choose to sue to get their delegates seated, would lose because the parties can choose their nominees however they want.

But it's moot, because even if HRC were given the FL and MI votes, she still wouldn't catch BHO.

Posted by: A Lawyer | May 14, 2008 2:32 AM | Report abuse

"If Obama did somehow get the nomination, Clinton supporters will not vote for Obama and McCain will win. At least we would know we put a stop to this malicious cult following and kept an unqualified, inexperienced, racist, arrogant, unpatriotic "57 states" nut out of the white house."

Hey, at least you've got your priorities straight

Posted by: DDAWD | May 14, 2008 2:30 AM | Report abuse

When are people going to start poking holes in HRC's "strongest candidate" line? If she is the strongest, then why has she lost more contests, has fewer delegates and trails badly in fundraising? What new startegic vision is going to be hoisted upon Hillary and her team that will prevent errors in judgement such as not contesting the caucus states, learning how to fund raise on the net and settling on a message? Strongest-get real.

________
um, you do realize that running against another Democrat is hugely different from running in the national election? Already many Dems will not vote for Obama since frankly he scares us; this would imply that independents are even more so not going to vote for him. Now let's add in the Republicans who may have jumped ship from the Rep. Party...they'll jump right back.

Strongest among Democrats means nothing. You have to have a candidate able to draw in wide demographic support. Obama can't pull that off. This is why the Clinton's, Gore, Kerry, were able to draw centrist support. Obama is not only black but also considered far to the left. Again I don't agree with the race paradigm but that is the reality of how the average American will vote just as 90% of the black population voted for their own skin color.

Lastly the Republican campaign chest vastly outnumbers the Democratic one. They will be sure to use those funds to paint him as a radical America hating Muslim extremist in a thousand commercials.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 2:26 AM | Report abuse

Did anyone else think the speech was defiant? Yeah, she said she would continue on and how the primary was good for the Democrats. However, I don't remember any contrasts with Obama or statements on how Obama can't win a certain demographic. In fact, she said that she would support the nominee. Almost seemed like the beginning of the end for me.

How did you all interpret it?

Posted by: DDAWD | May 14, 2008 2:24 AM | Report abuse

Mason: Math is my best subject, BTW. I only put the Mass. Poll out there to show the weakness of Obama in perhaps the "Bluest" of the Blue states. There are the 5 [five] key swing states and according to my Math, by losing any one of them could cost the Dems the GE. WV has 5 [five] EC votes and some want to discount us, but stop and think about our history going back to 1916, no Dem has won the Prez without carrying WV in the GE. Those are FACTS that the Obama team doesn't want known.

Posted by: lylepink | May 14, 2008 2:14 AM | Report abuse

She's just wasting her contributors money that could have gone to a general election fund at this point. She should pay that 20 million out of her own pocket. She's got it.

Posted by: Dave | May 14, 2008 2:13 AM | Report abuse

When are people going to start poking holes in HRC's "strongest candidate" line? If she is the strongest, then why has she lost more contests, has fewer delegates and trails badly in fundraising? What new startegic vision is going to be hoisted upon Hillary and her team that will prevent errors in judgement such as not contesting the caucus states, learning how to fund raise on the net and settling on a message? Strongest-get real.

Posted by: kranman | May 14, 2008 2:12 AM | Report abuse

Annon @ 1:44:
"Hillary is the nominee that can win and she is the most qualified."

If this were true, she'd be winning instead of waiting for BHO to quit.

The rest of your post is half-truths, red herrings, and outright lies. White people won't vote for a black man? He might be angry, elite, unpatriotic or worse yet... Muslim? Seriously? That's your position? What a sad world you live in. If this country judges its prospective leaders solely by the color of their skin rather than by their character or ideas, then frankly we deserve whatever ill fate follows.

___________
gads you people are lost. LOOK... You do not understand the average American voter. Bush won 2 terms because the average American voter is afraid of gay marriage. If that's all it took to get Bush in twice then Obama does not stand a chance!

a. He is black in a country that is 83% white.

b. c. d. e. f. g....Need i go on? This is not to say I agree with this paradigm. I understand it. Donald Duck could understand this. Obama can not win in a national election. He would be swift boated X 10,000. Obama will be the reason McCain wins in Nov. Hillary is our only chance of winning.

If you think I'm making this up...listen to the Republicans, they have known that only Hillary can defeat McCain for a while now. It is not rocket science.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 2:08 AM | Report abuse

Boutan-
That's how I read the speech as well.

I don't think she's aiming for a VP slot because, frankly, BHO won't have her as she wouldn't do much for him. Does he really need to win NY by a landslide? She probably wants a a leadership role in the US Senate

If it's latinos or western states he's after: Bill Richardson or another western governor.
If it's VA/NC/SC (yes, they're close now), it will be Warner, Kaine, or at the outside, Webb.
There's probably someone that could help out with the rust belt as well, but no one springs to mind at this late hour.

Posted by: Mason | May 14, 2008 2:08 AM | Report abuse

Is that all Hillary could do in West Virginia after all the red meat she has been handing out in recent days? I thought she would win West Virginia 99%. For these results, WV seems to have improved in race relatitons immensely.
Her arrogance and sense of entitlement are a liability for the party and herself, I submit.

Posted by: marcus | May 14, 2008 2:03 AM | Report abuse

Annon @ 1:44:
"Hillary is the nominee that can win and she is the most qualified."

If this were true, she'd be winning instead of waiting for BHO to quit.

The rest of your post is half-truths, red herrings, and outright lies. White people won't vote for a black man? He might be angry, elite, unpatriotic or worse yet... Muslim? Seriously? That's your position? What a sad world you live in. If this country judges its prospective leaders solely by the color of their skin rather than by their character or ideas, then frankly we deserve whatever ill fate follows.

Posted by: Mason | May 14, 2008 1:58 AM | Report abuse

I believe that Hillary should stay in the race until June 3rd. For her to get out now would be unfair and disrespectful of her supporters. She will lose a close and hard fought election, and she will have done so fairly. FL and MI will be seated, but their delegates will be allocated proportionately and, thanks to Obama's blowout in NC and close loss in IN, will not be sufficient to give her the victory.

Hillary does indeed know this race is over. She's a smart individual and a better politician. I hope she continues to stay classy and runs this thing out like someone worth admiring. I hope she does her supporters proud in KY and Puerto Rico.

But this is Obama's year.

Posted by: P Diddy | May 14, 2008 1:56 AM | Report abuse

In an election where the Democrats have added over 3M new voters nationwide, 200K in PA, 300K in OH alone...your "unelectability" argument is patently ludicrous and nothing more than the typical attempt of the calcified Washington elite to spread fear, uncertainty, and doubt about this race.

None of the math anywhere indicates that either Democrat would lose to McCain. You cannot look at the national polls. You need to look at the county by county polls. In the absence of those, all you need to see is which counties flip because of the Democratic turnout generated by newly registered voters or independents who crossed over. Hint: these newly registered voters have been trending towards Obama 60-65% of the time.

Barack Obama can tap a donor network of 1.5M people. He can tap a volunteer network of 1M people. He can help down-ticket races through turnout alone (here in Washington State, the WA-8 could very well turn against Dave Reichert and for Darcy Burner based on Democratic turnout driven by Obama's ability to bring the "latte liberals" to the table). Throughout the country, Obama helps candidates much more than he could hurt them. And in the districts where he could potentially hurt them, we've already seen the Republican attempts to associate candidates with Obama fail miserably.

What you're seeing is the perfect storm against the Republicans. They have to run on an 8 year record of incompetence, arrogance, and nepotism. Neither Obama nor Clinton have even seriously turned their attention towards John McCain. Once they do (whichever of the two prevails), this election won't even be close.

Posted by: P Diddy | May 14, 2008 1:52 AM | Report abuse

I've just re-read Hillary's speech. It is actually quite well written. But get this for the third paragraph... really, only a few sentences in to the speech...

"I want to commend Senator Obama and his supporters. This continues to be a hard-fought race, from one end of our country to the other. And yes, we've had a few dust-ups along the way, but our commitment to bring America new leadership that will renew America's promise means that we have always stood together on what is most important."

When you couple this together with the fact that not one word of the speech was trash talk against Obama, then it seems to me she knows she is on her way out.

I think she continues so
a) she goes out on a high on May 20

b) she pays off some debt with internet fundraising after a few big wins

c) she secures a future for herself after spending the next week spinning a conciliatory message (that could be VP, or senior role in the party, or as nominee in 2012 if Obama stumbles)

But she obviously doesn't think she can win the nomination. The words she said about Obama establish that very clearly.

Posted by: Boutan | May 14, 2008 1:52 AM | Report abuse

Am I really moved by the expected results?

Not at all, Chris. It was exactly predicted by Queen Hillary herself.
She has made it overwhelmingly among white, uneducated rural and blue collar workers

Not all rurals and white workers are uneducated and rednecks. But Hillary said so concerning West Verginia. She has always been wrong, but in this case, the results seem to prove her right, for once.

Posted by: bekabo | May 14, 2008 1:51 AM | Report abuse

Lylepink:
Regarding your EV tallies - no offense, but math isn't your strongest suit is it?

Let someone else do the dirty work:

http://www.electoral-vote.com
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com

And MA vote Republican? Unless Romney is the VP don't make me laugh.

Posted by: Mason | May 14, 2008 1:47 AM | Report abuse

Hillary's argument does not sway me. Winning in a Democratic primary states that swing between Democrats and Republicans in a General election means nothing as far as predicting success in those states in a general election.

That's like deciding whether a win in the Super Bowl will predict that football team's chances in a hockey game six months later -- different sport, different time.

I am more persuaded by the argument that Obama can hold on to the bulk of the more establishment Democrats that are voting for Clinton as well as bring into the general election the new voters he's brought into the primary. Those voters are likely to be disillusioned with a Clinton win and with no history of party loyalty, may stay home in November.

That said, there is hardly any reason for Clinton to quit. She's got nothing to lose. And the time is so short now before the primaries are over. Kentucky and Oregon will vote May 20. Puerto Rico holds sway on June 1 and Montana and South Dakota wind up the primary season on June 3, just three weeks away.

Here in Montana, Bill Clinton is paying his third visit to the state. He hit Havre, Great Falls and Helena last month, Billings last week, Kalispell today and here in Missoula tomorrow. Of course a visit by Bill isn't the same as a visit by Hillary, but then again, Bill is not your ordinary candidate spouse.

Both candidates visited Butte and Missoula last month. Obama's superior campaign chest is showing itself already with six offices open in the state (Hillary has one)and Obama television ads running regularly (We've yet to see a Hillary ad).

Interestingly enough, there are no published opinion polls yet indicating where the candidates stand in Montana. In neighboring South Dakota, a month-old poll shows Obama with a good, but not commanding lead with plenty of undecideds.

But it's hard to compare Montana and South Dakota. There are significant differences in the demographics of the two states.

I think the fact that the Democrats have remained at the top of the news through the entire primary season helps the party. The strife of the primary will drop into the background after June 3. The superdelegates will move after polls close June 3 and by the 4th or 5th, Obama will unofficially have the nomination sewed up. The convention will be a coronation and love festival.

Just look at the congressional election in Missippi. This is the third "safe" Republican seat in a row that has gone to a Democrat in a special election. The Republicans are headed for a huge shipwreck this fall. Not only will they take a cold salty bath in Congress but they have as a presidential candidate that thinks things are going well in a war 70 percent of the people disagree with.

A recession will also become official by election time and McCain's ideas on the economy display all the imagination of Herbert Hoover in 1932. Either Clinton or Obama will clean his clock in November, but it looks like it will be Obama.

Posted by: AlaninMissoula | May 14, 2008 1:44 AM | Report abuse

P diddy, you may think he is the best candidate, BUT he is not the candidate that can win. You may as well be voting for Ralph Nader or the Mormon guy.

Again: USA is 83% white. For that reason alone a black president will not be chosen. Now let's add in the Reverend Wright, the Muslim element, the racism, black elitism, the Muslim name, the problem he has with whites, the unpatriotic USA hatred, the refusal to wear a flag pin, that he will not say the pledge of allegiance, the lack of experience,...blah, blah, blah...

Make your vote count rather than throwing it away on Nader, eght-um, Obama.

Hillary is the nominee that can win and she is the most qualified.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 1:44 AM | Report abuse

I want her to bow out. Her wanting to be President has nothing to do with her being qualified, but has everything to do with her ego and her lust for power and to be able to be the bully on the street. Every speech she gives is always about her. Well, I'm not in agreement with any of her plans. And what really bothers me is that we are supposed to be free in America and there always seems to be some group of people who think what they want and believe should be shoved down others. I'm starting to believe John Edwards when he speaks about two Americas. I think there are, and I'm in the one that wants everyone to live and let live. Stay out of my life and my way. Besides, the world is too complicated now. Everything they want to do has to be at the expense of someone else. I don't believe that this is the way the Founding Fathers wanted America to be. Hillary is no more qualified than anyone else running. I'm sick of everybody making remarks toward someone qualifications. Well, the last thing the Founding Fathers wanted was someone who thought they were so qualified. If you read the requirements for President, I think you'll see that experience wasn't one of them. It puzzles me how the Founding Fathers had the wisdom to grasp this concept and make it work and we in today's society don't have a clue. We think it's a right of passage to some that they try and control everyone's life. I'd rather vote for Obama, because at least he addresses the people and wants to include us in the decision making. I'm looking for a Leader who can be a President, not a Dictator looking for the right opportunity.

Posted by: Marvice | May 14, 2008 1:42 AM | Report abuse

Annon @1:28
Right. The super Ds are going to tell a black man, "Sorry.... You won by any metric, but West Virginia and Kentucky convinced us you're just not electable."

Then they'll watch the Democratic party lose for 20 years as it struggles to convince the African-American community to trust them again.

Plus, there's the crushing arithmetic of the situation. BHO needs far fewer super Ds than HRC. They could go two-for-one from here to the end on super Ds and he'd probably still pull it out.

Posted by: Mason | May 14, 2008 1:39 AM | Report abuse

Some victory. A bunch of ignorant white crackers and their feminists allies get "passes" to act like the worst kind of racists and bigots, act on ignorance and self pity and anger. Manipulate the process and rules to suit themselves. This sounds more like a meeting of the American Nazi Party than a Democratic primary.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 1:36 AM | Report abuse

Opa2: Mass. is in play with Obama only ahead of McCain by 1.5 to 2% in some recent Polls and Hillary has a 15+% lead. The Media Pundits continues to spin the idea that Obama is a winner, when the opposite is TRUE. Every way I can give him the benefit of any doubt, I still cannot reach 200 Electoral Votes for him. With Hillary, I have her well over 300 and an almost certain winner in the states the Dems must win. Bottom Line, Hillary wins, Obama lose.

Posted by: lylepink | May 14, 2008 1:35 AM | Report abuse

Sam, FL and MI would not put Hillary over the top. Read my post further down for the real math.

Posted by: P Diddy | May 14, 2008 1:35 AM | Report abuse

It's clear that Obama is on his way to the nomination. I'm worried about the general election. He's done ok among whites and extremely well between blacks.Clinton has been doing great in the big states and among whites. How well will Obama do in November? It's sad that MI and FLA voters voices are not being heard, if that was the case Hillary would have on top right now. I've been leaning towards Clinton, but I'll certainly support the Democratic nominee. The question is: comes November ia America ready to put Obama in the WH or is it going to be another 8 years of Republican? I'm looking forward the response in November.

Posted by: Sam (from Arizona) | May 14, 2008 1:34 AM | Report abuse

hillary is hanging tuff and she should... because she knows she will win. "o bomb a" bombed another primary. he has only won one primary in two months. the bloom is off the rose. he if fini!

Posted by: o scam a hater | May 14, 2008 1:33 AM | Report abuse

I didn't forget it. I specifically said, as we have witnessed currently, that the superdelegates are going to break for Obama.

I had an analysis of this a few threads back.

I personally resent being called a cult follower, or that I have my head in the clouds. I have researched the candidates and am quite conversant on all the issues. Barack Obama is the candidate of my choice, for a variety of reasons, including knowledge of the issues.

But just as important to me is his ability to inspire the American people to stand with him to reform the Democratic Party, and what I believe will, by extension, cause a massive reformation of the Republican Party as well.

Moreover, JFK was a transformational candidate for the Baby Boomer generation. I believe Obama is a transformational candidate for the post-Boomer era. Like JFK, he will inspire the GenX, GenY, and Millenial generations to become involved in politics and their government. This is a great thing for our democracy.

Posted by: P Diddy | May 14, 2008 1:33 AM | Report abuse

OKh silly anon:

"57 states" was a misspeak. It should have been "57 Primaries and Caucuses". Count them up. All of them. Don't forget DA (Democrats Abroad - 8 halfpower delegates).

But if you think BHO thinks there are 57 states in the union, I've got a bridge I can sell you. It's down at the end of 14th Street SW and has only been hit by one plane....

Posted by: Mason | May 14, 2008 1:31 AM | Report abuse

you forgot p-diddy the last magical element of a super-delegate vote. They must vote for whom they think can win in the general election. Hillary has these delegates in her pocket and has since the beginning.

Do you really think an unqualified, racist, America hating, ex-Muslim black man named Barack HUSSEIN Obama can be President in a country that is 83% white, mostly christian, (and fearful of muslim anything)?

sorry, but that's the reality of how these things work. The Dems are not in this to lose AGAIN.

Can you say "your head is in the clouds"?

This whole Obama thing is as silly as that Mormon guy thinking he could be the U.S. President.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 1:28 AM | Report abuse

Fix your comments section. Latest posts go to the bottom of the stack, not the top.

Makes it difficult to follow the conversation, otherwise.

Posted by: misc | May 14, 2008 1:26 AM | Report abuse

"The Florida Democratic Party is suing the DNC to seat all Florida Dem delegates on behalf of all FL Dem voters. The DNC is the problem. But the DNC must eventually give in and count the votes. The reason they are holding out is because it will start a new precedent when a judge demands all votes be counted, stripping both Republican and Democratic parties of some of the power they have over states in primaries.

I say "who cares"! Our right to vote is far more important than petty party power"

Guess what: FL Dems will lose this suit because the nominating process is subject solely to "petty party power". They could pick the nominees by reading tea leaves or smoke rings or whatever because this is *internal* party business and no concern of the Govt's. Heck, the WV GOP has a convention to pick it's delegates. They don't even bother with a primary or caucus. I wish they still had Civics classes in schools so that people would know the difference between the primaries and the GE.

Posted by: Mason | May 14, 2008 1:25 AM | Report abuse

"this is a very desperate attempt to squash democracy just so your cult leader can win."

Democracy = rules.

What do you call someone who helps to write the rules, agrees to the rules, and then only when the rules work against him/her, starts to decry them as "undemocratic?"

The best way to squash democracy is to remove the rules. Haven't you been watching Bush? Or were you watching with approval?

Posted by: drossless | May 14, 2008 1:25 AM | Report abuse

That's got to be Leichtman, once again railing about how terribly inconvenienced the Baby Boomers are by "the kiddies".

Give it a rest, dude.

Posted by: P Diddy | May 14, 2008 1:19 AM | Report abuse

Past time to make a graceful exit, Sen. Clinton. Obama's the nominee, and the writing's on the wall. He is the future of the Democratic Party, and brings the next generation of voters with him, those who will take his message of hope and make it a reality.

-----um this behavior by the kiddies is why Obama will never gain the support of Clinton supporters. If Obama did somehow get the nomination, Clinton supporters will not vote for Obama and McCain will win. At least we would know we put a stop to this malicious cult following and kept an unqualified, inexperienced, racist, arrogant, unpatriotic "57 states" nut out of the white house.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 1:18 AM | Report abuse

>>> "West Virginia, a state that is the most cosmopolitan in the Union"

I believe that statement deserves post of the day honors. Brilliantly put, sir.

:-)

Posted by: P Diddy | May 14, 2008 1:17 AM | Report abuse

Bubba discovered the Soccer Moms, Karl Rove uncovered NASCAR Dads, and now Hillary has unearthed Toothless Hillbilly Banjo Players.

I was an Obama supporter until West Virginia, a state that is the most cosmopolitan in the Union, reflecting all American hopes and dreams.

I have a better motto than "Yes We Can" for the Hillary campaign - it's "Squeal Like a Pig!"

Posted by: TheTruth | May 14, 2008 1:13 AM | Report abuse

FL and MI may well be counted, but Hillary will not get all of the votes. Even with proportional allocation (like every single other state), she will get a maximum of 60-40 (and I suspect the compromise will be 53-47 in favor of Clinton). Even with the more aggressive allocation, she can't overtake Obama.

Let's go to the math!

Florida had 210 delegates (185 of which would have been at stake in the primary) and Michigan had 156 delegates (128 of which would have been at stake in the primary). That makes for a total of 313 delegates. Split 60-40, that would mean 188 delegates for Clinton and 125 delegates for Obama. Even if you give all of the superdelegates from those 2 states to Clinton (which will NOT happen), you end up with an additional 43 delegates for Clinton, or 231 for Clinton and 125 for Obama. If you add that to the current total, you end up with the following:

Candidate: current + MI/FL = total
Clinton: 1716 + 231 = 1947
Obama: 1883.5 + 125 = 2008

Now, if you take the remaining states and allocate them 65-35 for the ones Clinton wins and 54-46 for the ones Obama wins (assuming Clinton wins KY and Puerto Rico and Obama wins OR, SD, and MT), you end up with an additional 128 for Clinton and an additional 89 delegates for Obama. This would mean your totals are:

Candidate: number with FL/MI from above + remaining contest = total
Clinton: 1947 + 128 = 2075
Obama: 2008 + 89 = 2097

And this is WITH some very, very aggressive allocations in favor of Clinton and WITHOUT the remaining superdelegates, many of whom are breaking for Obama.

Bottom line: this historic primary election is a photofinish and Obama will pull this out.

(source for the delegate data: http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/01/25/america/Clinton-Florida-Delegates.php)
(source for the current delegate count: DailyKos)
(source for the future delegate count: CNN's delegate calculator map)

Posted by: P Diddy | May 14, 2008 1:13 AM | Report abuse

Michigan and Florida won't be counted in any way that will benefit Clinton at this point -- nor should they be, as their state Democratic Party officials broke the party rules in how they held the election. It's not any of the candidates' faults -- fault lies squarely with the state party officials.
__________
this is a very desperate attempt to squash democracy just so your cult leader can win. It has already been determined by law experts that these 6 million votes must be counted. Rest assured, you can not kick democracy to the curb as much as you'd like to for your cult leader to win (eh-um, steal the nomination).

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 1:09 AM | Report abuse

Listening to Clinton speak about fighting in this campaign is painful in the way listening to a stage IV lung cancer patient talk about how he/she's gonna fight the disease and live. You don't know whether it's self-delusion or not. You don't want to deflate the false hopes that may be the little that is keeping someone alive through the pain. But you know what's happening and you stand there stupidly nodding your head while you're appauled a how pathetic the whole thing is.

The March-April Clinton may be the best general election candidate in the field (if you leave aside the occasional racial slip). But the January-February Clinton was the worst candidate in field. If it mattered, we could speculate about which version of the candidate we'd see in the fall, but it doesn't matter. She's lost. It's over. She may be the best "world series" team, but she's not gonna make it out of the league championship.

Posted by: Solomon Grundy | May 14, 2008 1:07 AM | Report abuse

The Florida Democratic Party is suing the DNC to seat all Florida Dem delegates on behalf of all FL Dem voters. The DNC is the problem. But the DNC must eventually give in and count the votes. The reason they are holding out is because it will start a new precedent when a judge demands all votes be counted, stripping both Republican and Democratic parties of some of the power they have over states in primaries.

I say "who cares"! Our right to vote is far more important than petty party power.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 1:04 AM | Report abuse

Michigan and Florida won't be counted in any way that will benefit Clinton at this point -- nor should they be, as their state Democratic Party officials broke the party rules in how they held the election. It's not any of the candidates' faults -- fault lies squarely with the state party officials.

Posted by: larry | May 14, 2008 1:02 AM | Report abuse

Past time to make a graceful exit, Sen. Clinton. Obama's the nominee, and the writing's on the wall. He is the future of the Democratic Party, and brings the next generation of voters with him, those who will take his message of hope and make it a reality.

Posted by: p | May 14, 2008 1:00 AM | Report abuse

So, just wondering, is West Virginia one of the states that count?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 12:52 AM | Report abuse

NEWSFLASH:

Florida and Michigan must be counted. There isn't a judge in this country that would compromise the most precious American right, the right to vote. We're talking around 6 million voters here. The primary is a critical step in the selection of our elected representatives and all votes must be counted.

What frightens me is that from what I can see...Obama supporters are so malicious that they have no problem excluding 6 million Democratic votes from the Democratic primary.

Forget it. FL is a critical swing state and we chose Hillary. Hillary will win when our delegate votes have been added, all 230 of them.

Just one more reason that Obama would lose, the corrupt attitudes of his supporters.

Posted by: Count all votes!!! | May 14, 2008 12:52 AM | Report abuse

AlanInMissoula - If you create an email address for this purpose, send me an email at Mark_in_Austin@operamail.com, pls.

Posted by: MarkInAustin | May 14, 2008 12:50 AM | Report abuse

It is not "all over for the Dems". Look at the turnout for both candidates, look at the sheer volume of new voters, look at the staunchly Republican Districts going Democrat in these Special Elections. Even in those Special Elections where the Republicans tried to tie the candidate to Obama, they failed.

Come with data, not conjecture. Show me on a county by county basis how the Republicans will win the 271 electoral votes required. You can't. It's not going to happen. McCain will be hard pressed to win this election.

Posted by: P Diddy | May 14, 2008 12:50 AM | Report abuse

z

Posted by: Alan inMissoula | May 14, 2008 12:43 AM | Report abuse

For Obama to be where he is in the nomination process completing against the Clintons will be the topic of a future novel and movie.

___________________

If only the blind could see...

Obama got where he is because the Republicans need him to win for McCain to win! Just listen for 5 minutes to any Republican radio show to verify this. Obama also got way too much money from Oprah, one of the richest women in the U.S., another like minded racist who votes for skin color just like 90% of the blacks. Oh and don't forget the Republicans have been throwing money at him to make sure Hillary loses. How did he raise so much money? you should be suspicious of the candidate (or party) that has way more money raised.

Hillary Clinton is the qualified experienced candidate. All that Obama offers is bewitching teleprompter speeches, no experience, a hatred of America, white hatred...blah, blah, blah. Not enough time to list. Oh wait I get it...you people believe a guy with no qualifications to be a U.S. President who tells you "hope and change" whilst Hillary supporters say PROVE IT. She already has.

Posted by: BryonaB | May 14, 2008 12:34 AM | Report abuse

Why not complete the primary, June is but a couple of weeks. Based on recent presidential elections Clinton's points are indeed compelling. If Obama gets the nod an McCain picks Romney for #2 it would be all but over for the Dems. As a Democrat myself my sentiments regarding the party are with Will Rogers. When will we get it together to win?
As for my idealist friends, the sign of true change is when a candidate such as Kucinich can rise as nominee. Let us be honest all of the front runners are of the "establishment." This is however, Politics
in the U.S.A.

Posted by: Inwood | May 14, 2008 12:33 AM | Report abuse

The argument that Obama can't win key states is significant only in the primary, where candidates are competing for Democratic votes. However, in the General Election, the story changes, where the competition is between both Republicans, Democrats, Independents, etc.

The "Obama can't win in key states" argument no longer holds water because the GE is a completely different type of contest than the primaries.

Regardless of what exit polls say, a great majority of Democratic voters will coalesce behind the eventual nominee, whoever it may be.

Posted by: halloitsmark | May 14, 2008 12:31 AM | Report abuse

Why not complete the primary, June is but a couple of weeks. Based on recent presidential elections Clinton's points are indeed compelling. If Obama gets the nod an McCain picks Romney for #2 it would be all but over for the Dems. As a Democrat myself my sentiments regarding the party are with Will Rogers. When will we get it together to win?
As for my idealist friends, the sign of true change is when a candidate such as Kucinich can rise as front runner. Le us be honest all front runners are of the "establishment." This is however, Politics
in the U.S.A.

Posted by: Inwood | May 14, 2008 12:30 AM | Report abuse

Look at the Jay Cost map from Real Clear Politics:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/Appalachia.gif

WV is right in the middle of a demographic region that Obama simply doesn't do well in. And while Obama might be willing to write off WV in November, he can't write off what it says about neighboring states.

Dems have to win those states to win in November.

Posted by: Austin | May 14, 2008 12:25 AM | Report abuse

Short answer: No. As the GOP defeat in MS demonstrates, it is the Dem's race to lose, regardless of who leads the ticket. Neither Obama nor Hillary can win without the other's base. At least the GOP Rev. Wright strategy has failed in the Deep South, which bolsters Obama's claim that he can win VA, NC, and/or GA in the general. It is impossible to overstate the millions of black belt voters who will turn out for Obama in a match-up against McCain. The question is whether it will be enough to off-set the rural anti-black vote. Consider Atlanta, GA, which makes up almost 50% of the state population. If Obama just repeats his Feb. 5 performance, he could blow out McCain; however, there are many Atlanta voters who did not participate in the GA primary, who will overwhelmingly support Obama. Despite the polls, this puts GA in play come November. Smart GOPers know this.

Posted by: GA Independent | May 14, 2008 12:24 AM | Report abuse

Hillary and Bill Clinton, Edwards, Joe Biden and a few others have done far more for this country than Obama ever will. He is an empty suit. I doubt very much that he will do as well as Carter did against Reagan or Dukakis did against Bush Sr. About eight states I think and I could almost name them. Illinois, NY, NJ, Mass, Maryland, Conn, Delaware and Vermont. Add DC and that's about it. California will be close but so is the friendship between McCain and Gov. Arnold S.In the end Arnold will deliver that State to McCain. Besides that, the republicans will make mincemeat of Obama. They will continue to refer to him as Barack HUSSEIN Obama the candidate who converted to Christianity from Islam. I see nothing but trouble for us Democrats and on Nov. 5th we will once again be wondering how we could have got stuck with the worst candidate like we did in 2000 and 2004.

Posted by: Opa2 | May 14, 2008 12:21 AM | Report abuse

Its amazing that HRC followers think Obama supporters are cultish. Aren't the HRC supporters worshipping at the altar of the HRC. Y'all have really drank the Kool-aid. Starting to sound like DUHbya Republicans....back away from the cliff please

Posted by: hrciznutz | May 14, 2008 12:21 AM | Report abuse

Weren't the Clinton supporters saying, "If you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen" only a few weeks ago?

So why are they whining about Obama supporters being "mean spirited"?

We are sick of your convoluted double talk, your constantly changing the rules of the game, and your sense of entitlement.

She lost. Get over it.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 12:19 AM | Report abuse

Hillary 2008:
I'll type in caps to get through to you:

FLORIDA AND MICHIGAN WILL NOT BE COUNTED AS VOTED.

ESPECIALLY MICHIGAN!

THEY BROKE THE RULES! THEY SUFFER THE CONSEQUENCES!

BOTH OBAMA AND CLINTON BEAT MCCAIN IN HEAD-TO-HEAD POLLING (but Obama's map looks a lot more purple). SOURCE: FURTHER DOWN THIS VERY BLOG! STOP SAYING OTHERWISE! IT MAKES YOU LOOK DUMB, AND YES, BITTER!

(See? Caps is annoying to read. Take the hint.)

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 12:19 AM | Report abuse

If HRC was the better candidate she wouldn't be in second place right now would she. I wonder if she somehow destroys the Democratic party and goes on to lose to McCain would she actually stop running just because the American people told her she lost or would she keep running after that too? She has made me completely rethink my thoughts of the Clinton years with this narcissitic messiah complex she is parading throughout the country right now. Bill and Hillary are made for each other.

Posted by: hrciznutz | May 14, 2008 12:17 AM | Report abuse

A Democrat won the congressional seat up for grabs in no. Mississippi.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 14, 2008 12:16 AM | Report abuse

ccarter...Obama will close the deal. Somewhere between May 20th and June 3rd. We all must remember that Obama is running against the Clintons! Bill Clinton has built up an incredible political organization and name recognition over the last 25 years. Many women love the idea of a woman president and see Hillary as that president, not because they think she is the best candidate to bring about change but because Bill Clinton will have an active hand in a Hillary Administration.

For Obama to be where he is in the nomination process completing against the Clintons will be the topic of a future novel and movie.

Posted by: AJ | May 14, 2008 12:15 AM | Report abuse

No one cares what WV thinks - there aren't that many of them. 28 delegates? Five EVs? Pfft...

Posted by: Mason | May 14, 2008 12:08 AM | Report abuse

Okay listen loud and clear Obama cult followers:

WHEN FLORIDA AND MICHIGAN ARE COUNTED...
OBAMA WILL LOSE. HILLARY HAS WON THE MOST IMPORTANT STATES FOR ANY CANDIDATE TO WIN A GENERAL ELECTION.

ALL POLLS SHOW HILLARY DEFEATING OBAMA AND MCCAIN IN A GENERAL ELECTION.
The Republicans know this and thus are hoping for Obama to win so they can swift boat him in November, why don't you?

OBAMA CAN NOT DEFEAT MCCAIN. SO YOU HAD BETTER HOPE HILLARY IS THE NOMINEE.

Your mean spirited attempt to end this race before all votes have been counted is not only in poor taste, but it is also:

a. going to make Obama look stupid when he loses.

b. pissing off Hillary supporters whom in turn would not vote for Obama if by chance he did get the nomination.

c. UNDEMOCRATIC. All voices(votes) must be heard. This is a g**damned democracy not a cult following.

d. DISENFRANCHISING. Any honorable candidate must submit to their duty to honor those who voted for them; a pledge to finish a race. I would hope Obama would also finish the race even if he appeared to be behind by a few delegates. When Gore stayed and fought to the finish line, we admired him. When Kerry buckled even before Ohio was recounted, we hated him for giving up. He let all of us down who voted for him in the final hour.

If the media would stop playing dumb and leaving FL and MI out of the analysis..they would be able to tell the truth...that Hillary can and probably will win.

Posted by: Hillary 2008! | May 14, 2008 12:05 AM | Report abuse

Winning against a fellow Democrat is too easily conflated with winning against a Republican. Come on, they're not the same thing, as much as she'd like you to think they are!

What's the big deal with her staying in? All politicians are 100% in until they're out. As Yoda would say, "do, or do not. There is no try".

Posted by: Clem | May 13, 2008 11:57 PM | Report abuse

Don't believe the hype! Bill Clinton (oops I mean Hillary Clinton) had a big win tonight. Nearly 6 out of 10 people exit polled cited Bill Clinton as a reason to vote for Hillary. Hillary netted only about 10 more delegates than Obama in West Virginia.

Hillary is $20 million in debt! She can't go anywhere. If Hillary quits now she will have less than 3 months to pay her loan back or her campaign debt off unless she does some creative things to transfer debt.

I wonder how many people will contribute to Hillary's campaign tonight even though they know that Hillary is mathematically way behind in the pledged delegates, superdelegates, states won, total popular vote, and 2007/2008 funds raised.

Hillary's chances of winning the Democratic nomination stand at 7%!

Posted by: AJ | May 13, 2008 11:57 PM | Report abuse

Yes, her win does matter. Clearly, the people of West Virginia don't think this race is over. Record turn outs do not occur for "also rans". I anticipated signs of deflation among HRC supporters. Without question I was wrong. While I still do not see how HRC wins this race, I am beginning to seriously wonder why BHO seems unable to simple snowball this campaign by sheer force of arithmatic. There may really be a weakness on his part in winning over necessary demographics for November.
It may become politically necessary for him to consider making her VP. It is better to have a skunk in the tent spraying out than a skunk outside the tent spraying in.

Posted by: ccarter | May 13, 2008 11:51 PM | Report abuse

I don't think it's a compelling argument for why she should stay in the race. The voters have spoken. I do however, think it's a compelling case for why Democrats should be worried about an Obama candidacy. I think it's great that he's widening the base of the Democratic Party and involving previously disaffected people in the political process, but I remain unconvinced that this coalition will add up to a Democratic victory in November.

In short, I think Hillary is wrong, but her rationale is correct. Swing states are very much in jeopardy if Obama is the nominee.

Posted by: pragmatist | May 13, 2008 11:45 PM | Report abuse

I guess we're still waiting for the Clintons' "May Surprise" which will reverse Obama's lead in every electoral category - esp. the important one, the delegate count. Maybe it'll be a "June Surprise."

She makes fabulous arguments even when they are fallacious. Did you see how convincing she was when she was remembering the sniper fire? It was almost like she was living it all over again.

Hillary Clinton has succeeded in driving working class whites in the Rust Belt and Appalachia away from our nominee. I am hoping she and Bill will do their best to help repair the damage later, but West Virginia looks like a state to skip in the general election, sad to say.

Fortunately, Barack Obama is still leading John McCain in the polls and has electoral options in a variety of states. Most of Hillary Clinton's elected supporters understand that fighting hard for Obama will help all of us. We can, and we will, win it.

Posted by: Chuck | May 13, 2008 11:43 PM | Report abuse

Those of us who truly care about electing a Democratic president are urging Hillary to FIGHT ON! We must win this election in November and she and she alone attracts the voters we need to win it.

If Obama and his devotees want Hillary out of this race so bad, then beat her fair and square and stop trying to kick her to the curb before all the votes are counted. And STOP begging the woman to let the man have center stage - very sexist.

Posted by: Mark | May 13, 2008 11:28 PM | Report abuse

Let's turn our attention to The Truth About McCain!

Did you know John Sydney McCain (JiSM) called his wife a "c&&nt" in front of reporters. Here's video in which he refuses to deny having done so:

http://truth-about-mccain.blogspot.com/2008/05/mccain-declines-to-deny-calling-his.html

Posted by: francislholland | May 13, 2008 11:21 PM | Report abuse

This is not fantastic for the Democratic Party...Damn!

Posted by: marylandlegal | May 13, 2008 11:16 PM | Report abuse

It doesn't really matter whether it "moves" us... winning is so close to impossible that all Hillary is doing now is starting to embarrass herself.

The one good thing for Obama: at least he wont lose Kentucky to a candidate who has already dropped out.

But make no mistake: Obama has the numbers by May 20 and Hillary has to concede after that.

The most fascinating thing is to wonder whether she actually believes the stuff she is saying... because she is clinically cookoo if she does...

Posted by: Boutan | May 13, 2008 11:09 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company