Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Clinton: The Difference Between Could and Will

Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign is edging closer to overtly making the argument that she -- and she alone -- can beat John McCain in the fall election.

"There is a difference between someone who could win and someone who will win," said Clinton senior strategist Howard Wolfson on a conference call with reporters earlier today. "That is an argument superdelegates can understand."

Clinton made a similar argument in a letter to superdelegates and reporters today. She writes:

"We simply cannot afford another four -- or eight -- years in the wilderness. That is why, everywhere I go, people come up to me, grip my hand or arm, and urge me to keep on running. That is why I continue in this race: because I believe I am best prepared to lead this country as President - and best prepared to put together a broad coalition of voters to break the lock Republicans have had on the electoral map and beat Senator McCain in November."

Wolfson pointed out that current Electoral College vote predictions -- based on an aggregate of public polling -- show Clinton beating McCain and Barack Obama losing to the Arizona senator.

Wolfson repeatedly noted that he was not saying that Obama could not win a general election, simply that polls show that he is currently trailing McCain.

That distinction is crucial to Clinton as she spends the final weeks of the campaign seemingly preparing for what comes next in her political life. (For the record, the Clinton team continues to insist she can still win; "We clearly believe there remains a path to the nomination and Senator Clinton is pursuing that path," said Wolfson.)

Any suggestion that Obama is unelectable by Clinton is likely to rebound negatively on her, as many party activists already suspect -- with little actual evidence, to be fair to the New York senator -- that she will seek to undercut the Democratic ticket in the fall if she is not on it.

But even if you take Clinton's argument at face value, there appears to be little evidence in the recent primaries that voters are primarily focused on electability as they choose between Obama and Clinton.

In Pennsylvania's April 22 primary, just nine percent of voters said that a candidate's ability to win in November was the most important factor in deciding their vote; among that small group, Clinton won 57 percent of the vote to 43 percent for Obama.

Subsequent primaries showed similar results. In West Virginia, nine percent cited electability as the most important attribute, and Clinton won the group by a wide 75 percent to 19 percent margin. In Kentucky, eight percent named electability; in Oregon it was 13 percent.

It is possible, of course, that superdelegates' mindset is radically different than that of voters. Remember, however, that many of the undecided superdelegates are elected officials and are not generally in the business of going against public opinion.

Clinton's case is a tough one to make -- and has been since mid-February. But she seems committed to making it.

By Chris Cillizza  |  May 28, 2008; 2:00 PM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2008  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Hillary Clinton and the 'Told You So' Calculation
Next: Campaign Jingles -- Readers' Picks

Comments

If a teacher doesn't follow school policy, you don't punish all the students, you punish the teacher! The DNC is punishing the wrong people!

I'm going to split my vote also primary to Dem. & general to Rep.!

Yes I can live with this, but can all of you & the DNC!

Posted by: Gene_FL | May 30, 2008 12:00 PM | Report abuse

Hillary also said that she was the inevitable nominee, that the Democratic primary would be over by Super Tuesday in February, that the votes in Michigan and Florida won't count for anything (this was before she realized that she actually needed the delegates from these states). Before people accept her arguments at face value, they should examine her track record in predicting the future.

Posted by: tony | May 30, 2008 11:53 AM | Report abuse


Clinton supporters:

Read here analysis on why OBAMA will beat McCain in a blowout in November,

Its a lie that Hillary is a better candidate and that Obama cannot beat McCain

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/05/the_mccain_blowout_fallacy.html

Posted by: Joe | May 30, 2008 12:33 AM | Report abuse

justme 2727 wrote:

"If the superdelegates overturn the will of the voters and select Hillary, it will completely fracture and destroy the Democratic party. Therefore, Hillary is unelectable. This is not reflected in the polls."

I guess it depends on what you mean by "the will of the people". The allocation of delegates is not directly proportional to the actual votes cast (in many states a candidate can win a district by a large majority and loose another district by a few percentage points ending up with many more votes and fewer delegates). Based on the demographics of a district a candidate canget additional delegates by winning the district. A large precentage of Obama's delegates come from caucus states which generally represent a very small percentage of the voting population of a state and are open to coercion through peer and community pressure. Obama has effectively disenfranchised millions of voters in Florida and Michigan by not agreeing to any of the plans advanced for a conducting new primaries in the states.

I don't think the delgate count or even the vote count in the Democratic primary can be assumed to reflect the "will of the voters" - the Democrats don't release the actual vote count in causus states so we don't even know what the actual "will of the people" is. What we do know is what the will of a party is that is paniced over the potential of loosing what they clearly feel is their most important base block of voters.

Posted by: Don | May 29, 2008 11:41 PM | Report abuse

If the superdelegates overturn the will of the voters and select Hillary, it will completely fracture and destroy the Democratic party. Therefore, Hillary is unelectable. This is not reflected in the polls.

I say this as a lifelong Democrat and former Bill Clinton supporter. If the Democratic party turns undemocratic, I will leave the party.

Posted by: justme2727 | May 29, 2008 9:27 PM | Report abuse

Hillary's argument falls flat when she cannot even get the greater number of Democratic delegates. After all that is what the primary is all about, not the rationalizations of Hillary.

Posted by: Dale Netherton | May 29, 2008 9:27 PM | Report abuse

What? Your statement:

"many party activists already suspect -- with little actual evidence, to be fair to the New York senator -- that she will seek to undercut the Democratic ticket in the fall if she is not on it."


As a previous poster has already pointed out, she did a very effective job of undercutting the party when she planted the idea that both she AND MCCAIN had "a lifetime of experience" and Obama had "a speech." She further advanced this pathetic strategy by suggesting that both she AND MCCAIN had passed the "commander-in-chief threshold" and then added "and you'll have to ask Senator Obama about his candidacy."

That a politician attacks another from their own side during a primary is business as usual. But to try to bloody a member of one's own party, while simultaneously increasing the viability of the opposing party's nominee, looks like, walks like, and quacks like undercutting to me.

Furthermore, about the "with little actual evidence . . ." qualifier. Since you do acknowledge that at least some evidence does exist, how much do you think is enough?

I can only hope that Senator Clinton will come to her senses before any further damage is done. Given the win-at-any-cost approach I have come to expect from her, I won't be holding my breath though.

Posted by: Mireille | May 29, 2008 6:37 PM | Report abuse

What has Obama delivered? Nothing! Change, change and more change. If he is so great why hasn't he made any changes before. Its interesting to me to see he didn't change anything in Illinois. In fact, these people come to my state for gas, jobs, etc. He is a joke.

Posted by: qster | May 29, 2008 4:36 PM | Report abuse

Obama will be selected, hahaha. He didn't win anything but he will be selected. Just like Bush he don't want votes to count.

Posted by: qster | May 29, 2008 4:34 PM | Report abuse

Concerned John, The list of supposed Clinton related deaths is an old email scam. See http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/bodycount.asp

Posted by: chick | May 29, 2008 4:02 PM | Report abuse

I am tired of the fight between McBush and Clinton. So I will vote for the Republican Obama.

Posted by: Cindy | May 29, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

I am tired of the fight between Obama and Clinton. So I will vote for the Republican McCain.

Posted by: Marsh | May 29, 2008 1:22 PM | Report abuse

Why is the really stupid always try to blog?

Posted by: Monica | May 29, 2008 1:21 PM | Report abuse

It's not just about *winning* the presidency. It's also about being able to accomplish something once you're in there. There's no point in electing a Democrat who can't reach across the aisles--better to have a moderate Republican (as much as I dislike McCain's platform). There is, however, reason to gamble on Obama (even though I think he's a shoe-in), who is both very progressive and very good at working with others. Not saying Clinton won't work well with others--don't know for sure. But certainly she's less likely to take risks for important issues.

Posted by: aciel.livejournal.com | May 29, 2008 1:17 PM | Report abuse

Dear American Voters,

Hon. Senator McCain and Obama, besides each having many attributes and characteristics. The critical differences in my professional, political, and personal opinion are as under:

1. Presidential "Temperament and Integrity".
2. Little Washington "insider Versus outsider" connectedness.
3. Vision and mission for our nation future rather than past.
4. American policies first USA centric than other countries centric.

In my professional opinion one senator has it and the other does not. We need one for our Greatgrand Nation to address our all these challenges with a fresh, clean and new slate.

God Bless America. its diverse people, and our Greatgrand Nation.

Yours truly,

COL. [retd] A.M.Khajawall
Forensic psychiatrist, Las Vegas NV

Posted by: COL.[retd] A.M.Khajawall | May 29, 2008 12:52 PM | Report abuse

There are 50 States in United States of America. Should we compare the number of States instead of popular votes?

Posted by: nga | May 29, 2008 12:41 PM | Report abuse

Dear nosocksboy,

You are very alone in this. Are you a Republican? Do you really WANT to lose in November?

"In Pennsylvania's April 22 primary, just nine percent of voters said that a candidate's ability to win in November was the most important factor in deciding their vote; among that small group, Clinton won 57 percent of the vote to 43 percent for Obama" - from above article...

This is where superDel's are supposed to look ahead and throw support behind the candidate who can beat McCain. Sadly, they have failed. And so the party fails.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 29, 2008 12:11 PM | Report abuse

i belive hillary clinton would win in the general election over john McCain. Obama is the wrong person to lead the democratic party in this election, he may possibly lose. But if he is elected, there is no evidence that he will do anything. Clinton is more experienced and better prepared for the job then anyone.

Posted by: Charlie | May 29, 2008 12:10 PM | Report abuse

Sen. Clinton is the electable, strongest candidate.

The uncommitted superdelegates must select the best qualified and strongest candidate to win the general election using their independent judgement without regard to any "delegate math."

The superdelegates are not locked in by the pledged delegates. If the superdelegates simply follow the "delegate math" in their decision, they are repudiating the reason the superdelegate system was created and making it completely meaningless.

The superdelegates are challenged to be fair and square and live up to their true function and responsibility. This calls for the superdelegates to show wisdom, integrity and courage in their independent judgment in selecting the best qualified and strongest presidential candidate and standing loyal to the best interests of the Democratic Party in winning the general election.

The superdelegates have only one choice for the Democratic presidential nominee: Sen. Clinton, on the unyielding principle of qualifications as the best qualified and the strongest candidate to defeat McCain and win the general election in a landslide hands down.

Posted by: crat3 | May 29, 2008 12:09 PM | Report abuse

Florida and Michigan should not have counted. Give her those delegates and just have the supperdelegates chose Obama. At this point if Hillary wins the nomination, she gauranteed to lose the general. Then Obama can run in 2012. I don't understand why people cant see that Sore Losers never win. Nobody can trust someone that don't keep their word. Who's going to believe Hillary Clinton is sincere about what she say's if she said Mi and fl wouldn't count then went back on her word and is fighting for them to count. So the choice is yours. I find Hillary Clinton disgusting.

Posted by: Janice | May 29, 2008 12:03 PM | Report abuse

Let the soap opera go on...

Posted by: CG | May 29, 2008 11:36 AM | Report abuse

I notice almost no one is even posting on blogs relating to Hillary, it is all Mccain vs. Obama. Even her supporters are pretty much done. They are now left talking to themselves.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 29, 2008 10:23 AM | Report abuse

Having a hard time today even finding a story on Clinton. She is already becoming irrelevant. Next week after the last primary and nothing left to run for or any reason to campaign or draw a crowd. She will be gone from the scene all together. She is left just talking to herself.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 29, 2008 9:54 AM | Report abuse

Your fear of Mccain should be, he is nothing but a weak puppet. We now know that Cheney has been president for the last 7+ years not Bush and they now have another guy who is weak and stupid as a puppet for who even will be behind the scenes pulling his strings. The truth is, vote for Mccain and don't have a clue who you are really voting for or what you will get. I have a feeling it would not be good though.

++++++++++
aleks


McCain is a great deal more qualified to be Commander-in-Chief than Obama is.

Obama has virtually no qualifications at all


The ONLY foreign policy item on Obama's resume is Chairmanship of a committee - a committee which Obama has refused to hold hearings or do much of anything - Obama isn't doing his job.

I'm not implying that Obama is lazy by not doing his job.


I am stating that Obama is collecting a paycheck from the American people and INSTEAD of doing his job he has gone on a book tour and is now running for Presidential - Obama needs to be FIRED not PROMOTED.


.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 29, 2008 7:17 AM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 29, 2008 8:55 AM | Report abuse

After the Kennedy coments by Clinton I did some research and this is what I found out: She is capable of doing what she implied, that woman is racist otherwise she should have bowed out:

This is what happens when you have dirt on the Clintons :
1 - James McDougal - Clinton's convicted Whitewater partner died of an apparent heart attack,
while in solitary confinement. He was a key witness in Ken Starr's investigation.
2 - Mary Mahoney - A former White House intern was murdered July 1997 at a Starbucks Coffee
Shop in Georgetown. The murder happened just after she was to go public with her story of sexual
harassment in the White House.
3 - Vince Foster - Former white House councilor, and colleague of Hillary Clinton at Little Rock's
Rose Law firm. Died of a gunshot wound to the head, ruled a suicide.
4 - Ron Brown - Secretary of Commerce and former DNC Chairman. Reported to have died by impact
in a plane crash. A pathologist close to the investigation reported that there was a hole in the top of
Brown's skull resembling a gunshot wound. At the time of his death Brown was being investigated,
and spoke publicly of his willingness to cut a deal with prosecutors.
5 - C. Victor Raiser II and Montgomery Raiser, Major players in the Clinton fund raising organization
died in a private plane crash in July 1992.
6 - Paul Tulley - Democratic National Committee Political Director found dead in a hotel room in
Little Rock, September 1992... Described by Clinton as a "Dear friend and trusted advisor."
7- Ed Willey - Clinton fund raiser, found dead November 1993 deep in the woods in VA of a gunshot
wound to the head. Ruled a suicide. Ed Willey died on the same day his wife Kathleen Willey claimed
Bill Clinton groped her in the oval office in the White House. Ed Willey was involved in several
Clinton fund raising events.
8 - Jerry Parks - Head of Clinton's gubernatorial security team in Little Rock. Gunned down in his
car at a deserted intersection outside Little Rock. Park's son said his father was building a dossier on
Clinton. He allegedly threatened to reveal this information. After he died the files were mysteriously
removed from his house.
9 - James Bunch - Died from a gunshot suicide. It was reported that he had a "Black Book" of people
which contained names of influential people who visited prostitutes in Texas and Arkansas.
10 - James Wilson - Was found dead in May 1993 from an apparent hanging suicide. He was reported
to have ties to Whitewater.
11- Kathy Ferguson, ex-wife of Arkansas Trooper Danny Ferguson, was found dead in May 1994, in
her living room with a gunshot to her head. It was ruled a suicide even though there were several
packed suitcases, as if she were going somewhere. Danny Ferguson was a co-defendant along with
Bill Clinton in the Paula Jones lawsuit. Kathy Ferguson was a possible corroborating witness for Paula
Jones.
12 - Bill Shelton - Arkansas State Trooper and fiancee of Kathy Ferguson. Critical of the suicide ruling
of his fiancee, he was found dead in June, 1994 of a gunshot wound also ruled a suicide at the grave
site of his fiancee.
13 - Gandy Baugh - Attorney for Clinton's friend Dan Lassater, died by jumping out a window of a
tall building January, 1994. His client was a convicted drug distributor.
14 - Florence Martin - Accountant & sub-contractor for the CIA, was related to the Barry Seal Mena
Airport drug smuggling case. He died of three gunshot wounds.
15 - Suzanne Coleman - Reportedly had an affair with Clinton when he was Arkansas Attorney
General. Died of a gunshot wound to the back of the head, ruled a suicide. Was pregnant at the time
of her death.
16 - Paula Grober - Clinton's speech interpreter for the deaf from 1978 until her death December 9,
1992. She died in a one car accident.
17 - Danny Casolaro - Investigative reporter. Investigating Mena Airport and Arkansas Development
Finance Authority. He slit his wrists, apparently, in the middle of his investigation.
18 - Paul Wilcher - Attorney investigating corruption at Mena Airport with Casolaro and the 1980 "
October Surprise" was found dead on a toilet June 22, 1993 in his Washington DC apartment. Had
delivered a report to Janet Reno three weeks before his death
19 - Jon Parnell Walker - Whitewater investigator for Resolution Trust Corp. Jumped to his death
from his Arlington, Virginia apartment balcony August15, 1993. He was investigating the Morgan
Guarantee scandal.
20 - Barbara Wise - Commerce Department staffer. Worked closely with Ron Brown and John Huang.
Cause of death unknown. Died November 29, 1996. Her bruised, nude body was found locked in her
office at the Department of Commerce.
21- Charles Meissner - Assistant Secretary of Commerce who gave John Huang special security
clearance, died shortly thereafter in a small plane crash.
22 - Dr. Stanley Heard - Chairman of the National Chiropractic Health Care Advisory Committee,
died with his attorney Steve Dickson in a small plane crash. Dr. Heard, in addition to serving on
Clinton's advisory council personally treated Clinton's mother, stepfather and brother.
23 - Barry Seal - Drug running pilot out of Mena, Arkansas, death was no accident.
24 - Johnny Lawhorn Jr. - Mechanic, found a check made out to Bill Clinton in the trunk of a car left
at his repair shop. He was found dead after his car had hit a utility pole.
25 - Stanley Huggins - Investigated Madison Guarantee. His death was a purported suicide and his
report was never released.
26- Hershell Friday - Attorney and Clinton fund raiser died March 1, 1994 when his plane exploded.
27 - Kevin Ives and Don Henry - Known as "The boys on the track" case. Reports say the boys may
have stumbled upon the Mena Arkansas airport drug operation. A controversial case, the initial report
of death said, due to falling asleep on railroad tracks. Later reports claim the two boys had been slain
before being placed on the tracks. Many linked to the case died before their testimony could come

before a Grand Jury.
THE FOLLOWING PERSONS HAD INFORMATION ON THE IVES/HENRY CASE:
28 - Keith Coney - Died when his motorcycle slammed into the back of a truck, July 1988.
29 - Keith McMaskle - Died stabbed 113 times, Nov, 1988
30 - Gregory Collins - Died from a gunshot wound January 1989.
31 - Jeff Rhodes - He was shot, mutilated and found burned in a trash dump in April 1989.
33 - James Milan - Found decapitated. However, the Coroner ruled his death was due to "natural
causes."
34 - Jordan Kettleson - Was found shot to death in the front seat of his pickup truck in June 1990.
35 - Richard Winters - A suspect in the Ives / Henry deaths. He was killed in a set-up robbery July 1989.
THE FOLLOWING CLINTON BODYGUARDS ARE DEAD: 36 - Major William S. Barkley Jr. 37
- Captain Scott J. Reynolds 38 - Sgt. Brian Hanley 39 - Sgt. Tim Sabel 40 - Major General William
Robertson 41 - Col. William Densberger 42 - Col. Robert Kelly 43 - Spec. Gary Rhodes 44 - Steve
Willis 45 - Robert Williams 46 - Conway LeBleu 47 - Todd McKeehan
Quite an impressive list! Pass this on. Let the public become aware of what happens to anyone who
might damage the Clinton machine


Posted by: Concerned John | May 29, 2008 1:25 AM


Posted by: John | May 29, 2008 7:21 AM

Posted by: John | May 29, 2008 7:53 AM | Report abuse

SO LET ME GET THIS STRAIGHT:


NOW the story is this: both the media AND McClellan knew the TRUTH all along, but they were not telling us


The ENTIRE problem was Bush was lying the whole time.


1) McClellan never "went along" with it for his own self-interest -


2) The New York Times never "went along" with the story by printing some stupid story about aluminum tubes


3) The press knew the truth all along, but somehow the administration was such a good liar that the press was helpless


4) The democrats "went along" with the war when it was in their own self-interest in the 2002 and 2004 elections


5) The democrats "went along" with the war by FUNDING it for years and years because a few people in the Bush administration were such good liars.

Is that their story now???


My comment is this: all these people let down the American public - they are all no good and rotten.


For the democrats now to say - oh it was all because Bush was a liar - that is a deception and a lie.


THE REASON BUSH WAS ABLE TO GET AWAY WITH IT IS BECAUSE ALL THOSE PEOPLE KNEW BETTER - SHOULD HAVE DONE BETTER - AND WENT ALONG WITH IT FOR THEIR OWN SELF-INTEREST - THEY ARE THE ONES WHO SOLD OUT AMERICA.


YES THEY ARE THE ONES WHO SOLD OUT THIS COUNTRY.


IN LIFE, THE SELL-OUTS ARE THE ONES WHO TIP THE BALANCE.


IF ONE ELIMINATES THE SELL-OUTS, THE BALANCE IS NOT TIPPED.


.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 29, 2008 7:47 AM | Report abuse

How much respect do you think the rest of the world would have for a US president that only won because of breaking rules, strongarming superdelegates, whining, etc. etc. This is a bad basis for the "leader of the free world". After 8 years of total chaos with Bush, "Comical Hillary" would certainly not improve the US standing.
By-the-way we wonder if the superdelegates could vote anonimously, how much support would be left for Hillary. Now too many are afraid for the Clinton-revenge.
Barbara from Switzerland

Posted by: barbara | May 29, 2008 7:20 AM | Report abuse

aleks


McCain is a great deal more qualified to be Commander-in-Chief than Obama is.

Obama has virtually no qualifications at all


The ONLY foreign policy item on Obama's resume is Chairmanship of a committee - a committee which Obama has refused to hold hearings or do much of anything - Obama isn't doing his job.

I'm not implying that Obama is lazy by not doing his job.


I am stating that Obama is collecting a paycheck from the American people and INSTEAD of doing his job he has gone on a book tour and is now running for Presidential - Obama needs to be FIRED not PROMOTED.


.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 29, 2008 7:17 AM | Report abuse

Actually the Rules Committee could rule that the original rule is no good, thus the entire penalties are wrong


Posted by: Anonymous | May 29, 2008 7:07 AM | Report abuse

mt

You are wasting your time arguing here.

Game is up. Its finished.

Superdelegates are flocking to Obama.

It will be end by June 3.

In fact the number of superdelegates needed to win the nomination has gone to Obama to be made known after June 3.

Florida and Michigan - only 50% to be seated.

Obama willing to give Hillary more delegates but that still would not give enough delegates for her to win the nomination.

Obama would even settle her debts just to maintain party unity.

Its finito. kapish. kaput.

No amount of arguing and giving all the statistics will change the outcome.

The party leadership had enough and could not stomach anymore divisions.

Obama will gain the nomimation, by following the rules and by winning more delegates.

By the way, this is not an American Idol contest.


Posted by: Anonymous | May 29, 2008 7:00 AM | Report abuse

"many party activists already suspect -- with little actual evidence, to be fair to the New York senator -- that she will seek to undercut the Democratic ticket in the fall if she is not on it."

Really? So when she said that McCain was more qualified than Obama to be Commander-in-Chief, by the Fix's reckoning she wasn't trying to undercut Obama if he gets the nomination.

Posted by: aleks | May 29, 2008 6:36 AM | Report abuse

Sal are you in Florida

Posted by: Anonymous | May 29, 2008 6:30 AM | Report abuse

Clinton has now taken Kentucky ... Nevertheless, Montana, South Dakota and Puerto Rico are still to come.

The Democratic race for nomination is still very much alive and most likely to be decided by superdelegates If you haven't done so yet, please write a message to each of your state's superdelegates at http://www.lobbydelegates.com

If you're tired of waiting around for those super delegates to make a decision already, go to LobbyDelegates.com and push them to support either Clinton or Obama

Posted by: Jack08democracy | May 29, 2008 5:15 AM | Report abuse

Sen. Hillary Clinton has won 70% of the popular vote after super Tuesday! Since February she's been told to get out of the race and she keeps winning! I don't care what the polls say at some point, SHE'S WON 7 STATES OF THE LAST 10. WHAT DOES IT TELL YOU? Do you really believe yourself that she won WV and KY because of racism?She's won these states after people started to realize who Barack Hussein Obama is and his associates! 17% of population is black. So, who voted for Hussein Obama? Alliens from Mars? He's a "media made candidate" with no knowledge and a racist -read his book-; he showed no respect for people who in his words; .."cling to their guns and religion and are against people who are not like them.." What about his wife, "for the first time in my adult life I'm proud of my country.." Why? What about when she went to best schools, she seized the opportunities presented to her, she started making almost $400,000 after her husband was elected senator -almost 3 times more than she was making, she wasn't proud then? WAIT UNTIL REPUBLICANS SHOW everything they have hidden about Obama, his associations, his video in San Francisco, more videos about his pastor for 17 years, more about his associations with the domestic terrorist Ayers, and much more!! They havent's use it yet but they will! BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IS THE WEAKEST CANDIDATE AGAINST MCCAIN! Everything there is to know about Sen. Clinton, we know it already! SHE'S THE STRONGEST CANDIDATE! I'm an independent voter and like millions, I will vote for Mccain after Her! What's the change he's always talking about? He's new in the game but uses the same old politics like everybody else! So, again, What change does he talk about? It's unbelievable how misleading the media has been. They said the B. Hussein Obama atracted over 70,000 people to his campaign in Oregon. Why didn't they corrected the mistake and mentioned that people went to see a free concert? GO HILLARY!!!

Posted by: mt | May 29, 2008 5:08 AM | Report abuse

Go home Obama, you can't win. Obama screwed over the voters in two states, he's done-- toast. A mostly white and Hispanic country will not elect a black President. Whites, blacks, Hispanics are all racist voters when it comes down to it. Obama also can not get the Jewish vote, the Catholic vote, the average blue collar white vote, or the senior vote. Obama ran a racist campaign. Get out, we can't stand NObama.

Posted by: Sal | May 29, 2008 4:50 AM | Report abuse

"Obama WAS on the Michigan ballot, he took his name off in order to pander to Iowa voters, so its Obama's fault"

I heard Terry McCauliffe make this same point. (It's sad. He clearly doesn't believe in what he's doing anymore)

But how Obama's removing his name from the ballot pandering to anyone?

Posted by: DDAWD | May 29, 2008 4:23 AM | Report abuse

Clinton:
Gallup Tracking 05/22 - 05/27 4411 RV 48 44 Clinton +4.0
Rasmussen Tracking 05/24 - 05/27 1600 LV 46 45 Clinton +1.0
Obama:
Gallup Tracking 05/22 - 05/27 4411 RV 45 46 McCain +1.0
Rasmussen Tracking 05/24 - 05/27 1600 LV 43 47 McCain +4.0
RCP

Posted by: josgirl | May 29, 2008 2:41 AM | Report abuse

The 12 December 2007 Voter Guide published by the Democratic Party states: "A vote for "uncommitted" is a vote to send delegates to the Democratic National Convention who are not committed or pledged to any candidate. Those delegates can vote for any candidate they choose at the Convention. Supporters of Joe Biden, John Edwards, Barack Obama and Bill Richardson are urged to vote "uncommitted" instead of writing in their candidates' names because write-in votes for those candidates will not be counted.

Posted by: josgirl | May 29, 2008 2:01 AM | Report abuse

The debate is over.

Don't waste the bandwith and energy
After all is said and done, the superdelegates are going to put their votes to Obama.

In the last one week, most of the superdelegates went to Obama.

Florida and Michigan will be punished allowing 50% delegate seated or all seated with half votes.

Nancy Pelosi will not allow this to go to the Convention because it is political suicide.

At the end of the day, the Democratic Party leadership would not care two hoots if the Clinton supporters want to vote for McCain. These two-faced Democrats are not worth the hassle come this November.

Game is up and it is one minute to Midnight.

Hillary should be busy on two things:

a) How to repay the debt owed. The Clintons are obscenely rich so there is no need to scrounge on others.

b) How to adjut to life as a JUNIOR Senator.

c) How to keep Bill's pants on when he sees a skirt around.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 29, 2008 1:22 AM | Report abuse

This is what happens when you have dirt on the Clintons :
1 - James McDougal - Clinton's convicted Whitewater partner died of an apparent heart attack,
while in solitary confinement. He was a key witness in Ken Starr's investigation.
2 - Mary Mahoney - A former White House intern was murdered July 1997 at a Starbucks Coffee
Shop in Georgetown. The murder happened just after she was to go public with her story of sexual
harassment in the White House.
3 - Vince Foster - Former white House councilor, and colleague of Hillary Clinton at Little Rock's
Rose Law firm. Died of a gunshot wound to the head, ruled a suicide.
4 - Ron Brown - Secretary of Commerce and former DNC Chairman. Reported to have died by impact
in a plane crash. A pathologist close to the investigation reported that there was a hole in the top of
Brown's skull resembling a gunshot wound. At the time of his death Brown was being investigated,
and spoke publicly of his willingness to cut a deal with prosecutors.
5 - C. Victor Raiser II and Montgomery Raiser, Major players in the Clinton fund raising organization
died in a private plane crash in July 1992.
6 - Paul Tulley - Democratic National Committee Political Director found dead in a hotel room in
Little Rock, September 1992... Described by Clinton as a "Dear friend and trusted advisor."
7- Ed Willey - Clinton fund raiser, found dead November 1993 deep in the woods in VA of a gunshot
wound to the head. Ruled a suicide. Ed Willey died on the same day his wife Kathleen Willey claimed
Bill Clinton groped her in the oval office in the White House. Ed Willey was involved in several
Clinton fund raising events.
8 - Jerry Parks - Head of Clinton's gubernatorial security team in Little Rock. Gunned down in his
car at a deserted intersection outside Little Rock. Park's son said his father was building a dossier on
Clinton. He allegedly threatened to reveal this information. After he died the files were mysteriously
removed from his house.
9 - James Bunch - Died from a gunshot suicide. It was reported that he had a "Black Book" of people
which contained names of influential people who visited prostitutes in Texas and Arkansas.
10 - James Wilson - Was found dead in May 1993 from an apparent hanging suicide. He was reported
to have ties to Whitewater.
11- Kathy Ferguson, ex-wife of Arkansas Trooper Danny Ferguson, was found dead in May 1994, in
her living room with a gunshot to her head. It was ruled a suicide even though there were several
packed suitcases, as if she were going somewhere. Danny Ferguson was a co-defendant along with
Bill Clinton in the Paula Jones lawsuit. Kathy Ferguson was a possible corroborating witness for Paula
Jones.
12 - Bill Shelton - Arkansas State Trooper and fiancee of Kathy Ferguson. Critical of the suicide ruling
of his fiancee, he was found dead in June, 1994 of a gunshot wound also ruled a suicide at the grave
site of his fiancee.
13 - Gandy Baugh - Attorney for Clinton's friend Dan Lassater, died by jumping out a window of a
tall building January, 1994. His client was a convicted drug distributor.
14 - Florence Martin - Accountant & sub-contractor for the CIA, was related to the Barry Seal Mena
Airport drug smuggling case. He died of three gunshot wounds.
15 - Suzanne Coleman - Reportedly had an affair with Clinton when he was Arkansas Attorney
General. Died of a gunshot wound to the back of the head, ruled a suicide. Was pregnant at the time
of her death.
16 - Paula Grober - Clinton's speech interpreter for the deaf from 1978 until her death December 9,
1992. She died in a one car accident.
17 - Danny Casolaro - Investigative reporter. Investigating Mena Airport and Arkansas Development
Finance Authority. He slit his wrists, apparently, in the middle of his investigation.
18 - Paul Wilcher - Attorney investigating corruption at Mena Airport with Casolaro and the 1980 "
October Surprise" was found dead on a toilet June 22, 1993 in his Washington DC apartment. Had
delivered a report to Janet Reno three weeks before his death
19 - Jon Parnell Walker - Whitewater investigator for Resolution Trust Corp. Jumped to his death
from his Arlington, Virginia apartment balcony August15, 1993. He was investigating the Morgan
Guarantee scandal.
20 - Barbara Wise - Commerce Department staffer. Worked closely with Ron Brown and John Huang.
Cause of death unknown. Died November 29, 1996. Her bruised, nude body was found locked in her
office at the Department of Commerce.
21- Charles Meissner - Assistant Secretary of Commerce who gave John Huang special security
clearance, died shortly thereafter in a small plane crash.
22 - Dr. Stanley Heard - Chairman of the National Chiropractic Health Care Advisory Committee,
died with his attorney Steve Dickson in a small plane crash. Dr. Heard, in addition to serving on
Clinton's advisory council personally treated Clinton's mother, stepfather and brother.
23 - Barry Seal - Drug running pilot out of Mena, Arkansas, death was no accident.
24 - Johnny Lawhorn Jr. - Mechanic, found a check made out to Bill Clinton in the trunk of a car left
at his repair shop. He was found dead after his car had hit a utility pole.
25 - Stanley Huggins - Investigated Madison Guarantee. His death was a purported suicide and his
report was never released.
26- Hershell Friday - Attorney and Clinton fund raiser died March 1, 1994 when his plane exploded.
27 - Kevin Ives and Don Henry - Known as "The boys on the track" case. Reports say the boys may
have stumbled upon the Mena Arkansas airport drug operation. A controversial case, the initial report
of death said, due to falling asleep on railroad tracks. Later reports claim the two boys had been slain
before being placed on the tracks. Many linked to the case died before their testimony could come

before a Grand Jury.
THE FOLLOWING PERSONS HAD INFORMATION ON THE IVES/HENRY CASE:
28 - Keith Coney - Died when his motorcycle slammed into the back of a truck, July 1988.
29 - Keith McMaskle - Died stabbed 113 times, Nov, 1988
30 - Gregory Collins - Died from a gunshot wound January 1989.
31 - Jeff Rhodes - He was shot, mutilated and found burned in a trash dump in April 1989.
33 - James Milan - Found decapitated. However, the Coroner ruled his death was due to "natural
causes."
34 - Jordan Kettleson - Was found shot to death in the front seat of his pickup truck in June 1990.
35 - Richard Winters - A suspect in the Ives / Henry deaths. He was killed in a set-up robbery July 1989.
THE FOLLOWING CLINTON BODYGUARDS ARE DEAD: 36 - Major William S. Barkley Jr. 37
- Captain Scott J. Reynolds 38 - Sgt. Brian Hanley 39 - Sgt. Tim Sabel 40 - Major General William
Robertson 41 - Col. William Densberger 42 - Col. Robert Kelly 43 - Spec. Gary Rhodes 44 - Steve
Willis 45 - Robert Williams 46 - Conway LeBleu 47 - Todd McKeehan
Quite an impressive list! Pass this on. Let the public become aware of what happens to anyone who
might damage the Clinton machine

Posted by: Law and order | May 29, 2008 1:22 AM | Report abuse

Redline- actually the popular vote argument does count the caucus states except for the 4 that only produce estimates of numbers of voters (IA, NV, ME and WA) here is a link to the actual numbers used:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html

You can see how close the numbers are no matter which way you count it.

Given the archaic system the Dems use for selection of delegates and the FACT that states are unequal in population size (NY=~40 WYs), popular vote does seem to be the most Democratic of the measures- unfortunately caucuses are poorly representitive at best and discriminatory at worst and make the popular count difficult to come by.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 29, 2008 12:18 AM | Report abuse

Ndfrtrth-

Your post merits no response except that you are a f'n idiot.

Leon

Posted by: Anonymous | May 29, 2008 12:05 AM | Report abuse

Ndfrtrth-

Your post merits no response except that you are a f'n idiot.

Leon

Posted by: Anonymous | May 29, 2008 12:05 AM | Report abuse

Vote for Change
Obama 08

Posted by: eljefejesus | May 29, 2008 12:00 AM | Report abuse

Redline


Who is over it? the latte liberals and the black community which is voting racist?


you are completely out of your mind.

Do you really want to trust the NATIONAL SECURITY of this nation to a former cocaine user?


Cocaine can make holes in your brain you know.

Maybe if you do not understand, you have some holes in your brain.


.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 28, 2008 11:38 PM | Report abuse

The post made at 11 16 was not made by me


The Obama maniacs are running mad again.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 28, 2008 11:27 PM | Report abuse

Can you practice saying the phrase "President McCain"


Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 11:26 PM | Report abuse

TheTruth, you are nothing but a pack of lies.

I have never said anything bad about Obama.

That is 37th&OStreet. You can look it up.

Obama in 2008.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 28, 2008 11:16 PM | Report abuse

Funny how posters like words of wisdom and his chicken anonymous friends can not handle THE TRUTH even when it is spelled out for them. Here is THE TRUTH, you gutless punks ... Obama is going to win the Democratic nomination, and then he's going to be the president. How gutless will you be then?

Posted by: TheTruth | May 28, 2008 11:15 PM | Report abuse

THE TRUTH NEEDS NO DEFENSE......


Everyone please keep this in mind. HILLARY IS, AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE HER OWN UNDOING.....It's absolutely amazing how LOW-BRED and scheming this LOSER is.
This ELITIST, liar (PERFECT LIAR), Is beyond SICKENING. I want to apologize to the DELUSIONAL women, who have FALLEN VICTIM under the EVIL SPELL, of Senator HILLARY (hitler, stalin, bin laden, GW bush, i would be ceasar) CLINTON.
I cannot help but sound INSULTING as I deal w/this LOW-BRED ROGUE w/out "kid gloves'. SHE alone is responsible for undoing any CREDIBILITY she may have once had. SHE alone is responsible for dividing the entire democratic party right down the middle. SHE remains DELUSIONAL and UNAPOLOGETIC in regards to this TRUTH.

SHE ALONE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR DIVIDING THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY THROUGH RACE, CLASS, GENDER, AND COMPLETE INSANITY......

Her very own actions have proved she is CLASSLESS, lacking JUDGEMENT, INTEGRITY, SANITY, MANAGEMENT, and last but not least, DIGNITY. Senator Clinton has no GRACE. She hasn't allowed her very own SPIRIT to breathe a word of TRUTH.

"EVERY VOICE MUST BE HEARD.... EXCEPT THOSE OF THE CAUCAS STATES AND THOSE IN FL/MI WHO DIDN'T VOTE FOR ME..."

Yet, she continually PANDERS to the FEARS and MISGIVINGS of WEAK-MINDED WOMEN, RACIALLY PREJUDICED WHITES, LOW-INCOME/LOW EDUCATED WHITES, UNSURE OF THEIR IMMIGRATION STATUS AND FUTURE... LATINOS, and just anyone WHO IS LOOKING FOR A LIE TO BELIEVE IN.

Her SURROGATES Lanny Davis, Debbie Washerman Shultz, Bill Clinton, etc..PARROT her DELUSIONS and DENOUNCE any AGREEMENT, spoken or written, that would tie her into agreeing w/ the rules about FL/MI. which, FACT IS TRUTH IS she did agree with.

It's as though what Senator Clintrruption is saying to voters is this, "TO HELL W/ WHAT I AGREED TO!!! IT IS OFFICIALLY IN MY INSANITY, NULL AND VOID!!! IT NEVER HAPPENED!!!"

AFTER THIS SHE STILL ASK US TO ACCEPT HER DELUSION AND GIVE HER OUR BLESSING...


Not just Democrats but Cross-over Republicans, Independants, Young voters, First time voters African Amercian voters, and Overall The American People.

She's saying, "How I've behaved, the Lies I've told, the underhanded treachery I've been involved in, my total lack of any INTEGRITY, the UGLINESS of my character, The Very Proof of my Inability to Lead this Nation in a Character of Truth, the fact that the REAL vetting process has found me wanting,The Sepration of the Races, The Lying and Manipulating of Women, Even My Very Own SELFISHNESS is NOTHING." "What you've experienced of who I REALLY am." "I STILL WOULD BE YOUR NOMINEE AND ASK FOR YOUR BLESSING!!"

SENATOR HILLARY stalin, hitler, bin laden, khadafey, gw bush, CLINTON IS AND CONTINUES TO BE HER OWN UNDOING....LET HER DESTROY HERSELF......

The worse peice is the DAMAGE she has done due to her SELFISHNESS. Does anyone think she cares how she has HURT THE PARTY?

Does anyone think she cares how she has INFECTED these unfortunate delusional women?

Does anyone think she cares, about the AFRICAN AMERICAN constituency, or RURAL HARDWORKING CLASS WHITE constituency, or lATINO constituency, or MIDDLE AGED WHITE WOMEN constittuency? In her GAME everyone is nothing more than a PAWN....

THE TRUTH NEEDS NO DEFENSE......

"Everyones WORK will be TRIED by the FIRE...the day will PROVE it whether it be made of (worthless things) WOOD, HAY and STUBBLE...OR whether it be made of (precious things)GOLD, SILVER or PRECIOUS STONES..." Paul of Tarsus

It shall be proven by the test of FIRE (TRUTH)..Wood, hay and stubble (LIES) will be burned up leaving nothing but ruin and ASHES. Gold, Silver, And Precious Stones, (TRUTH), will come out proven and PURIFIED. More beautiful and worthy than ever...PROVEN CORRECT.

Senator Clinton, All you've done and all your CRONIES have tried to do WILL BURN AN BE UNDONE...You will be handed your head in a complete TROUNCING and utter DEFEAT, for the very New York Senate seat you now hold in the next senate race in New York State. YOU WILL BE YOUR OWN UNDOING


Ismael 29 yrs old SF CA.....

Posted by: need4trth | May 28, 2008 11:02 PM | Report abuse

Okay Saint Anonymous. That's all you have is some weak snipe about his admitted use of drugs. They tried that angle already, people are over it. He's a normal American that has a past! Shocker!

Next!

You are one bitter pill. Do you have your gun and religion?

Posted by: Redline | May 28, 2008 11:02 PM | Report abuse

Just where does Bill Clinton come off with Hillary being disrespected. How would he know about respect, He did her MORE disrespect than anyone ever could. Not only that, He did it in front of the WHOLE WIDE WORLD. Now thats what I call disrespect.
He should have stayed out of her campaign and let her do it on her own MERITS. He thinks he is a great advisor but, remember he is older now and doesn't have that so-called pizzaze anymore.
She should just hang it up and go HOME.
She is NOT electable, she is using Bill's reputation as a background. She is messed up in her thinking because she wants something so BAD and deep down she knows she can't have it. GO home and BAKE some cookies. Thats if she has anything left in the kitchen after she threw everything in it at Barack Obama. hehehehehehehehehehe

Posted by: mom from pa | May 28, 2008 10:59 PM | Report abuse


Obama has NO RIGHT TO SAY that McCain is going to continue Bush's policies.


PERHAPS if Obama actually did his job instead of going on a book tour:


Obama would have seen McCain opposing Bush in the Senate on issue after issue.

The reason Obama hasn't seen this is because Obama hasn't EVEN BEEN COMING TO WORK SINCE BEING ELECTED - OBAMA HAS BEEN COLLECTING A PAYCHECK BUT GOING ON BOOK TOURS AND RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT.


Instead, Obama was MIA selling books instead of WATCHING MCCAIN WORK ACROSS THE AISLE.


Seriously - Obama wasn't doing his job so he wasn't even IN THE SENATE TO BE ABLE TO WATCH MCCAIN SHOW HIM HOW ITS DONE.


Obama, if he wasn't so arrogant and uppity, could have ACTUALLY LEARNED SOMETHING FROM MCCAIN.


NOW we have the curious sight of Obama the inexperience person who knows very little about Washington attempting to find something wrong with the MAVERICK.


The truth is Obama has nothing on McCain so Obama HAS TO MAKE UP SOME SET OF LIES.


Of course, then Obama has to focus-group his lies to see which ones work the best.


Obama sickens anyone who truly wants to see this country run correctly.


Obama take your race-baiting and your lies and your false charges of "offensive remarks" and go back to Chicago.

Charge made.


Charge sticks.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 10:56 PM | Report abuse

Please put down the pipe...check your facts on MI. How can he lose delegates he never agreed to take and was never awarded?

Again, she said the votes would not count because they broke the party rules. Hillary is playing the sorriest game of politics here and you just don't want to see the forest for the trees.

The Hillary shell game...watch the peanut!

Posted by: Redline | May 28, 2008 10:56 PM | Report abuse

egc52556


so now you want to add the Edwards's supporters in with Obama's popular vote in Michigan???

Come on - Hillary is going to win the overall popular vote - including everyone

Obama is the affirmative action candidate but there is a limit to the extras he gets


Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 10:53 PM | Report abuse

redline


Crack ? Isnt that cocaine? why dont you ask Obama what the difference is between cocaine and crack

Apparently he is familiar

.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 10:50 PM | Report abuse

Desperate state calls for...


It's over. Now we'll just wait and see what other psycho babble spills from her campaign and her mouth on June 4th. I'm sure Bill will have a sprinkle of nuttiness with a touch of anger as well.

Sad cases. How the mighty have fallen.

Posted by: Redline | May 28, 2008 10:49 PM | Report abuse

Redline


you are a gloater and you havent won yet


clearly you are wrong on so many accounts

Obama WAS on the Michigan ballot, he took his name off in order to pander to Iowa voters, so its Obama's fault

The only thing SOVIET was Obama's attempts to prevent the revotes in Michigan


There were other candidates on the ballot, Hillary was not the ONLY one - so that is a complete lie.

Obama made his own problems in Michigan


Actually, by DNC rules, Obama should LOSE ALL his delegates out of Michigan because he sought to prevent Michigan from compiling with the rules by revoting - that is the truth.

.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 10:46 PM | Report abuse

Is that fuzzy delegate math?

And I thought the crack epidemic was over. Guess not.

Posted by: Redline | May 28, 2008 10:44 PM | Report abuse

"by Tuesday she will be leading in all the relevant categories"


That depends on how you define "relevant". Clinton's supporters apparently don't consider the following "relevant":

* More Delegates
* More States
* More Superdelegates
* More Popular Vote (if you count the Michigan voters who did NOT vote for Clinton)
* More Money raised
* More Independents (who Dems will need to win in Novenber)


So in the end, all this "more electable" stuff from Clinton is just old fashioned politics. That is, Crap.
.
.

Posted by: egc52556 | May 28, 2008 10:41 PM | Report abuse

Redline and all the Obama People


Hillary has the votes on the Rules Committee to get delegates out of Michigan and Florida


She deserves ALL her delegates credited


The people of those states DESERVE to be counted


The Superdelegates on Monday are going to see a radically different race - the delegates will be dramatically closer and Hillary will be well ahead in Popular Vote.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 10:41 PM | Report abuse

I'll ignore your cheesy joke and focus on the facts:

Hillary helped set the rules and agreed to them.

How can she claim victory in MI when she was the only one on the ballot? Okay Stalin.

Why is she not counting the caucus states?

Who's missing what here?

Can we say sore loser?

Posted by: Redline | May 28, 2008 10:39 PM | Report abuse

Redline

A 48 state primary is like affirmative action - the candidate can not win with all 50 states counting.


/

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 10:31 PM | Report abuse

When will you losers give up on the MI & FL pipedream?

She helped set the rules...I guess she wins the soviet style election in MI? She also agreed and said the votes in FL will not count. I guess the caucus states don't count either? Flip the scrip and put this craziness on Obama.

You'd be cryin' foul and pointing out how sad he was too.

Weak!

Posted by: Redline | May 28, 2008 10:20 PM | Report abuse

Rose


Our calculations are 100% correct


When you add in Florida and Michigan, which are part of the United States, and are swing states which Hillary won, Hillary will be less than 50 delegates behind

In addition, Hillary will be leading in the Popular Vote, a metric first pressed by the geniuses at the Obama campaign

There are 70 Superdelegates who have said they will switch to Hillary if Hillary wins the Popular Vote - by Tuesday she will be leading in all the relevant categories


hhhmmmmmmmm

In the words of the Obama people last week, can you smell the fear ???


.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 10:10 PM | Report abuse

Folks,

I am sick and tired of people who lump Clinton and Bush together. Perhaps the folks who do that are too young now to remember the Clinton years. Folks, don't draw an equal sign between screwing Monica Lewinski and screwing the American people (and the world!) Whatever your feelings may be about HRC, under WJC, this country has experienced prosperity and relative stability, and even the Middle East was a heck of a lot more peaceful than it is today. Whatever your feelings about WJC and HRC, think before you lump them together with the Bushes!

It looks like HRC is not going to be the nominee. I supported her strongly, and I will support BHO against McCain just as strongly. And if by some miracle it happens the other way at the DNC, I hope you will support HRC. The differences between the two Democratic hopefuls are small, in the grand scheme of things... the difference between either one of them and McCain is not! So let's stop the bickering, see what happens, and suport our Democratic candidate in November!

Peace,
RDSQRL

Posted by: RDSQRL | May 28, 2008 10:08 PM | Report abuse


Obama Caught in More Hypocrisy:


From Today's Washington Post:


The co-director of Barack Obama's presidential campaign in Puerto Rico is a Washington-based federal lobbyist for the government of Puerto Rico.

Ethics watchdogs said that the high-profile role of Francisco J. Pavía appears to contradict the Obama campaign's ethics guidelines, which forbid federal lobbyists from working on staff. But Obama spokesman Bill Burton said Pavía is an "active volunteer" -- not a paid staffer -- and can hold the job without running afoul of the campaign's rules.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 28, 2008 10:06 PM | Report abuse

I'm sooo busted!

Posted by: Redline | May 28, 2008 10:03 PM | Report abuse

Check the exit polls and voter comments in WV & KY. The point is made by those voters, not me.

Any counter argument?

I'm such a racist I hate myself. I wish I could wash the white away!

Posted by: Redline | May 28, 2008 10:01 PM | Report abuse

THIS IS ANOTHER RACIST STATEMENT BY AN OBAMA PERSON - RACIST AGAINST WHITES AGAIN.


HOW MANY TIMES DO WE HAVE TO CATCH THE OBAMA PEOPLE IN THE ACT


REDLINE ARE YOU WRITING DIRECTLY FROM OBAMA HEADQUARTERS IN CHICAGO ????


**********************************


Redline writes:


The only way McCain has a chance is if there are enough racist Americans like we saw in WV and KY. And don't try to argue. It was a fact that many folks voted for Hillary because they were uncomfortable voting for a black guy. If you don't know that you live in a fantasy land.

But I believe America has just enough grown-ups to override that BS.

Posted by: Redline | May 28, 2008 7:51 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 9:52 PM | Report abuse


Since it's time out for "fun and games" here, how about a "Where's Waldo"- like search of the prior comments section, "Clinton: The Difference Between Could and Will."

Who can tag the posts that were authored by:

-- Right-wing operatives seeking to elevate Obama and thus ensure that the weaker candidate gets the nomination;

-- Left-wing operatives seeking to tear down Hillary, leaving the Dems with no other choice but Obama;

-- Disinformation specialists, amateurs and pros, seeking to make it appear that advocates of one candidate or the other are illiterate, delusional or otherwise mentally unbalanced;
-- Frustrated writers auditioning for a columnist's slot;

-- Dedicated modern day Tom Paines seeking to influence inside the Beltway opinion, especially among members of the press who may subliminally drink up their ideas and some time later cast them forth as their own.

It's not good enough to simply ID the phony posts; you must justify your choices for each in 30 words or less.

On your marks, get set, GO!

Posted by: Inquiring Mind | May 28, 2008 9:42 PM | Report abuse

Whoever said "Hillary is 40 behind Obama with 250 Superdelegates still to decide" it's YOUR numbers that are wrong. Obama has nearly 200 more delegates than Clinton, and Clinton would need nearly all of the remaining superdelegates to endorse her to catch him -- it ain't gonna happen. And Clinton is making an argument about popular vote by not counting the caucus states. What happened to her argument to "count every vote?" I guess she means only if they voted for her. Obama won, what can't you understand about that? Get over it and get on with it.

Posted by: Rose | May 28, 2008 9:38 PM | Report abuse

Hillary's done by her own hand, heart, and mind.

Sorry that you're so disappointed. Obama won this fair and square, by the agreed upon rules, in a game she was predicted to win, with all her party support, money, and name recognition.

He beat her and she tried all the old dirty tricks. Come on... the pic of Obama in the turban...woops...the sniper fire...the red-faced angry husband...the hard working white Americans...RFK...her record on the War...her personality. Not because she's a woman...like she said if you can't stand the heat?

There's plenty self-made women out there that could be President. Let's start thinking about them and move on.

Posted by: Redline | May 28, 2008 9:30 PM | Report abuse

Ok...so Clinton says she's winning the popular vote? Where are the delegates to prove it - cause I just do not see them! And as far as MI/FL situation, the RBC will straighten it out - they will need to take everything into consideration and NOT just Clinton's claims.

One of the most shocking things I read today was on another blog - Indie in FL, I believe, stated that he and his wife went to vote for Obama and could not - the ballots they were given did not have the names of ANY of the presidential candidates on it...this was what was given out at the location where they voted - so, I ask you, how can even Clinton supporters honestly say the vote should be counted???? Let's get real here - the rules were broken...if our kids break the rules, there are consequences, aren't there?

Time to put this BS behind us and get on to the GE!!

Posted by: NanD | May 28, 2008 9:29 PM | Report abuse

I am one of the 17.2 million people who have cast votes for HRC and frankly I resent all of the people calling themselves liberals or progressives and backing him attacking me by calling me a racist or ignorant.

I have been extremely to the left of the party since 1984, when I was strongly for Mondale/Ferraro at age 13. I worked for J. Jackson in 1988 because what he said moved me- still does- and for Dinkins in 1989 and 1993 because he was also a great liberal leader with his policies aimed at society taking responsibility for it's most disadvantaged persons. I worked for B. Kerry in 1992. I marched against the war in winter of 2003. Please don't tell me that I am voting for someone for the wrong reasons.

I voted for her because she has the (closer to) the right policies- on health care, on the environment, on energy, on how to deal with the current international situation. I voted for her because she has the depth of policy knowledge to understand the implications of policy and make the right decisions. I voted for her because she stands the best chance of putting together a different coalition from the one that hasn't taken the white house in the last two elections (educated white majority and super majority of AAs with weak majority of latin voters and losing working class voters).

Despite efforts to interpret anything she says to fit some crazy narrative of her as an power crazed, racist, Lady Mcbeth- I have watched her in office for 8 years as my Senator and was attentive to politics for the 8 years before that while people tried to demonize her for being a strong woman. I know that you can make any statement mean anything in interpretation. Otherwise, I would feel that Barak was unbearabgly sexist because calling her whiny or emotional, or a representitive of the "old school" could be seen as mysogynst or agist- but I am not interpretting his remarks that way- his supporters, however lose more of my respect every day with their viscious attacks on her.

I don't understand how the Obamites can attack her on campaign financing when he takes >50% of his cash total from bundlers including from the banking and energy industry and although he takes no lobbyist money (makes up <1% of her total as well)- he has lobbyists working on his campaign. I don't understand why "liberals" call her Bush-like, when Barak and her have differed on only 6 votes of consequence in their overlapping Senate years- and she has voted more progressively in 3 of those. I don't understand why he gets a pass on running such a superficial campaign that he has not actually been forthcoming on his proposed agenda for "change" or why he gets a pass when he has been inconsistent on policies, such as in Iraq, where his statements in 2003 and 2004 and his votes in 2005 and 2006 don't really match his one big anti-war speech or like his sending a representitive to Canada to insure the government that anti-NAFTA posturing is just rhetoric. I don't get it.

I am frankly insulted by those of you Obamites, who may or may not have ever expressed interest or engagement in the struggle before, who may have even voted for the last person to bring "change to DC" and be a "uniter not a divider"-remember him??? telling me what my motivations are for supporting a great woman who would be a great president. It is unlikely I will get a chance to vote for her now, and I will back Obama or any Dem. vs. the rightwing...But I have been a leftist my whole life- and I resent the insults. There are a small number of racists that voted for HRC- just as there are a small number of mysogynysts who voted for Barak. I don't call you all women haters (even if many of the bloggers sound it- I don't claim that the bad apples represent the whole bunch). Please stop the attacks. Increase the peace.
Leon

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 9:10 PM | Report abuse

That email looks almost like a scam they are running to cheat people out of money.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 9:04 PM | Report abuse

You're missing the point. McCain has all the wrong "Keating Five" experience.

I'll go with the new guy.

And for the two old guys still whinnin' about my racial observations in WV & KY. Check the exit polls and comments by voters and come back with an argument. A little sensitive about this issue eh? You must be one of those hard working Americans.


Posted by: Redline | May 28, 2008 9:04 PM | Report abuse

Am I the only one who gets like 5 emails a day begging for money? Here is the latest. I can't get off her list. I have also begun getting a load of spam, it seems they have sold my name to marketers.. I am not sure where they got name in the first place.


Dear XXXX,

This Sunday, voters in Puerto Rico will go to the polls and make their voices heard -- the first time the island has played such a vital role in selecting our party's nominee. At this critical moment, I am depending on you to help me make sure they have a choice. We are depending on the voters of Puerto Rico in our fight to secure the nomination.

It doesn't matter what the pundits say. You and I know this race is up to the voters, and I'm going to keep fighting for every last vote. That's why it is so important that we get voters to the polls over the next few days -- and we can't do that without your help.

Over the next four days, we have the opportunity to make history in the Puerto Rico primary -- and win the national primary vote by redoubling our efforts. That's why a group of supporters has agreed to match contributions today from new donors -- meaning every dollar you give is worth double. Your $50 gift is worth $100, your $25 gift is worth $50 -- even a donation as small as $5 will have twice the impact.

Contribute today, and your donation will go twice as far toward helping us make history.

Puerto Rico isn't the only important deadline our campaign faces. The final two races -- in South Dakota and Montana -- are just six days away. And this Saturday marks another crucial end-of-month fundraising deadline.

And with the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee's decision on Florida and Michigan also coming Saturday, there has never been a more important time to keep our campaign moving forward.

We can finish the primary races strong and win the nomination, but only with your help. And because your contribution today is worth double, today is a great time to give.

Double your impact by making a contribution today.

Throughout the course of this campaign, your support has made the difference time and time again. Now we are facing the last few primaries together, and I wouldn't have it any other way.

Thank you for everything,

Hillary Rodham Clinton

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 9:01 PM | Report abuse

bam


Your numbers are wrong -


Needed to nominate 2210

Hillary is 40 behind Obama with 250 Superdelegates still to decide.

Plus 70 Obama Superdelegates have said privately that they will switch to Hillary if she wins the Popular Vote after Tuesday.

.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 9:00 PM | Report abuse

Obama's main point is that he is neither black nor white, male nor female

He is a blend of all.......


Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 8:58 PM | Report abuse

TheTruth


I think it was Obama who said people were disrespecting his wife.


Funny sight, seeing a metrosexual defend his wife like that.

Anyway ...............


Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 8:57 PM | Report abuse

By law the DNC Rules committee can reinstate at most 50% of the Michigan/Florida delegates (or all delegates with a 50% vote). Even if Hillary gets the proportion she demands (although it would be unfair to Obama), the numbers change as follows:
Needed to win: 2117
Obama delegates inc. estimates of his share of Florida & Michigan "uncommitted" delegates: 2040
Obama needs to clinch nomination: 77
Remaining pledged delegates: 86
Estimate of Obama's take: 35
Remaining superdelegates: 226
Superdelegates Obama needs to clinch nomination: 42

Does anyone think Hillary still has a chance? No, and neither does she. Her goal now is to sabotage Obama's chances in November.

It's time for Democrats and the media to move on to the general election.

Posted by: bam | May 28, 2008 8:56 PM | Report abuse

This election is about national security and who is best able to lead our nation through difficult international times.

It is not a time for inexperience and someone untested, an empty suit.

Would you want to entrust your money to a stock broker with no experience ? Why would you trust the taxpayers dollars?

Why would you trust the nation's national security with someone with no experience and who just lied his way through a primary season???


If you think Obama is going to be able to negotiation better from weakness, you are sadly mistaken. That is not going to fly in the Middle East.


.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 28, 2008 8:56 PM | Report abuse

Hillary's campaign narrative has cratered. She no longer has any credibility and her actions seem more intent on destroying the Democratic party than in uniting it. She has squandered her political reputation and whatever goodwill she may have had at the start of this nomination race. I doubt if any candidate in recent history has had a more profoundly disturbing and polarizing effect on the Democratic Party. She is an embarrassment.

Posted by: oaklynne | May 28, 2008 8:53 PM | Report abuse

What kind of boring argument is this the Clintons are making? I have become spoiled by the manner in which the shell-shocked Clinton campaign has jumped the tracks in weeks past, and have enjoyed the looney attacks on Obama that Bill, Hillary, and their deadenders have been making. She has gotten away with voicing every bigot's wet dream, Bubba of all people is accusing people of disrespecting his wife (because soliciting nobbers from every bit of trailer trash he can is respectful of Hillary), and they're both blaming the media for having the gall to report that Obama leads in contests won, the popular vote, superdelegates, and elected delegates.

Again, when do we finally get to see Bubba wrestling alligators or crushing beer cans against his head? That's what this freak show is destined for.

Oh yeah - all you meat and sock puppets in here are losers.

Posted by: TheTruth | May 28, 2008 8:51 PM | Report abuse

As someone else essentially said, why can not the Clintons or any of their rabid supporters answer the following question: why did you support stripping all the Michigan and Florida delegates because their states broke party rules, then when you became behind in delegates supporting your candidacy, you demanded the rules be completely changed?

None of them can honestly answer this question unless they acknowledge, this is the only way we have any chance of winning the nomination. However, being truthful and honest are alien to these people.

Posted by: Independent | May 28, 2008 8:49 PM | Report abuse

Aynsley |


Add up your numbers again


you are wrong

UNLESS THE DNC IS EXPECTING TO HAVE A 48 STATE ELECTION IN THE FALL TOO.


Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 8:47 PM | Report abuse

So redline and Boutan, when did you realize that you hated white voters ???


.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 8:46 PM | Report abuse

Obama can win EV WITHOUT:
OH and PA and FL (Hillary can't)

Take 2004 results,
give CO(dem trending), IA(caucus victory),
and NM(Richardson)...and all lean
Obama in the Polls.

Give him VA, also (Dem-Sen landslide coming, this fall)...very reasonable.

NOW...he ONLY needs ONE of these:
IN (neighbor state)
NV (trending Dem)
NC (Dole in trouble this fall, big AA pop).

With McCain's shortage of money, I have no
idea HOW he can fend off Obama in HIS states, let alone win a majority of EV's.

Posted by: Aynsley | May 28, 2008 8:43 PM | Report abuse

If that is the case, why do we need to do primary election? Just ask pollsters who should be president. She is in denial and she didn't get it people are tired of Clinton and Bush.

Posted by: T.L. | May 28, 2008 8:42 PM | Report abuse


See the logic is this: if one does not agree with the latte liberals, you must be a racist.


Boutan, Redline - Please stop your soviet style attacks on regular Americans who exercise Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Choice.


.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 8:40 PM | Report abuse


THIS IS ANOTHER RACIST STATEMENT BY AN OBAMA PERSON - RACIST AGAINST WHITES AGAIN.


HOW MANY TIMES DO WE HAVE TO CATCH THE OBAMA PEOPLE IN THE ACT


REDLINE ARE YOU WRITING DIRECTLY FROM OBAMA HEADQUARTERS IN CHICAGO ????


**********************************


Redline writes:


The only way McCain has a chance is if there are enough racist Americans like we saw in WV and KY. And don't try to argue. It was a fact that many folks voted for Hillary because they were uncomfortable voting for a black guy. If you don't know that you live in a fantasy land.

But I believe America has just enough grown-ups to override that BS.

Posted by: Redline | May 28, 2008 7:51 PM


Posted by: | May 28, 2008 8:12 PM

.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 8:38 PM | Report abuse

Redline

It is comments like the one you made today which are driving voters away from your candidate - in addition to the hypocrisy of the candidate himself.


Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 8:36 PM | Report abuse

McCain is going to self-destruct just like Hillary. Obama will emerge victorious!

Hillary's only hope is if Obama loses. My guess is that she will not fully support him and somehow try to sabotage him.

Posted by: Redline | May 28, 2008 8:33 PM | Report abuse

Redline... Agreed.

Posted by: Boutan | May 28, 2008 8:32 PM | Report abuse

Boutan


You should practice saying "President McCain"

.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 8:31 PM | Report abuse

This comment is a disgrace to American politics - now Obama should be asked if he supports this guy

**********************************


Redline writes:


The only way McCain has a chance is if there are enough racist Americans like we saw in WV and KY. And don't try to argue. It was a fact that many folks voted for Hillary because they were uncomfortable voting for a black guy. If you don't know that you live in a fantasy land.

But I believe America has just enough grown-ups to override that BS.

Posted by: Redline | May 28, 2008 7:51 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 8:30 PM | Report abuse

Did you goobers follow the race in WV & KY. The exit polls support my point. And in PA Gov. Randell said he wasn't sure if white folks we're ready to vote for a black guy. Check the numbers and the facts before you explode in being DEEPLY OFFENDED!

Would you like a bottle and a blanket as well?

Posted by: Redline | May 28, 2008 8:29 PM | Report abuse

It is COMPLETELY RELEVANT to point out that Obama hasn't spent enough time in the Senate to actually see McCain fighting with Bush all the time

Obama got to Washington, signed a book deal, went on a book tour - then give me a break.


THEN instead of ACTUALLY DOING HIS JOB when he got off the book tour, Obama started running for President.

OBAMA HAS NOT DONE HIS JOB.

As a taxpayer, we deserve a REFUND on Obama's paycheck.


McCain has been fighting with Bush the whole time - I guess it is understandable that Obama hasn't been around to see that.

.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 28, 2008 8:28 PM | Report abuse

The argument just keeps getting more absurd for Wolfson... now it is essentially "polling suggests we should have the nomination".

Shame for you guys you didn't understand the value of the CAUCUS but spent so much time looking at POLLS.

Clowns.

Last time I checked, polls don't getting any delegates to the floor of the convention.

Bring on June 4, and the end of this circus.

Posted by: Boutan | May 28, 2008 8:28 PM | Report abuse

Obama has NO RIGHT TO SAY that McCain is going to continue Bush's policies.


PERHAPS if Obama actually did his job instead of going on a book tour:


Obama would have seen McCain opposing Bush in the Senate on issue after issue.

The reason Obama hasn't seen this is because Obama hasn't EVEN BEEN COMING TO WORK SINCE BEING ELECTED - OBAMA HAS BEEN COLLECTING A PAYCHECK BUT GOING ON BOOK TOURS AND RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT.


Instead, Obama was MIA selling books instead of WATCHING MCCAIN WORK ACROSS THE AISLE.


Seriously - Obama wasn't doing his job so he wasn't even IN THE SENATE TO BE ABLE TO WATCH MCCAIN SHOW HIM HOW ITS DONE.


Obama, if he wasn't so arrogant and uppity, could have ACTUALLY LEARNED SOMETHING FROM MCCAIN.


NOW we have the curious sight of Obama the inexperience person who knows very little about Washington attempting to find something wrong with the MAVERICK.


The truth is Obama has nothing on McCain so Obama HAS TO MAKE UP SOME SET OF LIES.


Of course, then Obama has to focus-group his lies to see which ones work the best.


Obama sickens anyone who truly wants to see this country run correctly.


Obama take your race-baiting and your lies and your false charges of "offensive remarks" and go back to Chicago.

Charge made.


Charge sticks.

.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 8:25 PM | Report abuse

Obama has NO RIGHT TO SAY that McCain is going to continue Bush's policies.


PERHAPS if Obama actually did his job instead of going on a book tour:


Obama would have seen McCain opposing Bush in the Senate on issue after issue.

The reason Obama hasn't seen this is because Obama hasn't EVEN BEEN COMING TO WORK SINCE BEING ELECTED - OBAMA HAS BEEN COLLECTING A PAYCHECK BUT GOING ON BOOK TOURS AND RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT.


Instead, Obama was MIA selling books instead of WATCHING MCCAIN WORK ACROSS THE AISLE.


Seriously - Obama wasn't doing his job so he wasn't even IN THE SENATE TO BE ABLE TO WATCH MCCAIN SHOW HIM HOW ITS DONE.


Obama, if he wasn't so arrogant and uppity, could have ACTUALLY LEARNED SOMETHING FROM MCCAIN.


NOW we have the curious sight of Obama the inexperience person who knows very little about Washington attempting to find something wrong with the MAVERICK.


The truth is Obama has nothing on McCain so Obama HAS TO MAKE UP SOME SET OF LIES.


Of course, then Obama has to focus-group his lies to see which ones work the best.


Obama sickens anyone who truly wants to see this country run correctly.


Obama take your race-baiting and your lies and your false charges of "offensive remarks" and go back to Chicago.

Charge made.


Charge sticks.

.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 8:25 PM | Report abuse

By the way not all over 60 year old women are for Hillary.

Take Meredith Wood Smith of Portland is chairwoman of the Democratic Party of Oregon and one of 12 Oregon superdelegates.

Read what she wrote in The Oregonian newspaper

http://www.oregonlive.com/commentary/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/editorial/121192890383090.xml&coll=7

(Eat your heart out, Clinton supporters!!!)

Read below:

Why I've chosen to back Barack Obama
Wednesday, May 28, 2008

F or the first time in 40 years, the Oregon Democratic primary has played a pivotal role in deciding who may be our president. In casting our votes, we Oregonians understood the seriousness of our decision.

As one of the superdelegates to the Democratic convention, I've been especially aware of the importance of my choice. It's a choice that may tip the scales between two extremely well-qualified and able people.

I chose to remain neutral until the Oregon votes were counted. It seemed right not to attempt to influence that vote, to listen to both candidates' messages to Oregon voters and to wait until we knew the pledged delegate count.

I have decided to support Sen. Barack Obama.

Why Obama? Because he received the majority of the votes in the Oregon primary, and he demonstrates the leadership needed to get us out of Iraq, restore our economy, begin the tough job of providing health care for all Americans and, most of all, heal the divisions in our nation. His commitment to grass-roots organizing, similar to Howard Dean's "Fifty State Strategy," will help Democrats win our down-ticket races. His deep understanding of our Constitution ensures that he will appoint judges, to both the Supreme Court and lower federal courts, who will truly defend our constitutional rights and freedoms.

In 1960, I was too young to vote, but I was so inspired by John F. Kennedy that I worked on his campaign and continue to be motivated by his legacy of social and civic responsibility. He is one of the reasons I became chairwoman of Oregon's Democratic Party. I believe that Obama is providing that same inspiration for our next generation of leaders.

Finally, the contrast between Obama and Sen. John McCain could not be clearer. On bringing troops home from Iraq. On commitment to our Constitution. On telling the American people the truth. Obama has the ability to build -- not just talk about -- a governing majority to actually solve the major challenges facing America.

Has this been difficult for me? You bet it has.

As a 65-year-old woman, I have a visceral understanding of the fight for gender equality. My deep respect for Sen. Hillary Clinton and what she means to that fight continues and will continue in the years to come. As a senator, an advocate and as a candidate for president, she demonstrates the absolute importance and ability of women to lead. Her strength as a candidate has forever expanded the possibilities for other women. While we have come a long way in securing both gender and racial equality, we still have lots of work to do.

I believe that all of us, from whatever party or political affiliation, should come together to elect Sen. Barack Obama as the next president of the United States.


Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 8:23 PM | Report abuse

It is amazing how many of the Obama people have called the Hillary voters Racist


This is sick


Now everyday Americans who support smaller government and a strong national defense are going to be SUBJECTED TO BEING CALLED RACISTS BY THE OBAMA PEOPLE

Is that your only campaign strategy - to call everyone else a racist ????

I find this EXTREMELY OFFENSIVE ---

.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 8:23 PM | Report abuse

This comment sums up the Obama campaign and David Axelrod's strategy

Hillary may have been fooled.

We are not fooled by the latte liberals - we can see them for who they are.

**********************************


Redline writes:


The only way McCain has a chance is if there are enough racist Americans like we saw in WV and KY. And don't try to argue. It was a fact that many folks voted for Hillary because they were uncomfortable voting for a black guy. If you don't know that you live in a fantasy land.

But I believe America has just enough grown-ups to override that BS.

Posted by: Redline | May 28, 2008 7:51 PM

.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 8:21 PM | Report abuse

This comment is a disgrace to American politics - now Obama should be asked if he supports this guy


**********************************

Redline writes:


The only way McCain has a chance is if there are enough racist Americans like we saw in WV and KY. And don't try to argue. It was a fact that many folks voted for Hillary because they were uncomfortable voting for a black guy. If you don't know that you live in a fantasy land.

But I believe America has just enough grown-ups to override that BS.

Posted by: Redline | May 28, 2008 7:51 PM

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 28, 2008 8:20 PM | Report abuse

I'm still looking for the racist part of my comments, especially since I'm white with family in WV?

Why don't you go talk to some folks there and come back and tell me what they said.

Posted by: Redline | May 28, 2008 8:20 PM | Report abuse

Not really - Im talking about the latte liberals who are completely delusional.

AND don't try to twist my words into a deception.


Hey Words o' Wisdom,

By "OBAMA PEOPLE," do you really mean "Black People?"

(ps- what's with the ALL CAPS, Whitey?)

Posted by: Words of Maniac | May 28, 2008 8:07 PM

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 28, 2008 8:17 PM | Report abuse

WE'VE CAUGHT SOME GUY SPEAKING HIS MIND ABOUT RACE IN AMERICA...ITS THAT DAMN VAST OBAMA CONSPIRACY.

Posted by: Redline | May 28, 2008 8:17 PM | Report abuse

I'm just citing the poll numbers form WV and KY. It was about race. Have you been there? Have you been following the campaign?

You can pretend that our history and record on race is different, but I base mine on facts and experience.

Many black folks stopped voting for Hillary after she and her bonehead husband started casting their poison.

Check your facts!

Posted by: Redline | May 28, 2008 8:13 PM | Report abuse

THIS IS ANOTHER RACIST STATEMENT BY AN OBAMA PERSON - RACIST AGAINST WHITES AGAIN.


HOW MANY TIMES DO WE HAVE TO CATCH THE OBAMA PEOPLE IN THE ACT


REDLINE ARE YOU WRITING DIRECTLY FROM OBAMA HEADQUARTERS IN CHICAGO ????

**********************************


Redline writes:

The only way McCain has a chance is if there are enough racist Americans like we saw in WV and KY. And don't try to argue. It was a fact that many folks voted for Hillary because they were uncomfortable voting for a black guy. If you don't know that you live in a fantasy land.

But I believe America has just enough grown-ups to override that BS.

Posted by: Redline | May 28, 2008 7:51 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 8:12 PM | Report abuse

CALL TO DEMOCRACY IN ACTION FROM INFORMED DEMOCRATS TO DNC

To: DNC Members
From: Informed Democrats
Re: Michigan and Florida Voters Candidate Intent and Voices Counted devoid of misogynistic, anti-woman, and/or sexist behavior
Date: Until Michigan and Florida are Seated

Dear Governor Dean and the Esteemed DNC Members,

As a lifelong Democrat, I continue to ask myself why you, the Democratic National Committee continue to conduct yourselves in the tradition of the Republican Party?

Throughout the history of the United States of America, we have been fortunate enough to have had many major political parties: Republican, Federalist, Democratic Republican, Whig, Free Soil Party, Know Nothings, Populist, Progressive, Bull Moose, Reform and of course, our beloved Democratic Party.

We are Americans; therefore, we are bright, intelligent, literate, passionate, honest, and hard-working and sometimes Bible thumping and Second Amendment gun-totters.

Therefore, for the love of our Democratic Party, please cease and desist your deplorable actions against Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and seat Michigan and Florida as the voices of the voters intended, and award her the delegates she EARNED fair and square.

Why embarrass the Democratic Party any further by awarding the nomination to the media created Manchurian Candidate Obama and wait for the Republicans and the 529 to unload to the world Obama's unelectable dirty laundry: Antoin Rezko, William Ayers, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Iraqi born Aiham Alsammarae, the former electricity minister convicted of corruption in Iraq and his deal with Obama and Rezko to build nuclear power plants in Iraq-a nation we are currently at war?

If you will not listen to reason, please accept this CALL TO DEMOCRACY IN ACTION as fair warning that the17 million plus Americans voting for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, if Michigan and Florida are not seated with Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton's full award allocation, will in fact:

Leave the Democratic Party en masse;

Work diligently against any Democratic candidate who willfully and purposefully bashed, maligned, or denigrated Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton for misogynistic, anti-woman, and/or sexist purposes (don't think we can't, we are a powerful coalition, and we can give our $2,300.00 personally to any candidate we like and agree);

Vote for Senator John McCain, USMC retired in November if Senator Barack Obama is the Democratic Party's nominee (trust and believe- we will never get behind Senator Barack Obama or mindlessly fall in line with the misogynistic, anti-woman, and/or sexist behavior called for to turn against our parties most electable candidate Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton; and lastly,

Watch with "I told you so" satisfaction and indignation for the next eight years as the Republicans retain the White House and the Republicans regain the House and the Senate.

We as Informed Democrats will take no more misogynistic, anti-woman, and/or sexist behavior from you, Governor Dean and your Esteemed DNC Members.

Senator Obama is arrogant, presumptive and condescending to say, "I will allow her half of the delegates". Who does he think he is? He is not the Great Barack the media has created; he is only a CANDIDATE for the presidency of the United States of America. He is not President, or even God-forbid the Democratic nominee.

Due to your misogynistic, anti-woman, and/or sexist behavioral actions, we are forced to place the United States of America above the Democratic Party. Enough is enough.

Democratically Yours,


Informed Democrat

Posted by: Informed Democrat | May 28, 2008 8:12 PM | Report abuse

1) Hillary's recent wins were corrupted by crossover Republicans who figured McCain had a better chance against Hillary than Obama. This same game continues in response to polls and in the blogosphere, with neocons masking as either Hillary or Obama supporters to fan the flames.
2) Her dirty deceitful tricks affected Obama's standing in the polls.
3) She has consistently had unfavorable ratings over 50%.
4) Her campaign was "ready on day one" and has gone downhill ever since.
5) Obama has not yet had a chance to run against McCain. His style will be far different than his campaign against another Democrat. Obama overcame a 20 point deficit against Hillary, and can do the same against McCain once Hillary is no longer biting at his heels.

Democrats and the media need to focus on the November race and stop giving Hillary the spotlight she craves.

Posted by: Barbara Campbell | May 28, 2008 8:11 PM | Report abuse

Hey Words o' Wisdom,

By "OBAMA PEOPLE," do you really mean "Black People?"

(ps- what's with the ALL CAPS, Whitey?)

Posted by: Words of Maniac | May 28, 2008 8:07 PM | Report abuse

Independent


Fairly is the key word you used.

Running a campaign based on false charges of "being offended" is not fair

Asking the Superdelegates to vote in a racist way, to fear "riots in the streets if they do not vote for the black man" - that is not fair


There is a growing sense in the democratic party that Obama did not win fairly, that his tactics STOLE the election.


That is not leadership - that is FRAUD.


.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 8:06 PM | Report abuse

Wow,

One Clinton supporter spouting the "I'll vote for McCain" and one McCain supporter trying to claim that McCain has not caved and sprinted to the Bush camp. How many notes can these two people write?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 8:05 PM | Report abuse

Can you smell what Barrack is cookin'?

Old Pork Butt!

Besides, McCain is going to tank his own campaign...mark my words. He's a loose cannon with a crappy campaign team. You're gonna wish it was Mitt instead of Mr. Self-Destructo.

Posted by: Redline | May 28, 2008 8:05 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, Redline is right about that.

Sorry, its true. We dont vote for blakcs

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 8:05 PM | Report abuse

It is amazing how many of the Obama people have called the Hillary voters Racist


This is sick


Now everyday Americans who support smaller government and a strong national defense are going to be SUBJECTED TO BEING CALLED RACISTS BY THE OBAMA PEOPLE


Is that your only campaign strategy - to call everyone else a racist ????


I find this EXTREMELY OFFENSIVE ---

.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 28, 2008 8:04 PM | Report abuse

Who said Gore?

Are you kidding?

Stop numbering your fantasies... It's sad.

Posted by: Gore? | May 28, 2008 8:04 PM | Report abuse

Had Senator Clinton fairly won a majority of the pledged delegates, despite her many flaws, most of Barack's supporters would have voted for her in the fall. However, the only way she can win is by cheating, changing the rules, if the Michigan and Florida delegates are seated according to her royal decree. This would give the Clintons a slight chance of stealing the election if enough superdelegates were accomplices. Were the Clintons to thus steal the nomination, any of Barack's supporters or independents with an ounce of backbone and moral conscience would not vote for Senator Clinton.

Posted by: Independent | May 28, 2008 8:02 PM | Report abuse

THIS IS ANOTHER RACIST STATEMENT BY AN OBAMA PERSON - RACIST AGAINST WHITES AGAIN.

HOW MANY TIMES DO WE HAVE TO CATCH THE OBAMA PEOPLE IN THE ACT


REDLINE ARE YOU WRITING DIRECTLY FROM OBAMA HEADQUARTERS IN CHICAGO ????

**********************************


Redline writes:


The only way McCain has a chance is if there are enough racist Americans like we saw in WV and KY. And don't try to argue. It was a fact that many folks voted for Hillary because they were uncomfortable voting for a black guy. If you don't know that you live in a fantasy land.

But I believe America has just enough grown-ups to override that BS.

Posted by: Redline | May 28, 2008 7:51 PM

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 28, 2008 8:01 PM | Report abuse

McCain is going to "clean-up" the Middle East...? Okay George.

He's the great white hope they've been waiting for!

You keep watchin' the A-Team or Walker Texas Ranger, but try to remember it's just aTV show.

Posted by: Redline | May 28, 2008 8:01 PM | Report abuse

Redline


You should practice saying "President McCain"

seriously man, you are better off by far when McCain wins.

Obama will make an even bigger mess of the economy.

Posted by: 3 | May 28, 2008 7:59 PM | Report abuse

McCain is the guy who crawled on his knees to Bush buddy!

After what Bush did to him in SC he still took his hand, just like the sellout he is. I know the guy and he's a royal A-hole... and scary as well. He also said Rev. Parsley was his spiritual guide... do the math guy.

Posted by: Redline | May 28, 2008 7:56 PM | Report abuse

Redline


Pelosi's Congress is supporting the WAR by funding it year in and year out.


You have no idea who to be against, do you ???


Go with McCain - he will fight the lobbyist and make Congress more responsive to the people, not the money interests.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 28, 2008 7:53 PM | Report abuse

The only way McCain has a chance is if there are enough racist Americans like we saw in WV and KY. And don't try to argue. It was a fact that many folks voted for Hillary because they were uncomfortable voting for a black guy. If you don't know that you live in a fantasy land.

But I believe America has just enough grown-ups to override that BS.

Posted by: Redline | May 28, 2008 7:51 PM | Report abuse

Redline


Most of your democratic party voted with Bush on the war.


You pretend that the democrats never voted a dollar for the war.


You are practicing deception.

McCain and Bush do NOT get along - to say otherwise is a lie and you know it.

.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 28, 2008 7:49 PM | Report abuse

Reprinting campaign press releases of talking points virtually verbatim, plus a couple of original paragraphs at the end does not make for scintillating political analysis.

Posted by: gbooksdc | May 28, 2008 7:49 PM | Report abuse

To the poster at 7:44 PM


You and all of America is lucky to have McCain as our next President - he will clean up the Middle East - and expand jobs in our economy

You do not need an empty suit making a mess of our economy with a bunch of misguided social programs and more affirmative action.


.

Posted by: Words of Wisom | May 28, 2008 7:48 PM | Report abuse

There is no need for sniper experience in the white house

Posted by: bluejazz | May 28, 2008 7:45 PM | Report abuse

McCain tied himself to Bush...he has no honor in this game. He slinked up to Bush just because he thinks it will help...dummy...just like his Rev./Pastor supporters. He's now a relic of the past. If he would have stood his ground against Bush he might have some respect, but he lost what little he had.

Posted by: Redline | May 28, 2008 7:45 PM | Report abuse

McCain should counter by stating that Obama has more in common with Bush than McCain does - they both love to smear people in South Carolina.

Can we have a break with the deceptions here.

Chris - I request that you call out Obama on this one..........


.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 28, 2008 7:44 PM | Report abuse

Have you been watching Mccain, When confronted with a tough question or one he doesn't want to answer he begins twitching and has all kinds of facial ticks. They are going to push this guys buttons like crazy and watch him self-destruct before our eyes as the months go by. I almost feel sorry for the old guy. We know he is a little nuts anyway and now he is the republicans sacrificial lamb for this election cycle as they try to rebuild their parties creditably. Poor Mccain, he will have a legacy that will be an embarrassment. Heck, they can beat him with little more the bush used to beat him out of the nomination. This guy is a complete loser and the republicans know it.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 7:44 PM | Report abuse

I believe in affirmative action but this is too important a time to have an inaexperienced affirmative action president.Majority of the public it appears understands that though DNC elite will likley stick with their empty suit.

Posted by: jenn | May 28, 2008 7:41 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton is trained argumentative lawyer. Sometimes, illegitimate arguments may help winning the case. For Michigan and Florida violation of Party Rules striping to be seated in the convention, DNC Rules Committee going to have a meeting on Saturday to destory its own Rules and bow to Hillary Clinton, at least, half of she asked for.

Now, she asks uncommitted SUPERDELEGATES endorsing her. Her argument is Sen. Obama will be unable to win McCain, and she will be able to win McCain. SHE HAD A SUPER START LAST YEAR. So many SUPERDEGATES rushed to her because of former president Bill Clinton connection, or women for woman. Her spoiled behaviors blew some of them away. Her holdings now are (low consciousness) LOYALTIES and weman. How she expect these uncommitted genuine SUPERDELEGATE move to her?

If all going on her way, it will be a disaster to the Democratic Party.

Posted by: Joan | May 28, 2008 7:40 PM | Report abuse

We simply cannot afford another four -- or eight -- years of neither Clinton and Bush.
Yo both too OLD.

Posted by: bluejazz | May 28, 2008 7:38 PM | Report abuse

McCain is at his job! Please, he's missed more votes than either Hillary or Obama while he's chugging around on his stupid bus, kissing up to Rev Hagee and the likes. Ha - He couldn't even make it into town to vote one way or another on a Vetern's Bill - the group he's supposed to support so much! It was more important for McCain to raise money than to support the troops! Typical Republican - all talk but no substance!

Posted by: dre7861 | May 28, 2008 7:36 PM | Report abuse

"bluejazz
you are a fool, you have no idea what you are talking about."

You mush be pretty OLD when you talk about blue and red states. With Obama there is only one United of States.
The Bush and Clinton era are done, WELL DONE INDEED... time for us to move on and Hillary moves back to the kitchen.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 7:35 PM | Report abuse

Obama has no right to attempt to tie McCain to Bush because it is a lie.

Bush smeared McCain in South Carolina -

Sounds like Bush and Obama have something in common - the South Carolina smear move!!!!


Obama is not going to be able to lie his way into the Presidency.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 28, 2008 7:34 PM | Report abuse

I don't know where some people are getting their facts but saying that the GOP has raised more money than the DNC does not know what the hell they're talking about. Earlier this week, McCain had a fund raiser with Bush that had to be moved to a smaller venue because not enough tickets were sold. The Post reported a few weeks back that the Chairman of the Committee that raises funds to re-elect Republican Members of Congress told the party that they were on their own as far as getting funds. Every news source has reported how the GOP is having a hard time raising campaign contributions - and just remember only a few months back McCain's campaign was running so low on money that he had to borrow some to keep his campaign going. While over on the Democratic side Obama is flush with cash. Let us also remember that in the last three special elections, in districts that were historically Republican, that ran anti-Obama campaigns, the Democrats won each of them. All I hear from the Republicans is a bunch of hot air.

Posted by: dre7861 | May 28, 2008 7:31 PM | Report abuse

bluejazz


you are a fool, you have no idea what you are talking about.


With Obama on the top of the ticket, SO MANY downticket democrats will lose in blue states

Obama's people deserve what they get

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 7:27 PM | Report abuse

Hillary can have the nomination IF:

Bill discloses the names of people who have hired him or given him, his foundation or his library, ANY money since 2001. Please include the amounts given.

Hillary has told reporters Bills financials are "off limits" Why?


Bill answers questions about what happened on Ron Burkle's private jet, two years ago, when ONLY BILL and a "lovely young actress" were the only passengers on a "cross country flight"


Posted by: bob North Smithfield | May 28, 2008 7:26 PM | Report abuse


HOW STUPID COULD OBAMA BE - TO CRITICIZE MCCAIN ON SOMETHING WHEN OBAMA SHOULD HAVE BEEN THERE TO KNOW THE EXACT OPPOSITE ???

I am beginning to wonder about Obama.


Seriously folks, McCain has been fighting with the Bush administration for years

so why is Obama attempting to create a deception the other way ???

Creep.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 28, 2008 7:25 PM | Report abuse

If the Democratic Party leaders can just decide who they want to be the nominee, as Clinton apparently wants, what was the point of having primaries and caucuses for the last five months?

Posted by: jbilsborrow | May 28, 2008 7:24 PM | Report abuse

PERHAPS IF OBAMA WAS AT HIS JOB, He would know what McCain has been saying in the Senate and IT CERTAINLY HAS NOT BEEN SUPPORTING THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION.

This whole campaign theme of Obama shows Obama has not been at his job.

How many sick days has Obama taken with his book deals and book tours and running for President?

Shouldnt Obama return part of his paycheck to the American people?

IF Obama was there at his job all the time, Obama would know that McCain has been fighting the Bush administration.

.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 28, 2008 7:24 PM | Report abuse

"As a Hillary supporter I can tell you there is no way I will vote for Obama."

PLEASE don't b/c Obama will win with you and without you.

Posted by: bluejazz | May 28, 2008 7:21 PM | Report abuse

Either Clinton or McCain will get the votes come November. If we Democrats nominate Obama we will once again lose in November. It's about experience and solving some very big problems and people will respect John McCain's experience and service regardless of party affiliation to solve the Bush dilemna if the choice is McCain or Obama. I for one will cross over.

Posted by: Euridite | May 28, 2008 7:19 PM | Report abuse

Obama has done nothing in the Senate


Nothing.

For Obama to start to say that McCain will continue Bush's policies is a lie and a deception.

Obama is attempting to deceive people.


Is that Obama's campaign theme for the fall - ANOTHER DECEPTION ????

.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 28, 2008 7:19 PM | Report abuse

"You are not electable if you are losing the election. Hillary is losing."

"if Hillary was so electable she would be winning the election she is losing now, the PRIMARY ELECTION. end of story."

Refresh my memory, how many times since 1968 have the Democratic Party NOT nominated a BREATHING American to stand in the presidential election held in every fourth November? How many times have a Democrat been INVITED to the White House BY the Electoral College?

Let's see: 1968, 1972, 1980, 1984, 1988, 2000 and 2004. Were the Democrats so sad and pessimistic that they WEPT during the seven Conventions? Or were they elated and certain they would win in November? Did they PREDICT they would win? Or did they KNOW they would win?

So the score is 30% (1976, 1992 and 1996). Which one of the seven LOSERS was NOT preceived as LIBERAL by voters when the polls opened in November? I can think of merely ONE, who was Jimmy Carter, who lost his re-election by winning 49 Electoral College votes against Ronald Reagan's 489 and winning 6 States and DC against Reagan's 44.

How did Reagan manage to win the entire Northeast save Rhode Island? Who coined the phrase "Reagan Democrats?" Why REAGAN Democrats? Is there anyone that is NOT deranged in the Obama camp saying Mr. Obama can win even 300 Electoral College Votes handily through his coalition of MOST Blacks, MOST Liberals, NOT nearly as many young people and even FEWER Republican converts? Will that leave plenty of room for error so that you taek it to the bank and retire?

"The NYT endorsed Clinton." They also endorsed John McCain. Did they not publish a lengthy piece suggesting Mr. McCain was involved sexually with a woman lobbyist?

The paper seemingly was against the Iraq War. But did they NOT encourage Judy Miller to interview an unnamed Iraqi who insisted Saddam Hussein had WMD's? Did Dick Cheney NOT quote the NYT when he appeared on "Meet the Press" to push for the war?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 7:18 PM | Report abuse

The poster at 708 is correct Obama has no right to ask for a promotion when he hasn't even done the job he's got now.


.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 7:16 PM | Report abuse

bluejazz


Keep on dreaming - or is that a nightmare


Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 7:15 PM | Report abuse

"I fully expect that as Barack Obama is sworn in as President of the United States in January 2009 Hillary Clinton will be standing behind him at the inauguration holding up a sign reading "Count Michigan and Florida!"."

Hillary is holding the sign and Bill is holding the shotgun.

Posted by: bluejazz | May 28, 2008 7:10 PM | Report abuse

As a Hillary supporter I can tell you there is no way I will vote for Obama.


I decided that around the time Gerry Ferraro was attacked by the Obama campaign.

So, Obama people, you have your way, however you will lose a good chunk of the democratic party and I believe even your side will be disillusioned very quickly.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 7:10 PM | Report abuse

Obama has NO RIGHT TO SAY that McCain is going to continue Bush's policies.


PERHAPS if Obama actually did his job instead of going on a book tour:


Obama would have seen McCain opposing Bush in the Senate on issue after issue.

The reason Obama hasn't seen this is because Obama hasn't EVEN BEEN COMING TO WORK SINCE BEING ELECTED - OBAMA HAS BEEN COLLECTING A PAYCHECK BUT GOING ON BOOK TOURS AND RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT.

Instead, Obama was MIA selling books instead of WATCHING MCCAIN WORK ACROSS THE AISLE.


Seriously - Obama wasn't doing his job so he wasn't even IN THE SENATE TO BE ABLE TO WATCH MCCAIN SHOW HIM HOW ITS DONE.

Obama, if he wasn't so arrogant and uppity, could have ACTUALLY LEARNED SOMETHING FROM MCCAIN.


NOW we have the curious sight of Obama the inexperience person who knows very little about Washington attempting to find something wrong with the MAVERICK.


The truth is Obama has nothing on McCain so Obama HAS TO MAKE UP SOME SET OF LIES.


Of course, then Obama has to focus-group his lies to see which ones work the best.


Obama sickens anyone who truly wants to see this country run correctly.

Obama take your race-baiting and your lies and your false charges of "offensive remarks" and go back to Chicago.

Charge made.


Charge sticks.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 7:08 PM | Report abuse

Obama now has more delegates and will win the nominee. I'm sure that most of Clinton supporters will vote for Obama when he is nominated. If some of Clinton supporters vote for McCain they are not using common sense and good judgement. Why would they want to vote for another 4 years of Bush policy seeing the condition this country is in today. I belive most of the Clinton people who vote for Mccain are possible racist and just don't want a black person as President.

Posted by: lclon | May 28, 2008 7:08 PM | Report abuse

So it's Hillary or nobody, huh?

Hmm.

Decisions, decisions ... Hillary ... nobody ... Hillary ... nobody ...

Maybe we should chat first.

Posted by: pressF1 | May 28, 2008 7:05 PM | Report abuse

bad limerick i hope somebody else can do better

Posted by: sorry bought that | May 28, 2008 7:04 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton sent this letter to Democratic superdelegates:

"For all the women who are energized for the first time, and voting for the first time. For the little girls - and little boys - whose parents lift them onto their shoulders at our rallies, and whisper in their ears, "See, you can be anything you want to be." As the first woman ever to be in this position, I believe I have a responsibility to them."


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/05/clinton_letter_to_superdelegat.html

The information to the remaining uncommited supers should also contain this:

"Californians switch from Clinton to Obama"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOMoxl0qSzw

Posted by: piktor | May 28, 2008 7:03 PM | Report abuse

she said a lot she really talked quite a bit she mention war and didnt even give a quip,
when her husband was around she let him dilly and dance even her daughter was set out to prance,
she talked BIG, but didnt compete,
the delegate count came down she found she was missing her crown,
she claimed only twas her could slay
mcCain
roared her with two more states the red dragon would lay at her feet!!
much to her surprise a BLACK KNIGHT ON A DARK HORSE came into the fray,
he hewn LEFT AND RIGHT
EVEN his uncle he cut down with no mercy in the HEAT OF BATTLE,
even so he said with two more states your effort will be naught,
tis the delegate count, this is a PRIMARY the MAIN BATTLE IS STILL TO be FOUGHT,
either ally OR be cut down tis your choice,
FALSE GOLDWATER GAL
she cut her own throat by her EXTREMELY BAD RHETORIC YA ALL

Posted by: the leperchan | May 28, 2008 7:02 PM | Report abuse

Jerry:

You're unworthy of debate. You fail to see the picture clearly, either wittingly or unwittingly. In your estimation, the popular vote does not include those who participated in caucuses. If you're unwilling to accept that simple fact then your stance on other issues are rendered moot because you, like your candidate, have zero credibility.

I suspect, per your last "point," you were amongst those 72% in supporting Bush's war. You, like your candidate, were "fooled" by a blurring of the facts. But, had your candidate read the National Intelligence Estimate perhaps she would have made a more prudent decision. And had you not taken at face value the "evidence" being presented supporting Bush's War, we may not be where we are today.

However, you're obviously as easily manipulated now as you were then. It's evidenced by you're unquestioning support of your candidate.

Posted by: JohnGalt1 | May 28, 2008 7:01 PM | Report abuse

let's finish this discussion, both Hillary and Harold Ickes strongly and publicly endorsed the position of not counting MI and FL if they broke the rules. It is dishonest- surprise- to try to make the case now that the time has passed. Many people did not vote in those states because they know they did not count. It is disingenuous for her to insist they be seated as they voted.

Posted by: Mark | May 28, 2008 7:01 PM | Report abuse

To the Washington Post:

The trolls are one thing, one can view them as amusement.

Obscenity is another and should not be tolerated in a public forum.

Brent should be banned.

Please fix the login process.

Posted by: smartinsen | May 28, 2008 7:00 PM | Report abuse

Progressive Pete: The Rush "Chaos" JOKE came after the damage had been done, and it was a JOKE indeed and had little to no effect in the voting that came after. The damage was done in the Caucus and X-Over states early on as I explained in my earlier Post. From everything I can find from Exit Polling, Talk Shows, Current Polling, and The Media, ETC., about 25% [Twenty Five Percent] of Repubs that voted in these states and probably more in Caucus states went for Obama in their effort to stop Hillary. many of these same Repubs that changed their Registration in the non X-Over States to vote for Obama in their effort to stop Hillary have no intention, and I would strongly suggest, of voting for Obama in the GE. I cannot see a repeat of 1972, but it is virtually impossible for Dems to win if Obama is the nominee. I think about a month ago I saw that even California could be in play because of the high Hispanic Population, and dismissed it out of hand, but I have seen this come up again, and the Governator is a strong supporter of McCain, so I am going to try, in the next few days, to see if it valid or not. Sounds Crazy, but this whole process could not have been more Crazy.

Posted by: lylepink | May 28, 2008 7:00 PM | Report abuse

I fully expect that as Barack Obama is sworn in as President of the United States in January 2009 Hillary Clinton will be standing behind him at the inauguration holding up a sign reading "Count Michigan and Florida!".

Posted by: maupin1 | May 28, 2008 6:59 PM | Report abuse

"It looks like its Hilary or McCain ,either way the country wins as they would have someone with real experience in charge not just someone who talks fancy."

Yes, this country really needs someone with real experience like mr. Bush again.
Bush has alot of white house experience just like Hillary before he came back to the white house in 2000.
4 more years in Iraq is what the Clinton and Bush want.

Posted by: bluejazz | May 28, 2008 6:54 PM | Report abuse

Is it not arrogant to base your closing argument to the superdelegates on the notion that, "ONLY I CAN WIN."? Am I missing something?

Posted by: godblessusa | May 28, 2008 6:51 PM | Report abuse

> that's the part that sticks in my craw, since clinton will likely end up the popular vote winner, possibly even by the strictest interpretation.

There's no "popular vote" to win, because there are states that ran caucuses that have NO popular votes to total.

In other words, there's no such thing as the "popular vote" because of the way this thing is run.

And even for the states that give caucus totals, caucuses require hours of attendance, not just a vote, so they get maybe 10% of the turnout (and I'm being generous here). So the "popular vote" Clinton is claiming to win has small states that are worth 10x as much as they would be, and big states that are worth 1/10th what they should be.

If you want something closer to a real popular vote at this point in time, look at CNN's poll of Democratic voters' likely choice. It's shown Obama in the lead for a very long time now and it's more fairly representative of country-wide sentiment than any popular frankenvote total that tries to add primaries and caucuses together ever could be.

Posted by: Joe | May 28, 2008 6:51 PM | Report abuse

Have you all noticed that a majority of Clinton cabinet members have come out in support of Obama. What does that tell you about the criminal Clintons.....will that stain come out?

Posted by: Mark | May 28, 2008 6:51 PM | Report abuse

Hillary's play on Florida and Michigan is actually an insult to the 48 states who followed the rules.

Being unfair to Obama is secondary.

She is being unfair to the 48 states, mind you it is 48 states, not 4 or 8 states, who followed the rules and played by the rules.

Clinton supporters failed to see that.

How can you reward a rule breaker. Tell that to your First Grader.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 6:47 PM | Report abuse

cabick... by no measure except creative math is she ahead in the popular vote. She counts MI where Obama was not on the ballot and does not count caucusus. Intellectually dishonest to go along with her dishonesty about everything else...Bosnian sniper alert!!!

Posted by: mark | May 28, 2008 6:44 PM | Report abuse

In the end - I have come to loathe Hillary and Bill more than I ever thought possible.

I voted for him twice, and despite all of his challenges in office, I was proud of my votes considering the alternatives.

I now find myself ashamed to be associated with the Democratic Party because of the non-stop shinnanigans of these two and their "loyal staffers".

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH - you LOST! Go away, now and count your money!!!

Posted by: BlueBear | May 28, 2008 6:44 PM | Report abuse

Popular vote means about as much in the Democratic primary as it does in the General. IT MEANS NOTHING! The nominee is chosen by delegates. Pulling ahead? How about these numbers. Pay close attention to the pledged numbers. Obama has been pulling ahead since the beginning.

Delegates: Pledged Super Total Needed
Obama 1,660.5 318.5 1,979 46
Clinton 1,499.5 280.5 1,780 245
Remaining 86 197 283

Posted by: Progressive Pete | May 28, 2008 6:43 PM | Report abuse

HrC's latest logic, such as it is, discounts the states with caucuses. I won in primary states. Ok, sure you did if you dont count lots of states, but actually those caucuses count, silly.

HRC's big state strategy failed, and now she attempts to redefine reality to conform to her failed strategy. Actually, Mrs C, caucus states do count, and have delegates.

No amount of redefining the rules will allow you to win.
Popular vote is not the way this process works, no matter how many women hound the DNC this week. No one will overturn the election based on the total number of votes of Puerto Rico which chose not to be a state, so they dont have to pay taxes.
The way this process actually works is that Obama will win delegates in PR, and so will you and he will have more than he needs and you wont. So talk about total votes is irrelevant.
You racked up a lot of votes in NYC. Let's look at that:
If you win NY by 1 million votes and Obama gets zero votes in 82 precincts in NYC, some people think you were trying to steal the election, since some of those precincts where he got ZERO votes were in Harlem. You wouldnt try to steal the election would you Mrs C? The guys who entered the zeros in the computer said, we must have made a mistake. Oh, sure.

Just as with Texas, where you claimed you didnt understand the process, you are always a bit off, never quite getting it.
The delegate count in Texas was 99 for Obama, 94, for you.
You lost Texas and Bill was right, you should have quit after you lost Texas, but you lied your big smile and pretended you won.
The media were so scared of you that they covered for you on that lie for a month. Weird, but true.

Now you want to make Michigan Ok as is, like you are Stalin, the only candidate on the ballot. No way, Mrs C. Small states are first for a reason, so that people LIKE YOU, with NAME and Great fortune, cannot buy the election.

We will not stand for your lies another day.

Posted by: bruce becker | May 28, 2008 6:43 PM | Report abuse

It looks like its Hilary or McCain ,either way the country wins as they would have someone with real experience in charge not just someone who talks fancy.

Posted by: Truth | May 28, 2008 6:43 PM | Report abuse

"that's the part that sticks in my craw, since clinton will likely end up the popular vote winner, possibly even by the strictest interpretation."

NO, she's not going to win popular vote unless you count only the states that she won.

Posted by: Demgirl08 | May 28, 2008 6:42 PM | Report abuse

Suicide watch for Hillary next month.

Posted by: bluejazz | May 28, 2008 6:37 PM | Report abuse

"Remember, however, that many of the undecided superdelegates are elected officials and are not generally in the business of going against public opinion."

that's the part that sticks in my craw, since clinton will likely end up the popular vote winner, possibly even by the strictest interpretation.

there's a difference between public opinion and pundit opinion, but reporters seem no longer to recognize it.

there's no question that if the tables were turned and clinton looked likely to win on delegates but lose on the popular vote that we'd be seeing many a story about how the superdelegates would have to follow "public opinion," meaning the popular vote.

Posted by: cabick | May 28, 2008 6:37 PM | Report abuse

Hey, so if Obama is the winner, why isn't he winning? Why isn't he pulling ahead in some substantial way in the Rasmussen and Gallup tracking polls? Why haven't ALL of the undecided supers declared for him?

The DNC elites are IN for him, so is the MSM... but voters are almost perfectly evenly split... and as usual the voters have a certain indisputable wisdom.

Posted by: Texas Rose | May 28, 2008 6:36 PM | Report abuse

You are not electable if you are losing the election. Hillary is losing.

Posted by: Brendan | May 28, 2008 6:33 PM | Report abuse

With all of the lies told by Hillary, how could we possibly believe that she is REALLY against the war? Especially, considering that she has direct intelligence connections and had the capability of doing due dilligence to learn that the alleged chemical weapons in Iraq were far fetched at best. Hillary did not need to take Bush's word for this. she should have checked out the facts herself. She is no fool. She lied to us at first and said she believed Bush, then later she said well she did do due dilligence... but, given the history of Iraq... Never did i hear her apologize for her wrong decision. Edwards apologized and i respect him for it.

I dont care what the hypothetical situation asked of her, or what the leaders of Iran say, it was asinine for Hillary to say that she would obliterate Iran -- at a time when the world is calling for them to disarm or halt efforts to obtain nuclear weapons. Hillary eggs them on as if she is looking for a fight. Do you think those leaders of Iran will take this threat, made by a woman at that, and back down in fear or will they have more incentive to continue the buildup? Especially knowing that the USA invaded Iraq and entered into war that was deemed unlawful by the international community, the United Nations and the European Union? Did her fight mentality help the effort, or hurt?

Americans do not want war! and we need a leader that can diffuse the threat of a nuclear war! -- we want to ease the tension, not build it up. This is why we need to talk and enter into dialogue. Those comments made by Hillary to obliterate Iran caused an uproar in the international community -- all around the world.

We are isolated enough as is. It matters to the farmers and to our businesses because we wish to export our goods, and strengthen the economy. If the world hates us they will boycott us, as a policy or out of general principle. We need to show the world we are not the barbarians that some believe us to be. Americans reject the unlawful and immoral war too! And we are doing something about it! We are holding our elected officials accountable for this atrocity that has lead to the death, torture and rape of 100s of thousands of innocent women and children.

Leadership comes in a variety of ways. There is a time to fight, there is a time to negotiate, there is a time to neutralize and stabilize; and there is a time to exercise humility and caution. It is easy to fly off the handle and react. We need control. We need to re-establish our position and respectability in the international community. Obama can lead the way. No, he cannot solve all of the problems, but he can heal wounds domestically and internationally so that we are in a better position to come together and all do our part to get out of this mess, and meet the economic challenges in the decade before us.

Posted by: Harriett | May 28, 2008 6:32 PM | Report abuse

Clinton's claims are based on her willingness to continue to suspend our Constitutional guarantees to appeal to the right wing and her demagoguery among old women and drunk bowlers.

She is unfit to represent the Democratic party, no less command the armed forces. Thank God her management skills are so weak that she rolled her entire fortune and her dice on the Super Tuesday that didnt happen.

Now her last best chance is to threaten us and demand we change the rules.
No thanks, wretch.


Posted by: bruce becker | May 28, 2008 6:31 PM | Report abuse

"Did you read your favorite Clinton-bashing paper, the NYT today?"

The NYT endorsed Clinton.

Posted by: DDAWD | May 28, 2008 6:29 PM | Report abuse

"...Give it up Shillary fnas, it's OVER"

On closer examination, I realize both you and your wife gave IT up to the new bla(k gentleman you met through your rich white pu88yman friends and their wives who apparently also gave IT up to... How many bla(k endowed bla(k gentleman did you hire? I am happy some people made some money. While the economy is in bad shape for some people.

Posted by: Brent | May 28, 2008 6:26 PM | Report abuse

I'm from North Carolina and all I see when I ride around are signs for Obama. I believe North Carolina is going to go blue in the election because of Obama. The definition of "electable" is going to change in this election because people who have never been engaged enough to vote before will come out in record numbers. States that have gone Republican in the last few elections are going to go Democratic this time. When Obama is elected in November, it will be by an inclusive cross-sample of the American people, which in itself, is a victory for democracy.

Posted by: ProPsych | May 28, 2008 6:24 PM | Report abuse

I think Scott McCellan just gift wrapped a present for Obama. A member of Bush's inner circle saying we should not have gone to war.

Good bye Hillary....watch out for those Bosnian snipers on your way out.

Posted by: Mark | May 28, 2008 6:23 PM | Report abuse

Given that Obama has been attacked from two sides (Clinton and McCain) for the last two months, I have been impressed at how strong his poll numbers have remained. On the other hand, Hillary has faced no attacks from McCain, and few from Obama (her only problems have largely been her own missteps). Hopefully, by next week this will all be wrapped up and Obama won't have to deal with constant backstabbing by the Clinton camp (if only...). But if Hillary continues her snipping for the next few months, I see a Republican victory in November.

Posted by: Curious | May 28, 2008 6:22 PM | Report abuse

"Oregon4Obama - The wife and I went over to Florence last weekend...Give it up Shillary fnas, it's OVER!" meagerperson

Did your rich friends introduce you to a hung bla(k man who took you as HIS wife during your stay there?

Of course you as the worshipper of money will NEVER in your LIFETIME have as much as Chelsea Clinton makes in THREE years once the campaign is over. Get a life your co(k-su(kin LOSER.

Posted by: Brent | May 28, 2008 6:21 PM | Report abuse

'Wolfson pointed out that current Electoral College vote predictions -- based on an aggregate of public polling -- show Clinton beating McCain and Barack Obama losing to the Arizona senator.'
=============

Deja vu all over again. Here is the poll we had at the end of 2007 for the nomination.

Hillary Clinton 49%
Barack Obama 19%
John Edwards 10%
Bill Richardson 3%
Joe Biden 3%
Dennis Kucinich 2%
Chris Dodd 1%

Where are we today? The Hillary Campaign is making the same argument all over again. Wolfoson, why don't we just poll and decide the president today as this is the only way HRC wins? As soon as the campaigns started she looses ground state after state - deja vu.

As to the GE, no republican will be nice to the Clintons, all that dirty laundary will be recycled including the new ones such as all that money from Arabs for the library, and what about the Khazakhstan deal with the dictator for $32mil for Clinton. Just because Obama was nice to them does not mean they were clean... Of course it did not stop them to shoot themselves with lies, ethics,... just plain nastiness.

Oh, what about their current fair media, Fox News and all that right wing conspiracy? Yes, of course they will be nice to them in the GE, because NBC, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and CNN do not like the Clintons. The Clintons just told us.

It is sad for me to see the politicians I once admired are left with Carville, Wolfson, McAulliffe who chased the decent friends they had like Richardson, Reich, Dodd, Kennedy who would have told them the reality. Birds of the same feather,...


Posted by: Selam1 | May 28, 2008 6:20 PM | Report abuse

Reverse psychology eh? Nice try. I think you overestimate Limbaugh's listeners. I know a few, and they do what he tells them to do.

They threw Wright, Ayers, the kitchen sink at Obama and he still won. What in the world makes you think 527's would have any more luck? Could it be your Hillary bumper sticker? Hopefully they weren't made in China so they can be safely removed.

Hillary would run the country like she ran her campaign...into debt.

Posted by: Progressive Pete | May 28, 2008 6:19 PM | Report abuse

You considered two of three options, could and would. However, you forgot about SHOULD. The Supers SHOULD select Hillary over Obama, if they want to take back the white house.
Also, did I ever tell you about my uncle that liberated Auchwich, or about my Uncle that I could not disown anymore than my own Grandmother, or my Dad who came here because of JFK, or my campaign that would be a new kind of politics, or my good friend, the terrorist, etc.

Posted by: Bud Curtis | May 28, 2008 6:18 PM | Report abuse

Wolfson is a complete fool. "This is an argument that Superdelegates can understand."

Then why is it that Obama has leaped far into the lead in Superdelegates?

I think he really believes everyone listening to him is stupid.

Posted by: Brendan | May 28, 2008 6:16 PM | Report abuse

Barak Obama gracefully losing the general election this year could mount a more plausible return in 2012 (Still feeling the pain?), buyers remorse etc., while Hillary's chances more likely would be inline with the Democratic tradition of failed dustbin to history.

Her negatives are scary, as is historical trend reactions to Dukakis, Gore, et. al. We Dems are generally the optimists towards improvement is possible, right? Stick with the plan.

"Electability" concerns is what ran the Republican party gleefully over the cliff, whith George at the wheel, Cheney in the backseat snortling all the way, and Tom Delay in the rumble seat mightily doling pork.

One thought, 119 comments down.

I stand by my view of (a more) rational governance over emotional, and progress over label/sloganeering. Big government telling us what to do sucks, but failing to recognize workable improvements in the system is just... stupid. And failing to institutionalize good practices for simple novelty/new manager... dumb. I guess you can tell I have lived in Japan long enough to know... these people have some parts of their life very organized, for good reasons.

Posted by: Kevin Sullivan | May 28, 2008 6:15 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, it will definitely get interesting as the election draws closer. It seems like all of the candidates still have a fair shot, though. You should check out these weekly election poll results. There were almost 3500 voters last week!

http://www.votenic.com

Posted by: Barack | May 28, 2008 6:09 PM | Report abuse

if Hillary was so electable she would be winning the election she is losing now, the PRIMARY ELECTION. end of story.

Posted by: johannesrolf | May 28, 2008 6:09 PM | Report abuse

Hillary won more delegates??? What is Jack Smith smoking? And scrivener, why would the DNC pick Gore when he could not beat Bush the first time following a popular Bill Clinton with a good economy?!?

Obama is the nominee gang. He completely outmaneuvered and outmanaged Hillary. He deserves it. He has more experience than Ted Roosevelt had

Name one piece of legislation Hillary has authored...One?

Posted by: Mark | May 28, 2008 6:08 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton PROMISES? REALLY? WOW!

You mean her word is her bond? as in 'There was supposed to be some kind of greeting ceremony...but we just ducked & ran to the vehicles....'

No thanks Hillary!

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 6:06 PM | Report abuse

Oregon4Obama - The wife and I went over to Florence last weekend and spent the weekend staying with some dear (and very wealthy!) freinds. What was interesting was driving through the rich people's summer cabin areas - Obama signs everywhere, not one for anyone else at all. Ran into four other couples, disgruntled Republican's, who are voting Democratic for the first time in their lives for Obama. None, not one of these peope is going to cast a ballot for Hillary, not one will support the aspirations or programs of the toxic hags of 60's feminism. Give it up Shillary fnas, it's OVER!

Posted by: mibrooks27 | May 28, 2008 6:06 PM | Report abuse

"please explain why Limbaugh spent so much time trying to get republicans to register as Democrats to vote for Hillary? Because they were afraid of her? That is strange logic indeed."

You certainly are NOT NEARLY as smart as Rush Limbaugh. It is psychology in reverse. If Obama supporters know Republicans are trying to derail his chances, they will come out to make a statement.

His listeners are essetially diehard conservative Republicans who don't switch parties back and forth. Merely the threat of the operation has been enough to energize Obama supporters, who also tried hard to portray Hillary as the candidate preferred by Republicans.

That's exactly why Limbaugh has congratulated himself when he sees Obama is the inevitable nominee who does NOT stand a chance in heaven against McCain.

The RNC can't even contain their glee and won't STOP 527 groups from using Wright, Ayers and Michelle in their attack ads past the Conventions. The RNC can say: we don't have the money to file lawsuits to stop their ads (which is the ONLY way to pull ads off the air).

Did you read your favorite Clinton-bashing paper, the NYT today? It has a story that the Dems are having a hard time raising money for the Convention. Along with the RNC's $40M in hand compared with Dean's DNC's $4M, that tells you why McCain can't be stopped.

Posted by: Brent | May 28, 2008 6:05 PM | Report abuse

Obama has to fight on two fronts:

McCain and the Republicans. This is unavoidable

Hillary and her bunch of knitting women and blue collar white men.This is avoidable

It cannot get any worse for Obama.

Yet he is winning and gaining pledged delegates and super delegates.

Either Obama is that good or Hillary is that bad.

You decide.

Posted by: Jack | May 28, 2008 6:05 PM | Report abuse

Clinton can PROMISE anything she wants...but she will not be our nominee.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 6:04 PM | Report abuse

McSAME IS AT IT AGAIN:
McCain has now unveiled his 'Foreign Policy', which was supposed to show his BREAK from the Bush administration. It is an utter joke. In his speech, McCain proposes doing several things we are already doing to prevent nuclear proliferation, followed by a handful vague promises quite similar to those made by Bush as a candidate in 2000?
Is this guy even aware of the REAL change Americans are looking for?
If McCain's campaign wants to claim they are breaking with the Current Administration, a few vague details in a speech and some new inspirational rhetoric won't cut it. They'd have to lay out a whole new approach to foreign policy, one that includes actual engagement. But McCain won't, because he's even more hawkish than Bush.
However, if they want to show 'the REAL' John McCain...I found this post which was quite appropriate:

Senator McCain´s foreign policy plans probably include the use of military forces. His foreign policy representative poster should be that of an Apache helicopter with guns ready under the caption "Wanna talk?"
Posted by Steve

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 6:03 PM | Report abuse

Republicans October Surprise on Obamas.

MICHELLE OBAMA RAILING AGAINST WHITEY
http://www.dontvoteobama.net.

Republicans October Surprise on Obamas. Video of Michelle Obama railing against whitey in Rev. Wright's church.
http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/05/16/will-barack-throw-mama-from-the-train/

More video showing Michelle Obama, railing against whitey from the pulpit of racist, anti-US pastor Reverend Wrights church, former Deputy Director in the US State Department.
Four republican sources (three who are senior Republicans) confirm there is video dynamite coming -Michelle Obama railing against whitey at Jeremiah Wrights church. Republicans are hell on wheels when it comes to opposition research. They took a chance and started reviewing the recordings from services at Jeremiah Wright's United Church of Christ which are on sale. And Holy smoke!! There are clips being held for the fall to drop at the appropriate time. The last thing Barrack needs are new clips that raises further questions about Michelle Obama poor judgment, mean and hateful temperament, when this clip is made public, Obama's hope of becoming the next president of the United States will be instantly destroyed.

DEMOCRATES NEED CLINTON TO WIN IN GENERAL ELECTION!

We are told it is why Obama's recent statement urging Republicans to lay off his wife, as if Michelle Obama's behavior, provocative statements and high-profile stance during his campaign should somehow be immune from examination and criticism and we should just allow her to call Americans MEAN because she isn't proud of her country or like white folks! Now we understand why Obama's chief political adviser David Alexrod on National Public Radio claimed white working class Democrats barely exist and hardly matter, white working class has gone to the Republican nominee for many elections, This is not new, WE don't need or rely solely on those votes.

Obama lost West Virginia by more than 40 points and KY by 35 an enormous fall, after out spending Clinton 3, 4, 5 to 1. Voters who went against Obama -- white, rural, older, low-income and without college degrees -- don't just live in West Virginia. They live everywhere in the country, places Obama needs to win in a general election. Now we hear pained remarks from the Obama camp that many white men won't vote for any black. Oh really? No one was complaining during the early races in Iowa, Maryland, Virginia and Wisconsin, when most of the white male participants backed Obama. That was before the Rev. Jeremiah Wright ugliness became In Kentucky, 8 in 10 Clinton voters... say they'd be Dissatisfied if Obama were the nominee; about 60% of Clinton voters in Oregon said the same. MORE Clinton voters in KY say they'd support John McCain than support Barack Obamapublic. Obama's inability to persuade working-class white voters to back him points to serious problem for him in the presidential election. A large percentage of voters who backed Mrs Clinton said they would not vote for Obama in the presidential race if he becomes the nominee. Disrespecting the nearly 17 million who have supported Clinton is politically unwise, but turning them into "the enemy" is insane


I personally am sick to death that the media jumps on the Clintons at every turn, and ALLOWES the Obamas to be racist and offend anyone and all they get is praise! The media, especially CNN and MSNBC tabloid news are really angering the voters and I believe it is the main reason Clinton stomped Obama so badly in W.VA & KY!!!! even after being out spent 3,4, 5 to 1, but the media refused to give her and the millions and millions who supprt her airtime credit, why? because it shows, 1. they are completely biased, 2. They do not know what they are talking about and there so-called political analyst are nothing more than Obamakins....CLINTON IS THER BEST CHOICE FOR OUR GREAT BUT TROUBLED COUNTRY RIGHT NOW! OBAMA WILL BE A GRAVE MISTAKE FOR THE ENTIRE U.S......

Posted by: MICHELLE OBAMA RAILING AGAINST WHITEY | May 28, 2008 6:02 PM | Report abuse

Wow Lynn, where can I pick up some of those special glasses you seem to have on. You know the ones that change words around to suit your message of...

I think you're a little confused when you say Obama supporters "hope" he is the nominee. He already is, it's just that there are quite a few people that have chosen to deny that fact.

Posted by: Progressive Pete | May 28, 2008 6:01 PM | Report abuse

Superdelegates jumping ship on Obama!!!!
Kevin Rodriquez, a superdelegate from the Virgin Islands, was supporting Clinton earlier this year, then switched to Obama and now back in the New York senator's corner.
http://www.dontvoteobama.net

ABSOLUTE MUST READ BEFORE YOU VOTE FOR OBAMA

http://www.dontvoteobama.net

BOYCOTT CNN & MSNBC for manipulating the Presidential election with the biased pushing of obama before researching.

May 27, 2008
Tracking Polls (General)
Gallup: McCain 47, Obama 45
Gallup: Clinton 49, McCain 44
Rasmussen: McCain 45, Obama 45
Rasmussen: Clinton 47, McCain 45

http://www.dontvoteobama.net


Hillary Clinton's plummets Obama in West Virginia and KY raises serious doubts over Barack Obama's ability. SENATOR CLINTON WINS THE STATES NEEDED TO TAKE WHITE HOUSE, OBAMA DOES NOT

FACT: NO Democrat has won the White House since 1916 without winning West Virginia, Obama lost West Virginia by more than 40 points, an enormous fall, voters who went against Obama -- white, rural, older, low-income and without college degrees who live everywhere in the country, where Obama would need to win in a general election. In anticipation of the West Virginia primary, Obama supporters were hurling insults at farmers and truck drivers. Now we hear pained remarks from the Obama camp that many white men won't vote for any black. Oh really? No one was complaining during the early races in Iowa, Maryland, Virginia and Wisconsin, when most of the white male participants backed Obama. That was before the Rev. Jeremiah Wright ugliness became public. Obama's inability to persuade working-class white voters to back him points to serious problem for him in the presidential election. A large percentage of voters who back Mrs Clinton said they would not vote for Obama. Disrespecting the nearly 22 million who have supported Clinton is politically unwise, Obama camp turning them into "the enemy" is insane. More facts and proof Obama is to inexperienced and as a political elite out of touch with everyday America, Obama received glowing, it's-over-he-is-the-nominee coverage for the past six days, and that amounted to nothing in West Virginia. One has to wonder if the giddy praise and tingling feelings jolting up the legs of ALL at CNN and the Chris Matthewses, Keith Olbermanns cable news "Wright-free zones" of the world amounts to a hill of beans. Voters have figured out the biased media and no longer relying on them for truth!


Bill Clinton presided over the longest peacetime expansion since World War II. His budget surpluses put his so-called conservative predecessors and successor to shame. Wouldn't a vow to build on the Clinton legacy, rather than dismantle it, be a better tack for the Obama campaign? More Quote of the Year From The Audacity Of Hope... I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction. Senator Barack Hussein Obama
Quote of the Month: "My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world. I hope you'll join with me as we try to change it." - Senator Barack Hussein Obama

Reason Obama said he wanted to be President of ALL 57 states. Keep in mind U.S. doesn't have 57, but...ISLAM is what he is talking about!
Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) is an international organization grouping 57 states which have decided to pool their resources together, combine their efforts, and speak with one voice to safeguard the interests and secure the progress and well-being of their peoples and of all Muslims in the world.

President Obama A Victory For Islam

If Barack Obama Enters The White House, Islam Will Have Conquered The Heart Of American Civilization. Said; IsraCast, Menashe Amir an Israeli expert on Iran.

Posted by: DEMS NEED CLINTON IN NOV 08 | May 28, 2008 6:01 PM | Report abuse

Obama's State Senate Record Will Hurt Him Badly
A review of Barack Obama's State Senate record reveals some "hot button" issues that will cause him grief in a race against John McCain. These issues will hurt Obama against John McCain and strengthen Hillary Clinton's arguments that he is unelectable:

Judicial Watch: by Klaus Marre- Obama 'intended to leave no paper trail' OBAMA REFUSES to cooperate in releasing 8 years of his state senate records. One main reason REZKO!
- Voted against making permanent the repeal of the state's 5 percent sales tax on gasoline. (2000)
- Supported higher taxes, raising more than 300 taxes and fees on businesses in 2004 to help solve a budget deficit.
- He is opposed letting people use a self-defense argument if charged with violating local handgun bans by using weapons in their homes. The bill was a reaction to a Chicago-area man who, after shooting an intruder, was charged with a handgun violation.
- He voted against requiring medical care for aborted fetuses who survive, the fetuses would sometime survive for hours. Abortion opponents see Obama's vote on medical care for aborted fetuses as a refusal to protect the helpless and accuse him of supporting infanticide.
- He sponsored a measure to expunge criminal records and create an employment grant program for ex-criminals. (2002)
- He voted to limit the purchase of handguns to one a month.
- Voted against making gang members eligible for the death penalty if they kill someone to help their gang. (2001)
* THE CHANGE AGENT*
Obama said he goofed on votes angered fellow Democrats in the Senate when he voted to strip millions of dollars from a child welfare office on Chicago's West Side. But Obama had a ready explanation: He goofed!
Politico reports, "During his first run for elected office, Barack Obama played a greater role than he acknowledges in crafting liberal stands on gun control, the death penalty and abortion- positions that appear at odds with the more moderate image he's projected during his presidential campaign. The evidence comes from an amended version of an Illinois voter group's detailed questionnaire, filed under his name during his bid for a state Senate. In response to a Politico story, Obama's answers he never saw questioaire?


Also announced he had fumbled an election-reform vote the day before, on a measure that passed 51 to 6. The next day, he acknowledged voting "present" on a key telecommunications vote. He stood on March 11, 1999, to take back his vote against legislation to end good-behavior credits for certain felons in county jails. "I pressed the wrong button on that," he said. Obama was the lone dissenter on Feb. 24, 2000, against 57 yeas for a ban on human cloning. "I pressed the wrong button by accident," he said.

But two of Obama's bumbles came on more-sensitive topics, he backed legislation to permit riverboat casinos to operate even when the boats were dockside.

The measure, pushed by the gambling industry and fought by church groups whose support Obama was seeking, passed with two "yeas" to spare -- including Obama's. Moments after its passage he rose to say, explaining that he had mistakenly voted for it.

Obama would later develop a reputation as a critic of the gambling industry, and he voted against a similar measure two years later. But he was clearly confused about how to handle the issue at the time of his first vote, telling a church group that he was "undecided" about whether he backed an expansion of riverboat gambling. And, months earlier, he had voted in favor of a version of the bill.

Obama's vote sparked a confrontation after he joined Republicans to block Democrats trying to override a veto by GOP Gov. George Ryan of a $2-million allotment for the west Chicago child welfare office. being responsible," said Sen. Rickey Hendon, accusing Obama of voting to close the child welfare office.Obama replied "I understand Sen. Hendon's anger, I was not aware that I had voted no on that piece of legislation.

Striking similarities between Barack Obama's words and those of Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick during his 2006 election campaign have raised eyebrows and attracted traffic on YouTube. The stump speech Barack Obama has been giving aimed at convincing voters that his campaign is not just about lofty rhetoric -- is from Patrick.

Posted by: CHANGE AGENT | May 28, 2008 6:00 PM | Report abuse

Hillary won't know the difference between could win and will win. She NEVER BEEN there, all her life she was hidden behind her husband back. This is her first real test and she fails.

Posted by: bluejazz | May 28, 2008 5:59 PM | Report abuse

It's interesting to see that Obama fans are finally recognizing that he'll lose in November. More interesting still to see that they want him as the nominee, anyway. That sort of takes the wind out of the arguments from the paid bloggers about how we've got to put a Democrat in the White House this year.

Speaking of the paid bloggers, isn't it about time for another one of those classic posts. . . "I'm a (insert typical Clinton demographic here) with (insert degrees here) and though I've always (insert blue collar history here) I avidly support the brilliant, special, exciting Obama?"

Posted by: Lynn | May 28, 2008 5:57 PM | Report abuse

Suzy and all Hillary Supporters voting for McCain,

You have every right to vote for McCain. But, once you do you need to support that vote. I can think of no other way for you to do that more powerfully than to enlist. It's the right thing to do. If you plan to vote for a guy who is going to continue the war then you need to be willing to fight in the war.
So, as soon as you cast your vote head on down to your local recruiting office and put you a$$ where your vote is.
When you get sent to war be sure and explain to all your fellow soldiers why you voted for McCain. "My girl didn't win" "It was stolen from her" "She had more electibility" She had more popular votes". "It's the medias fault". "Obama is an elitist". "Obama is a muslim." "Obama hates poor white people."
"Rev. Wright, Rev. Wright, Rev. Wright,..."

Do you really think the soldiers give a rats a$$ what your petty arguments are?

This is not about you and "your girl" Hillary. This election is about alot more than seeing a woman as president. PEOPLE ARE DYING! GROW UP!

Posted by: Tina, Democrat in NC | May 28, 2008 5:55 PM | Report abuse

If Hillary loses this nomination, life after this campaign is simply unbearable for Hillary.

Going back to a life of a JUNIOR SENATOR when she had been preparing herself to be a president. That has never been in Hillary's script when she entered Presidential politics. She came unprepared for any opposition to her candidacy. She took for granted her nomination last year until someone who is charismatic, a people mover and a communicator came along out of nowhere.

Obama has taken the torch from the Kennedy brothers.

As a communicator, Obama belongs to the class of Ronald Reagan, only with more class and style.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 5:54 PM | Report abuse

Every time you think that this wretched beast and her deranged enablers can not possibly sink any lower, you need only to wait until tomorrow. After her wishful thinking musings about possible asassinations did not pull any Super Delegates, it is time for a new, despicable tactic in an attempt to undercut Barack in the GE. And on Saturday she is summoning throngs of her white, old women supporters to pretend they are marching on Selma, AL. What a nauseating, mendacious fraud.

Posted by: Shiva | May 28, 2008 5:51 PM | Report abuse

"they are almost exactly alike."

You need to check the definition of "alike" before you rant. Two things can be "90% alike" or "75% alike" but never "100% alike (which will be "same"). The same goes with "almost." The correct thing to say is "are alike."

There are MEN who are supportive of Obama only because of the three (him, McCain and Hillary) he is the most sexually appealing to them. They would love to be substitute for Michelle if she's out of town.

Note that I did NOT say ALL MEN who support Obama fit into that category. Exactly because I do NOT buy your psychotic analysis that ALL the women are sexist against men when they demonstrate in support of Hillary.

The lamest excuse for your fitting into the above category of men would be that you deserted women because women deserted you.

Posted by: Brent | May 28, 2008 5:49 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is fighting tooth and nail is because if she loses the nomination she will be back as a JUNIOR SENATOR.

Even then, she has a problem of holding that position. The African-Americans in the New York constituency are upset on her remarks and that of Bill during this campaign. She might lose the senate position.

So, Clinton supporters, you are being led on the wrong path by Hillary. Her slogan of being a stronger President is all bull.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 5:49 PM | Report abuse

First, the vitriol here and throughout this election cycle is unfortunate. Those who have had enough of Bush should see their sniping for what it is: part of the grand Republican scheme.
Now, in fact, Mrs. Clinton is not and never has been electable. Her argument that she wins more battleground states, based on her primary wins, ignores the fact that she and her husband are divisive, polarizing figures. Her negatives are sky-high and not likely to diminish. In fact, more people will vote against her than for either Sen. McCain or Sen. Obama.
Bottom line here: Bill Clinton can't stand being out of power. His latest conspiracy/sexism arguments prove the point.
Sen. Obama is not the perfect candidate but he's winning according to the rules that everyone agreed to. And his negatives are much lower than his rival's. And that's the way it is.

Posted by: muleman | May 28, 2008 5:44 PM | Report abuse

It is a sad day in America when a former first lady becomes an international joke. But that is what this evil lying, cheating woman has become, a joke who will say and do anything to win. The fact that some are supporting her speaks to either their ignorance (been duped), or their racism. I respect you racist more if you were just overt about it like your boys in KY and West Va who admit they dont like Hillary, but just can't vote for a half Black man. Atleast they are honest compared to you fools who make all manner of BS rather than just acknowledge your true feelings.

Posted by: chris c | May 28, 2008 5:44 PM | Report abuse

There is NO DOUBT that Clinton could beat John McCain in November

BUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Barack Obama can beat him as well....

This whole campaign has been about change, and what better way to go in a new direction than to elect a Woman or an African-American Man..........

Point is that the PEOPLE want change....and that means a DEMOCRAT WINNING the general election.....

All these polls are STUPID because they are asking people to pick favorites on the SAME TEAM

people who are partial to clinton think obama is a lesser candidate and visa versa.....so these polls dont convey the truth 100%......ONCE a DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE is chosen.....just WATCH those polls switch to that NOMINEE...

Clinton has won some big states, but let me ask......DID ANYONE KNOW THE NAME BARACK OBAMA IN NOVEMBER 2007??????????? Most of you would say NO

His popularity has only gone up, and the more Clinton and her Husband speak,,,,,I get the feeling it is MORE about HER and LESS about the PARTY

it doesnt matter who you think is the stronger candidate....we need to back the democrat who WINS this NOMINATION....because I dont know ANYONE who fully SUPPORTS John McCain

Ive seen more RON PAUL signs here in Oregon....and Ive seen no mccain signs....

Democrat 08

Posted by: Oregon4Obama | May 28, 2008 5:42 PM | Report abuse

lylepink, please explain why Limbaugh spent so much time trying to get republicans to register as Democrats to vote for Hillary? Because they were afraid of her? That is strange logic indeed.

Posted by: Progressive Pete | May 28, 2008 5:39 PM | Report abuse

To the Blogger that posted one of Hillary's campaign speeches.....

Words must have substance. If they do not work for Hillary by way of:

fundraising
popular vote
super-delegate vote

Why would you think by using 2/3rd of this site.... they would matter!

Delusional seems to be a theme thought the Hillary Camp!

Posted by: puddlescited | May 28, 2008 5:38 PM | Report abuse

"...What chance would either Obama or Clinton have if McCain had Collin Powell or Condy Rice as a Running-mate...."

I'd like to see a dream ticket of McCain/Rumsfeld. Even hillary could beat that team.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 5:38 PM | Report abuse

I feel sorry for Ms Clinton's hardiest supporters. She's got you all whipped up to a fine frenzy, but what are you going to do when Ms Clinton starts campaigning aggressively for Obama after her last appeal is lost?

Don't you understand that she is merely using your emotional involvement in her campaign as a political tool? She has no intention of sinking the eventual Democratic nominee and thereby wrecking her own political fortunes. She's marching you all off the edge of the cliff to prove how devoted her followers are, while she herself stands back on the brink ready to reverse course when that doesn't work.

If you think you've been betrayed by Obama, the DNC, the MSM, males in general, etc., etc., etc. . . . you ain't seen nothing yet. Just wait until Ms Clinton pulls the rug out from under you.

Posted by: drossless | May 28, 2008 5:38 PM | Report abuse

jacksmith at 5:10PM: This has been my argument since January, when I first came across the Repub strategy to stop Hillary from getting the Dem nomination. I have always thought Obama was the weakest of the viable Dems from the very start, and from the Repubs efforts to stop Hillary at any Price/Cost, they agree with me. The "Fear" Factor is the KEY to their thinking. Always try and get the weakest candidate to run against is Politics 101.

Posted by: lylepink | May 28, 2008 5:36 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is Karl Rove and Rush Limbaugh's choice. Why is she still yours?

I'm unimpressed by the lack of reasoning by the Hillary supporters. Most of the arguments posed in favor of her are solely based on emotion rather than fact or issues. It also saddens me when I hear things like "you've been duped" when referring to Obama supporters. Do you really think we're so dumb that we'll just say "Oh, geez I didn't realize I've been duped, I'll support Hillary now" Yeah, I guess you do.

I'm even more disturbed by lifelong democrats that are so bitter that their wonder woman lost the primary that they would vote republican. How can you live with yourself?

Posted by: Progressive Pete | May 28, 2008 5:35 PM | Report abuse

Mark -- I saw your note and wanted to let you know I'll be checking in again more often. Work hasn't allowed much time for this hobby of late. Hope that all is well.

Posted by: Colin | May 28, 2008 5:35 PM | Report abuse

Suzi,

Get back on your medication. Obama AND Hillary have the very SAME platforms. If socialism ensues from one, then by extension, the same will occur with the other. If your candidate (Hillary) cared so much about your vote, then why did she agree to disenfranchise you at the beginning of the primary season? It's a little expedient for her to now say you count.

Posted by: Nuffsaid | May 28, 2008 5:35 PM | Report abuse

Suzi, and others complaining about the MI and FL delegations:

Please explain why what Senator Clinton agreed to and her supporters on the committee put in place LAST FALL, is no longer what is "fair."

Don't whine about "re-votes" being blocked by either candidate--it was the legislatures that ruled out new primaries, and Clinton supporters who nixed the caucus idea in Michigan.

I am a Michigan voter who chose "uncommitted" in the MI Democratic primary. Clearly I would have voted for Obama if his name had been on the ballot. He took it off, like Clinton PROMISED to do.

Obviously, I did not vote for Clinton, but in her math my vote didn't count at all in the popular vote.

My guess is that they will seat the whole delegation, with 1/2 vote each, according to the results in the flawed primaries, with Obama getting the "uncommitted" votes in MI. But any way you slice it, these delegates will not be enough for Clinton to surpass Obama in the delegate count.

So, it is up to the superdelegates. They know the lay of the land, they've heard Clinton's New Math and Electability arguments for weeks, and they have been breaking in Obama's favor.

Posted by: mikeinmidland | May 28, 2008 5:35 PM | Report abuse

Clinton supporters are going to demonstrate on saturday at the DNC meeting. Mostly, majority are women who takes sexism to the extreme. Feminism at its worse. Divisive and unbecoming of the female gender.

On the other hand, Obama is calling its supporters not to demonstrate and stay away as it may further divide the party.

The call is for unity and some sanity.

That is what we call strong leadership.

Clinton is going for the old Washington divisive politics.

Obama is bringing the new paradigm of american politics. Inclusivity for all.

How come the Clinton supporters can't get think out of the box. Is it female recalcitrance.

Posted by: Jack | May 28, 2008 5:34 PM | Report abuse

At the beginning of the campaign the same polls showed Clinton with a huuuge margin over Obama. Look where they stand now in delegate count. The people who are conducting the polls today are the same from before the campaign. They also got Nwe Hampshire wrong. These polls at this juncture are meaningless. Hillary's case is basically closed. People have already writtenn her off. Hillary's story is History or let's call Hillstory.

Posted by: Karen | May 28, 2008 5:33 PM | Report abuse

JohnGalt1
1. 44 electorial votes Michigan and Florida
that is quite a hit for the dems to take
if I recall correctly it was 1700 or so
votes in Florida that cost Al Gore the
job in 2000.
2. Clinton has won approximately 25.02% of
the popular vote Obama has taken
only 24.98% of the popular vote.
McCain already has his nomination it
just has to be made formal and he has
roughly 47% of the popular vote.
3. The media has been comparatively silent
over all the Obama transgressions
in a general election the 501's are
going to be all over him and his big
mouthed wife Michelle.
4. Very few have really opened their eyes
as you say, most have not even checked
this guy out 80% of you have no idea
what the Superior Bank Scandal was about
If asked I bet most think Tony Rezko is
an inventor like Ron Popiel.
5. Most people think Hillary voted to start
a war in Iraq but its was a resolution
to allow the president to use military
force if he deemed it necessary.
If intel for WMD was reliable.
Bush lied how were the congress
and senators to know most of the
country didnt!!
When this was signed 72% of the
population thought the other 28% was
not patriotic if they didnt support it.

Posted by: Jerry | May 28, 2008 5:32 PM | Report abuse

JackSmith- So Rush's Operation Chaos was really just a cover story so Karl Rove could secretly convince Republicans to switch their party affiliation and vote Obama? Ok, but one question for you: What color is the sky in your world?

Posted by: Kevin | May 28, 2008 5:31 PM | Report abuse

Clinton Supporters count, too...thus far, I've yet to read a post from one who can count votes and/or delegates.

Socialist State! Do you even KNOW what that means? Have you even compared Senator Obama's policies with Senator Clinton's - they are almost exactly alike...that has got to be the strangest argument from a Democrat about a Democrat that I've ever heard...

Posted by: John D in Houston | May 28, 2008 5:30 PM | Report abuse

NOW IT'S HILLARY'S TURN TO PLAY HER DELEGATE CARDS
IN A COUP TO TAKE DOWN OBAMA

... A Gore/Powell Ticket for the Dems in '08?


All the negative talk from Hillary and Bill Clinton against the Obama candidacy in the face of their own demise could add up to this:

The Uber-Democrat power couple is considering throwing its support, and Hillary's delegates, to an alternative candidate who stands a better chance of winning the general election than Obama.

They know there's no chance in the hell that Hillary has created for the party that leadership and core constituencies will back a Hillary candidacy. So, just perhaps, they're about to stage their own delegate power play in a bold move to checkmate Obama.

Here's the evidence for a Hillary-led delegate coup against Obama:

1) The Clinton's talking points. They know the party and the supers have had enough of the divisive Hillary candidacy, but they believe they've got the facts on their side -- that Obama can't win the general due to his inexperience, his naivete, and his dismissive attitude in the late-season primaries toward rural and suburban white voters, whom he cavalierly wrote off in the states where Hillary triumphed.

2) Superdelegate hesitancy to embrace Obama. Where's the "flood" of supers racing toward the Obama camp? It's still a mere trickle. The supers don't like the idea of nominating a likely loser any more than do the Clintons, or the lunch-bucket Dems who lodged their protest votes against Obama by supporting Hillary.

3) Al Gore's refusal to endorse Obama. This is key. Edwards, ever the opportunist, actually believed Obama could win the nomination and, presumably, the general, so he cast his political fate with the Obama campaign. That could prove to be a costly error. Had he hung back, as Gore has done, he could have been a successor to Obama if and when the supers reject his candidacy. Given the Clinton's enmity towards Gore (and vice versa, for sure), Edwards would have been far more palatable to Billary than Gore.

But Gore is last man standing; and Hill and Bill would much prefer that Gore get the nomination than Obama, whom they see as a rookie usurper.

Remember all my talk a few weeks back about a third way candidacy, with Obama taking the lead at unifying the party by tossing his delegates to Gore? Well, it appears that Obama believes his own press to the point of self-delusion. As a result, he could be the one to go down hard, even harder than Hillary, who would go back to the Senate as the party unifier and savior of the Dems' general election hopes.

It's Hillary's final solution -- the chance to pull a major power play, back a compromise candidate, unite the party and better prepare the party for victory in the fall. No other third way candidate has the gravitas and the star power to pull off a late-season nomination coup. Only Gore could do it.

And by his refusal to endorse Obama, Gore is sending a powerful message to the superdelegates: You can't go with Obama and still expect to win, and I can save the party and redeem my rightful role as the party standard-bearer with your pledge of support.

For this to happen, powerful Obama backers like Kennedy, Kerry and Dodd have to be convinced that Obama can't win in a matchup against McCain. The polls are showing that he can't. The supers are sitting on their hands, waiting for a sign from Al Gore.

In a very few weeks time, as the Obama candidacy slips further into the realm of the improbable (to use Obama's own word), Gore will give that sign. He may have to make Colin Powell his running mate to prevent all hell from breaking loose among fervid Obama supporters -- and Gore might do just that, winning back blacks who might otherwise sit out the election, and forging a unity ticket that will appeal to Republican moderates.

Posted by: scrivener | May 28, 2008 5:29 PM | Report abuse

Hillary should be concerned about her re-election campaign in New York in 2012. If Obama should lose in November, Hillary and Bill will be blamed and rightly so. The fallout will reach New York. They are finished.

Maybe Hillary and Bill can get Kentucky and West Virginia to leave the Union and Hillary can be crowned Queen with Bill as Court Jester.

Posted by: svbreeder | May 28, 2008 5:29 PM | Report abuse

How can Hillary unite the democratic party after she has joined forces with Rush Limbaugh and Operation Chaos. Please go to Rushlimbaugh's website. He has called for conservative republicans to vote for Hillary and cause Chaos in the democratic party. Most of the bloggers who say they would never vote for Obama, and claim they are Hillary supporters are actually memeber of the Operation Chaos conspiracy. Bill Clinton was interviewed by the Rush Limbaugh radio showed that is broadly listened to by racist. The Clinton campaign has not rejected this racist endorsement or the members who are racist, republicans who are supporting Hillary, not because she is the better candidate but because they intend to destroy the democratic party and to stop a black male from winning. This is unforgiveable. Hillary should have rejected and denounced the endorsement of Rush Limbaugh a known racist and ultra-conservative republican. She did not. She should have support Obamas call to bridge the racial divide and call for open dialogue. She did not. She has betrayed the democratic party, people of color and progressive Americans who want change; who want an end to the war and who reject white supremacy and national chauvinism. AMerican people as a whole are honest to goodness, hardworking multi-cultural people. We can compete in the world fairly. We want to invest in education, not war preparation. Hillary cannot unite America; and she is a disgrace to us in the international community.

Posted by: Harriett | May 28, 2008 5:29 PM | Report abuse

The problem with being insane is that you are delussional. The problem with being a liar AND INSANE is that uou often come to believe you own lies. This is apparently the case with Clinton and her shock troops. No one I know of would even dream of voting for Clinton. Not in a million years! Most will vote for Obama, quite a few for McCain, and some plan on sitting out the election. Hillary Clinton would loose in a landslide. Her compatriots in the Senate detest her. The polls in NY even show her Senate seat at play. She has nothing, nowhere to go to, and no future.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | May 28, 2008 5:28 PM | Report abuse


jacksmith, that has to be one of the least persuasive rants I've seen in a long time. McCain supporters voting for Barack? Where do you have a scintilla of evidence for that bizarre comment? If the Limbaugh pitch is having any effect, it's driving the Clinton vote in Indiana and elsewhere.

Buddy, you really need to get a hobby.

Posted by: zoot | May 28, 2008 5:25 PM | Report abuse

And what would the polls be saying if Obama had the monkey (Hillary) off his back?

Her illusionary hopes have become a thorn in the Democratic Party and Obama's side!

Hillary, the Queen of Spin and a Legend in Her Own Mind!

http://klintons.com

Posted by: Bob | May 28, 2008 5:24 PM | Report abuse

Suzy

YOu should not have been a Democrat supporter in the FIRST place.

You should be talking only and only about McCain and the Republicans.

You are one Democratic party supporter who the party does NOT need at all. Disgraceful.

You are only interested in getting a woman President not a good president

Posted by: Jack | May 28, 2008 5:24 PM | Report abuse

Hillary raised over a quarter of a BILLION dollars, yet their campaign is in debt $10 mil and she has lent the campaign an additonal $11 mil.

This seems like very poor management. Is this the kind of "experience" we can expect from a second Clinton administration?

Crippling national debt is the reason the dollar is in the terlet and international goods, like oh, say oil, are so expensive.

I say, "No, thanks!"

Posted by: Kevin | May 28, 2008 5:24 PM | Report abuse

Democratic voters and caucus-goers and superdelegates get to choose the candidate they want to represent them. Whether Clinton accepts it or not, she has not persuaded enough of them that she's the best choice. Senator Clinton has had ample time and opportunity to bow out of the race, with every Democrat hailing her valiant effort, and with plenty of options for the future. The longer she stays, though, when there is no real hope of prevailing, she burns through that positive view and risks dividing the party.

Posted by: wesfromGA | May 28, 2008 5:23 PM | Report abuse

Hmm. I've heard Clinton repeatedly say that she does not pay attention to the polls.

It is impossible for Clinton to get the nomination without the end result being destruction of the Democratic Party as we know it. This should be obvious to all.

The superdelegates should not tolerate such divisive behavior by Clinton and her campaign unless, of course, they want to lose in November.

The SDs need to wrap this thing up by June 4.

Posted by: Doug M | May 28, 2008 5:23 PM | Report abuse

HILLARY IS PLAYING YOU LIKE FOOLS...IT WAS HER PEOPLE LIKE HAROLD ICKES WHO VOTED TO DISENFRANCHISE MY VOTE IN FLORIDA LAST SUMMER...IF SHE CARED ABOUT MY VOTE THEN SHE WOULD HAVE TOLD HER MINIONS BACK THEN TO PRESERVE IT...BESIDES THIS WAS A REPUBLICAN TRAP THAT YOU WOULD THINK A NOVICE WOULD FALL INTO...BUT NOOOOOOOO HILLARY "THE EXPERIENCED ONE" CLINTON DID...YOU PEOPLE NEED TO WAKE UP!

Posted by: @ SUZI | May 28, 2008 5:23 PM | Report abuse

Hillary "The Black Knight" Clinton, it is over and you lost. I know it is hard to face this fact but the sooner you do the more likely the Democratic nominee Barack Obama will become president.

The reason why people have wanted you to drop out of the race is because they could see the improbability of you coming back to win (the math was against you) and because you have been campaigning in such a way that damages Obama within the Dem party.

We need a Dem president and Obama is our nominee. The sooner we all realize this, the better our party's prospects in the fall.

Posted by: PeninsulaMatt | May 28, 2008 5:22 PM | Report abuse

I thank the fact that Obama is bringing the young, educated, critical thinking voter out says it all.
Billary supporters are the working poor people who believe what they think she said without regard for the facts and actions that indicate otherwise.
McCain - Politics as usual, that's why I'll be voting Dem this time around

Posted by: critical thinker | May 28, 2008 5:22 PM | Report abuse

We will not allow bho to win the general if he is the nominee. If the DNC does not give FL and MI their full votes then they are no longer OUR party. We WILL vote McCain. At least America will still be here in 4 years. If bho is elected we would be a socialist state by then. Why are the bho supporters so blind to fairness and the marxist agenda of their candidate? They don't care about their fellow dems, otherwise they would advocate full representation. It's only because those are Hillary states that they refuse them. You know bho will lose, that's what you are afraid of. It's Hillary or McCain. Nobama!!

Posted by: Suzi | May 28, 2008 5:18 PM | Report abuse

THAT IS THE MOST RETARDED, PARANIOD AND INSANE THING I HAVE EVER HEARD...YOU AND HILLARY ARE PERFECT FOR EACH OTHER...IN A PADDED CELL WHERE YOU CAN LEAVE THE REST OF THE WORLD ALONE....

DID THE CLINTONS HIRE THE SAME INSANE BLOGGERS WHO USED TO BLOG AGAINST THEM?

Posted by: @ JACKSMITH | May 28, 2008 5:17 PM | Report abuse

I think Hillary should run as a Perot style Independant...Then she could syphon off McCain's hard working white voters and leave him with only the lazy, trust fund CEO, I "heart" war voter...THEN BARACK WILL LAUGH ALL THE WAY TO THE WHITE HOUSE!!!

HILLARY/LIEBERMAN '08

PS DOES ANYONE ELSE FIND IT DISGUSTING THAT HILLARY CLINTON WOULD TAKE VOTES AWAY FROM JOHN MCCAIN NOT BARACK OBAMA?

Posted by: Becky | May 28, 2008 5:12 PM | Report abuse

DON'T BE DUPED AGAIN AMERICA !!!

IT'S ABOUT ELECTABILITY !!!

Large numbers of BUSH_McCain Republicans have been voting for Barack Obama in the DEMOCRATIC primaries, and caucuses from early on with the backing and help of the medical and insurance industry. Under the direction of the George Bush, and Karl Rove vote fraud, and vote manipulation machine. Because they feel Barack Obama would be a weaker opponent against John McCain. And they want to stop Hillary Clinton from fixing the HUGE! American, and Global mess they have created. shocking!!! isn't it. Just gotta love those good old draft dodging, silver spoon Texas boys. Not! :-(

You see, the medical and insurance industry mostly support the republicans with the money they ripped off from you. And they don't want you to have quality, affordable universal health care. They want to be able to continue to rip you off, and kill you and your children by continuing to deny you life saving medical care that you have already paid for. So they can continue to make more immoral profits for them-selves off of you, and your children's suffering.

With Hillary Clinton you are almost 100% certain to get quality affordable universal health care for everyone very soon. And you are also certain to see major improvements in the economy for everyone.

The American people face even worse catastrophes ahead than the ones you are living through now. It will take all of the skills, and experience of Hillary Clinton to pull the American people out of this mess we are in. Fortunately fixing up, and cleaning up others incompetence, immoral degeneracy, and mess is what the Clinton's do very well.

Hillary Clinton has actually won by much larger margins than the vote totals showed. And lost by much smaller vote margins than the vote totals showed. Her delegate count is actually much higher than it shows. And higher than Obama's. She also leads in the electoral college numbers that you must win to become President in the November national election. HILLARY CLINTON IS ALREADY THE TRUE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE!

Just look at Oregon for example. Obama won Oregon by about 70,000 votes. But approximately 79,000 Bush republicans switched party's back in January to vote for Obama in the democratic primary. They are not going to vote for, or support any Democrat in November. Are you DEMOCRATS going to put up with that. Are you that stupid, and weak. The Bush republicans think you are that stupid, and weak.

As much as 30% of Obama's primary, and caucus votes are Republicans trying to choose the weakest democratic candidate for McCain to run against. These Republicans have been gaming the caucuses, and open primaries where it is easier to vote cheat. This is why Obama has not been able to win the BIG! states primaries. Even with Republican vote cheating help. Except North Carolina where 35% of the population is African American, and approximately 90% of them block voted for him. African Americans are only approximately 17% of the general population.

Hillary Clinton has been OUT MANNED! and OUT SPENT! 4 and 5 to 1. Yet Obama has only been able to manage a very tenuous, and questionable tie with Hillary Clinton. This is even more phenomenal when you consider she has been also fighting against the George Bush, Karl Rove vote fraud machine in the DEMOCRATIC primaries, and caucuses. Hillary Clinton is STUNNING!.

If Obama is the democratic nominee for the national election in November he will be slaughtered. That is crystal clear now. Because all of the Republican vote cheating help will suddenly evaporate. And the demographics, and experience are completely against him. All of this vote fraud and Bush republican manipulation has made Obama falsely look like a much stronger candidate than he really is.

You will have another McGovern catastrophe where George McGovern lost 49 of 50 states. And was the reason the super-delegates were created to keep that from happening again. Don't let that happen to the party and America again super-delegates. You have the power to prevent it. The only important question now is who can best win in November. And the answer is HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON. That fact is also now crystal clear.

And YOUNG PEOPLE. DON'T BE DUPED! Think about it. You have the most to lose. As do African Americans. Support Hillary Clinton. She will do her best for all of you. And she will know how to best get it done on day one.

The democratic party needs to fix this outrage. Everyone needs to throw all your support to Hillary Clinton NOW! So you can end this outrage against YOU the voter, and against democracy.

The democratic party, and the super-delegates have a decision to make. Are the democrats, and the democratic party going to choose the DEMOCRATIC party nominee to fight for the American people. Or are the republicans going to choose the DEMOCRATIC party nominee through vote fraud, and gaming the DEMOCRATIC party primaries, and caucuses.

Fortunately the Clinton's have been able to hold on against this fraudulent outrage with those repeated dramatic, and heroic comebacks of Hillary Clinton's. Only the Clinton's are that resourceful, and strong. Hillary Clinton is your NOMINEE. They are the best I have ever seen. Probably the best there has ever been. :-)

"This is not a game" (Hillary Clinton)

Sincerely

jacksmith... Working Class :-)

p.s. Cynthia Ruccia - I'm with ya baby. All the way. "Clinton Supporters Count Too."

Posted by: jacksmith | May 28, 2008 5:10 PM | Report abuse

Not only can the super delegates understand that argument, but it is the entire reason they were created, not necessarily to back up the pledged delegate count, but to be prepared to buck it if they feel it would make the difference between losing the general election and winning it. Not only have state by state and national polls over the long term shown Clinton to be considerably more electable on the electoral map despite all attempts by the media to discredit her, but the result also makes sense given her more moderate positions on energy (which includes some domestic oil production along with aggressive conservation and alternatives), the military, and foreign policy, and her greater experience on the national and international level.

Posted by: Deborah | May 28, 2008 5:10 PM | Report abuse

Please take down the obscenity posted by "Brent" at 5:03.

Is anyone watching the store?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 5:09 PM | Report abuse

"Remember, however, that many of the undecided superdelegates are elected officials and are not generally in the business of going against public opinion."

Isn't this exactly what the "changers" are talking about? This statement is no different than saying - we'll go with backroom good ole boy democracy.

btw gallup - today - McCain beats Obama by 1 percentage point.

Posted by: RetCombatVet | May 28, 2008 5:08 PM | Report abuse

Sorry... tooo angry last post.

Revision:

Americans will not write her in... Only Idiots will write her in...

Then they can all relax as they watch America become the largest Third World Country EVER!


I mean we teach our children NO means NO...
Are you advocating you will RAPE America!

Posted by: puddlescited | May 28, 2008 5:07 PM | Report abuse

Mrs Clinton can't ever run her own finances or control her husband. Over spend by 20 million and want to be elected. Time to go home and be a homemaker!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: jon | May 28, 2008 5:07 PM | Report abuse

Clinton supporters remind me of the 28% who still support Bush and his war, just as Hillary reminds me of Bush.

In the face of all logic and fact the aforementioned people still believe victory is within reach. Thus, it isn't really a stretch to imagine those of her supporters who threaten to vote for McCain if Obama is the nominee (and he will be), actually following through.

But, it doesn't matter. Check out the Post's Electoral College Prediction Map...FL and MI are inessential to winning in the fall. And to think that Obama won't win CA, NY, NJ is beyond an absurd notion. As for the poll's cited that have Clinton beating McCain six months out from the election, I remember that six months ago she had a substantial lead over Obama. What happened to that?

For some reason a large number of people in this country are reactive in their decision making, relying solely on their emotional response (or "gut feeling" as Bush likes to call it) and foregoing any logical conclusion that can be reached based on the evidence at hand.

That's why we've had eight years of Bush.

Well, thankfully, most have opened their eyes, though a lot were never fooled.


The one thing that impresses me most about Obama (it's not his speeches, his policy, his energy, his fund raising, etc.) is his organizational might. The ability to implement change is more important that the will to bring about change.

Posted by: JohnGalt1 | May 28, 2008 5:07 PM | Report abuse

PERSONAL TO CHRIS CILLIZZA:

Earlier today, bsimon suggested that you poll superdelegates to get a sense of where they are in the face of growing skepticism over Obama's electability (the Billary argument), as well their views on the prolonged Clinton fatigue that has brought the Dems to the brink of civil war.

Present them with this hypothetical: If Hillary Clinton, sensing an impending defeat for the nomination, pledged her delegates to someone like Al Gore, with Colin Powell as his veepee pick, would the supers prefer this compromise/unity ticket over a ticket with Obama at the top?

Chris: The experience question has caught up to Obama among the American people. The word just hasn't reached the chattering class in DC. For the sake of your own credibility, stop hanging with Olbermann, Matthews, Fineman and Alter and start talking to the supers out there in flyover country. They won't take our calls, but they'll be honored to take yours.

And save your career by ditching elitists out to push an agenda as your confreres. Thanks.

Posted by: scrivener | May 28, 2008 5:07 PM | Report abuse

AMERICAN WILL NOT WRITE HER IN ONLY IDIOTS, WILL WRITE HER IN...

THEN THEY CAN ALL RELAX AND WHAT THE USA BECOME THE LARGEST THIRD WORLD COUNTRY EVER!

Posted by: puddlescited | May 28, 2008 5:04 PM | Report abuse

"Those were 2 separate decisions (one in each state) by a small group. So why should the WHOLE electorate in each state suffer?"

What a stupid argument. That's how our society works. Laws are passed by a small minority of individuals. Why should our whole electorate suffer because a few individuals wanted to go to war in Iraq or Vietnam or whatever? Why should I pay taxes? I didn't personally make a decision on taxes. What if I wanted to smoke pot? No one ever asked me what I thought.

The elected officials represent the people. The people of these states clamour to get the primary dates moved early. The elected officials did so. The elected officials in other states played by the rules despite what the populace wanted.

You don't change the rules mid-stream. How difficult is that to get through your dense skull?

God, how are people such idiots?

Posted by: DDAWD | May 28, 2008 5:04 PM | Report abuse

"you're sort of pathetic with that appellation you gave yourself.." -sob

You're not "sort of" pathetic. You are the DEFINITION of being "pathetic." With you and your bla(k penjs su(king cohorts who demonize Hillary Clinton 24/7, the guy you want to dominate you will NOT win the GE in November.

You can COUNT on it.

Posted by: Brent | May 28, 2008 5:03 PM | Report abuse

"That is an argument superdelegates can understand." Yes, because they're so stupid they can't understand your new math.

Posted by: RollaMO | May 28, 2008 5:03 PM | Report abuse

STFU ALREADY IT'S OVER

Posted by: citizen | May 28, 2008 5:00 PM | Report abuse

The mainstream press bears a huge responsibility for the continuation of the delusional Clinton campaign. Aided by second-rung bullies like Howard Wolfson and Mark Penn, Sen. Clinton ran an incompetant race. She was bested thoroughly and honestly by a superior candidate who raised more money, won more votes, gained more delegates, and persuaded more super delegates than she did.

Seating one-half of the Michigan and Florida delegations makes imminent sense and will be fair to all candidates.

Now let's stop this ridiculous bickering, get behind Sen. Obama and unite to defeat the scary John McCain and his odious puppetmaster, George Bush, in the fall.

Posted by: dee | May 28, 2008 5:00 PM | Report abuse

NEWSFLASH...!!!!

Escaped patient from the "I wanta be" Mental institution...

Please be on the look out for the following tendencies...

Not able to take NO for an answer.

Feels Disrespected in a Sexist type of way..

Has problems counting numbers correctly..

Seeking new formats to concede a win when they have already lost... (Unable to accept reality).

Constantly lies...

Please approach carefully... if patient appears bugged eyed there is a possibility she may miss-speak...

Call White House at three AM and ask for Bill should you locate her... He will know what to do!

Oh that's right.., he's no longer there!

Posted by: puddlescited | May 28, 2008 4:59 PM | Report abuse

Before making the ludicrous argument that she has a better chance of beating McCain than Obama does, Hillary -- and the superdelegates! -- should check out the latest Zogby poll at:

http://zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1511

It shows Obama to be the MUCH stronger candidate.

Posted by: Bill Fusroy | May 28, 2008 4:57 PM | Report abuse

Mrs. Clinton you are nothing but the rich spoilled wife of a powerful man, with too mush sense of entitlemet, you are not a woman of substance, you are not a self-made woman, but worst of all you have stalin personality flaws.

You are a dangerous person in the presidency, even in the senate, but worst of all your mood swings are disturbing.

Posted by: Alma Ludivina | May 28, 2008 4:57 PM | Report abuse

Before making the ludicrous argument that she has a better chance of beating McCain than Obama does Hillary -- and the superdelegates! -- should check out the latest Zogby poll at:

http://zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1511

It shows Obama to be the MUCH stronger candidate.

Posted by: Bill Fusroy | May 28, 2008 4:55 PM | Report abuse

Per the comments that Obama will destroy McCain, you can be in lala land all you want. Sure, Obama can win and I hope he will. But considering how far McCain has come from the brink, he will not be destroyed. It will be a close election.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 4:53 PM | Report abuse

Look, when this argument loses steam they will just pull out another excuse. Hillary deserves it whine whine whine...she cannot give up in her quest to do to people what she thinks they need (Whether or not they do), which makes her an extremely dangerous person to hold the Presidency.

Posted by: nclwtk | May 28, 2008 4:52 PM | Report abuse

She's got everything a second runner could possibly want to ensure a spot on the ticket except the ability to make an impression of truthfulness, warmth, sensitivity, skills in cooperation, collaboration, consideration. No, she's got everything else but likeability and truthworthiness. The other prospective VP candidates are as talented and worthy only they carry better baggage and more open hearts.

Posted by: Gaias Child | May 28, 2008 4:52 PM | Report abuse

Still way to early to predict this. Polls out recently show Obama can beat McCain. All of you who point to the primaries won by Hillary are missing this key point. Wait until Oct, then I will agree with you.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 4:51 PM | Report abuse

Wolfson is such a sleaze bag. And if I hear any of them say 'toe to toe' one more time I am going to vomit !!

Posted by: Tom | May 28, 2008 4:50 PM | Report abuse

Nick from Ithaca and Classy,

Learn how to interpret statistics and not trust any of them.

"For results based on the sample of 2,753 registered voters residing in "purple" states in which Hillary Clinton won a majority of the popular vote in the 2008 Democratic primaries and/or caucuses" (this is 8 states including Florida and Michigan).

This means that they surveyed about 344 registered voters age 18 and up from each state. Is that an accurate representation of the entire registered voting public in those swing states? I don't think so.

Sincerely,
An Obama supporter that reads the fine print.

Posted by: Gordon Bombay | May 28, 2008 4:50 PM | Report abuse

Angel: Add Ky. and WV to the critical swing states you cite, Ohio, Pa., and Fla., and Obama loses all of them against McCain, and Hillary wins them all. This has been the trend over many months and should the Dems lose any one of these states, it is almost impossible for them to win the GE. There are a whole bunch of folks out here looking at the numbers and coming to the same conclusion, Hillary wins, Obama loses. Take your pick.

Posted by: lylepink | May 28, 2008 4:47 PM | Report abuse

Look, either they wisely nominate her and she wins, or HRC supporters overwhelmingly WRITE HER IN and she wins.

Karl Rove's plan to have Obama suicide himself against McCain in a racist America was doomed to failure from the beginning BECAUSE MIDDLE AMERICA SAW RIGHT THROUGH IT. From the SECOND he raised more money from big GOP donors, through the primaries and caucuses when an overwhelming number of GOP "switch-hitters" turned out to prop up their (and Rove's) straw man pick, AMERICA KNEW. The GOP-owned mainstream media fawned and slobbered and lied through their teeth with faked polls from their databases of sworn rabid Obama supporters, but AMERICA KNEW.

AMERICA will WRITE HER IN if they have to, and DECIMATE BOTH Obama AND McCain.

Posted by: xbjllb | May 28, 2008 4:47 PM | Report abuse

How does she figure that she could win? I can already envision the Republican attack ads now...a clip of her NPR interview about how MI wont count, Terry McCauliffs comments from 2004 and the icing on the top if they have footage of Harold Ickes's hard line on why he voted to strip FL and MI of their votes...then the scary attack ad voice...maybe even a woman's...LOOK HOW HILLARY CLINTON AND HER ADVISORS LIED TO HER PARTY...HOW CAN SHE BE TRUSTED FOR AMERICA?

Posted by: Becky | May 28, 2008 4:46 PM | Report abuse

With the GRACE of GOD... this will all be over soon... in just a matter of days.

I am more interested in Obama's and McCain's policy and political positions and inpromptu debates then Hillary's pipe dreams...

She and Bill are the new 2008 version of the Barnum and Bailey... 'Circus'!

Posted by: puddlescited | May 28, 2008 4:46 PM | Report abuse

With the GRACE of GOD... this will all be over soon... in just a matter of days.

I am more interested in Obama's and McCain's policy and political positions and inpromptu debates then Hillary's pipe dreams...

She and Bill are the new 2008 version of the Barnum and Bailey... 'Circus'!

Posted by: puddlescited | May 28, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Can people learn to take any poll with a grain of salt? It's a poll of 1000 people taken via phone with god knows who, it's not an accurate representation of anything, it's a sample size with a realistic margin of error easily in the teens if not higher. Anyone quoting or citing a poll and putting the word "fact" behind it has very little of understanding of what any of these polls actually represent.

Posted by: Joey | May 28, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Superdelegates who have not voted yet and those who have voted for Obama, please vote for or switch your vote to Hillary Clinton. Obama can't win in the general election and we can't have John McCain as president. Hillary is by far the better candidate. We need a tough and practical leader in the White House, not an inexperienced politician who speaks in glittering generalities. Voting for change agents who have no real plan for change is classic risky behavior. The superdelegates need to be security conscious in this era of economic and national insecurity. The superdelegates need to correct the electoral distortion of the Democratic primary system. The superdelegates need to pick the winner. That is what they were created for. Let's make sure the Democrats win in November. Put Clinton at the top of the ticket.

Posted by: Andrew Austin | May 28, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Look at the countries who's leaders who have fallen because they aligned themselves with GW and the Iraq war:
Australia
Spain
England
Not to mention: Many of the Republicans in the U.S.
and
Hillary

Who's next?, Gramps?

Talk about regime change.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 4:41 PM | Report abuse

Anybody remember how poorly she ran her campaign? With an economy already in the tank, she certainly would "run the country"....into the ground

Posted by: Travis | May 28, 2008 4:40 PM | Report abuse

"That is why, everywhere I go, people come up to me, grip my hand or arm, and urge me to keep on running."

where did she go? her kitchen and bedroom?

Posted by: David | May 28, 2008 4:38 PM | Report abuse

Hillary's campaign is just becoming sad and comical. So with the expected win in Puerto Rico, Hillary will claim victory by saying that she wins the most popular votes and primary votes. Whatever happened to the caucus states? Has Hillary casted them aside again?!

The superdelegates need to come out for Obama in numbers like 4 to 5 per day till June 3rd, so that their overwhelming support for Obama won't be over scrutinzied.

Posted by: AJ | May 28, 2008 4:37 PM | Report abuse

"The Gore/Powell idea would be great!"
-- poster below


Start spreadin' the news... the Dems can present a winning ticket after all.

It's like Bobby Ewing's demise on "Dallas" -- this primary campaign was just a bad dream.

Powell is much more deserving of the black vote than Obama... after all, Colin has earned his stripes, literally. If Gore asked him, he'd run as a Dem and the Dems would garner lots of GOP votes, for a change.

As for Franklin's objection to "substituting" one black man for another...

I would say it's a case of putting a truly experienced, battle-tested veteran on the ticket in the number two slot to Al Gore, versus a putting an untested rookie at the top of the ticket. Powell's race is merely added value; he's super-qualified; Obama is not even remotely qualified to be the commander-in-chief.

Posted by: scrivener | May 28, 2008 4:36 PM | Report abuse

Let me get this straight: BO made an error in naming the correct city that his GRANDFATHER helped liberate during WWII (that's before BO was even born) and you people are giving him hell and saying because of that he's not fit to be our next president. Yet HRC LIED about Bosnia sniper fire on a trip SHE took. SHE voted with Bush to invade Iraq. SHE helped to ship our jobs overseas. SHE ran her campaign $30M+ into a hole. SHE MADE racist comments about WHITE WORKING CLASS AMERICANS and wouldn't apoligize. SHE insinuated assasination of BO and wouldn't apologize. SHE stated that she'll obliterate Iran. SHE agreed with the DNC ruling re: FL & MI earlier this year and now goes back on her own word - in essence saying that rules and laws are only meant to be broken and her word stands for nothing. She's lying about the popular vote argument (including FL & MI and excluding caucus state, as if the voters in caucus states shouldn't be counted)
AND YOU WANT HER TO BE OUR NEXT PRESIDENT.
(Bush & McCain may be bad, but atleast they have some integrity)
And you think BO has baggage with Rev Wright. Wait until the GOP starts on HRC and her baggage, namely Bill. BO may have stayed in his church for 20 yrs, but HRC stayed with Bill and his cheating ways for over 35 yrs and covered up for him.
These are the qualities you want to instill in our children that they should aspire to have as they are inspired by our leaders - especially our president.
If HRC becomes our next president,
AMERICA WILL BECOME THE LAUGHING STOCK OF THE WORLD AND THE BUTT OF ALL POLITICAL JOKES.

Posted by: rt | May 28, 2008 4:32 PM | Report abuse

"So why should the WHOLE electorate in each state suffer?"

Because their leaders decisions created a flawed election.

That's why

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 4:32 PM | Report abuse

jabos, I thought it already was an Obama - X and McCain - Clinton Match up.....

I mean.. if it's not somebody needs to tell Hillary!

Posted by: puddlescited | May 28, 2008 4:32 PM | Report abuse

Hill, do you and your pea brained aides really believe that the GOP will give you a pass on your impending fraud trial? Your friend the judge might have agreed to stay the case until after the nomination process to help you out, but the GOP certainly won't feel that generous.

And what about your many other scandals such as Whitewater and Vincent Foster? Just because you and your husband have been successful in manipulating the system and the media so as to ensure nobody unearth these tricky issues, it doesn't mean that the GOP will also oblige. They have been waiting a long time to finally sink their teeth into you and you running to become president will provide them with a legitimate excuse to indulge themselves. Having alienated not only the black population, but also a substantial size of the Latino, Asian as well as educated upper middle white class, you can only now appeal to the white working class with a racial bias and McCain will beat you at that with his core KKK members.

If you think you are a stronger candidate of the two, you are so wrong. You are definitely the weaker and the compromised candidate of the two.

Posted by: thisworld | May 28, 2008 4:30 PM | Report abuse

What I said: (Please, just count ALL the votes and delegates (no punishing Fla. and Mich). -they did nothing wrong) then get the nominee elected.
To work hard to solve our nation's many problems.

Is code for: Please just count the important states that Hillary won, and don't punish voters because they broke the rules and staged a flawed imprecise election.

Just ignore the facts and put my candidate in office because it appears she can't win it on her own merit even with a huge 20+ lead at the onset of this primary season.

As Art Carney used to say on the Honymooners "Sheee-yu"

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 4:29 PM | Report abuse

Hillary, sweetie, please wake up ... the dream is over ... wake up sweetie.
.
Yes, you thought marrying Billy and playing 1st lady - and accepting Billy's philandering - would make everyone love you and want you as their president - but sweetie .. it takes more than that.
..
"Moving up the corporate ladder by screwing the boss" doesn't work that reliably ... and there's only so much pandering you can do.
...
Please DO NOT SCREW IT UP ANY MORE for the smart, genuine, capable, decent and non-evil women out there who deserve a chance ... for the White House and other positions.
....
The ferocious pursuit of your dream has awakened us all to the reality that meanness, greed for power, trickery, viciousness is gender-neutral ... and missed the opportunity to demonstrate that positive attributes are.
.....
So, wake up and grow up H ... and take a long (very very very long) vacation!

Posted by: Orion | May 28, 2008 4:29 PM | Report abuse

You folk saying that Hillary could win the general election are simply delusional. Even before there was a Barrack Obama, Hillary would not have been elected President of this country no matter who the republican candidate would be. The only motivation would have been folk to come out to vote against her with the exception democratic women.

The DNC needs to stop the nonsence by enforcing the rules. Period. There is no other way to produce a fair result to all ( voted, did not vote, known candidate, unknown candidate) with an interest other than enforcing the rules. Americans' understand rules - the reason why some of us want change is because Washington does not follow rules anymore.

Posted by: Heather | May 28, 2008 4:28 PM | Report abuse

Each voter in America should think for themselves and make their OWN choice of who will be our next President rather than be deceived by news blogs and the comment rhetoric.
America's future. This will best be accomplished without any of the troll distortion and media bias to grease the path of politics to elect THEIR own biased choice as has been the history for the last 2 major elections.

Mike Cool Oakfield TN

Posted by: mike cool | May 28, 2008 4:26 PM | Report abuse

Why Senator Clinton could and will win? She wears a bullet-vest under that pant suit. She is assassination-proof! Rise Hillary, rise!
Sisters for Hillary.

Posted by: AB68 | May 28, 2008 4:26 PM | Report abuse

str8talk said:
"Some people it seems want to bury their heads in the sand and claim the world doesn't exist or they are just plain ignorant. I'll try once more to articulate what the MSM repeatedly has failed miserably in doing. "The states of MI and FL transgressed by refusing to adhere to their primary schedule, to wit, by moving said primary dates up. It was in clear violation of DNC rules. Yet we still have people claiming those states did nothing wrong. "

Those were 2 separate decisions (one in each state) by a small group. So why should the WHOLE electorate in each state suffer?

Posted by: Me | May 28, 2008 4:26 PM | Report abuse

Why these people voted for Clinton if she is not electable? What kind of poll is that? The very fact that they voted for her says she is electable with the same percentage.

Posted by: Krish | May 28, 2008 4:25 PM | Report abuse

Speaking of Gore.... Do you recall how disrepectful Bill and Hillary were towards him?

Especially Hillary!!!!

Now look at what he has accomplished inlieu of their disrespect!

Winner are Winners... no matter what they are faced with...

Ergo... OBAMA!

Posted by: puddlescited | May 28, 2008 4:25 PM | Report abuse

The MSM seems to be missing the point on this electoral college argument. The reality is that Obama has a bigger map than Clinton's. Clinton is stuck with the 2000/2004 electral map. Her hope is to replicate Gore's wins and add Florida and/or New Hampshire. With Kerry's map, she needs to replicate Kerry's wins and add Ohio. This is all doable for her, but certainly not a slam-dunk.
Obama starts with the same map as Clinton, but will compete hard in states that Clinton won't, like: Virginia, Colorado, Montana, Louisiana, Mississipi, Georgia, the Carolina's, and Iowa. Obama won't win all of these states, but doesn't need to. A few wins in thesse states are insurance in case he loses MI, PA, or OH. I think he needs to win 2 of those 3.
The point is that Obama can "play" in a lot more states than Clinton giving him a greater margin for error.

Posted by: NM Moderate | May 28, 2008 4:25 PM | Report abuse

NEWSFLASH: Within the last 2 hours, Obama has picked up two more superdelegates. He now needs a total of 46. See for yourself at www.Dailykos.com

Posted by: gmundenat | May 28, 2008 4:22 PM | Report abuse

I'm glad to see Hillary running and struggling to be elected president.

I'm even more glad to see her lose.

Posted by: James | May 28, 2008 4:21 PM | Report abuse

"President Bush acknowledged to "learning as we go" in building democracy in Iraq"

So apparently learning on the job is OK now.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 4:21 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is simply delusional. Why would you vote for the person who cannot understand something that is clear to 99% of population?

Why would you vote for the person that is ready to do anything, to say anything just to be a president? Now it is your choice. If you choose her she will be the "decider". Nobody knows what direction she will choose. This is similar to the case when democrats voted for Liberman. Just don't do it

Posted by: Reindeer Farmer | May 28, 2008 4:21 PM | Report abuse

McCain will be taking tickets at the door during the Inaugural Ball!

"yeah, that was me... would you like me to autograph your ticket"?


or you could be correct.... "Toast Anyone"?

Posted by: puddlescited | May 28, 2008 4:18 PM | Report abuse

Must go shopping for a yellow pant suit after work so I'll meet expectations. I wonder if some of the bloggers are Republicans trying to be annoying to help divide the Democratic Party. In case you haven't noticed, this is a very close election. If it wasn't, it would have been over by now. Stop the damage before everyone is so totally p*ssed that we don't stand together in the GE.

Posted by: huntley | May 28, 2008 4:17 PM | Report abuse

Please, just count ALL the votes and delegates (no punishing Fla. and Mich. -they did nothing wrong) Posted by: ann chestnut.

Some people it seems want to bury their heads in the sand and claim the world doesn't exist or they are just plain ignorant. I'll try once more to articulate what the MSM repeatedly has failed miserably in doing. "The states of MI and FL transgressed by refusing to adhere to their primary schedule, to wit, by moving said primary dates up. It was in clear violation of DNC rules. Yet we still have people claiming those states did nothing wrong.

Posted by: str8talk | May 28, 2008 4:14 PM | Report abuse

Why are we paying attention to this windbag???

This thing has been over since March.

Posted by: gthstonesman | May 28, 2008 4:14 PM | Report abuse

Woulda, coulda. shoulda and a bunch of other da's. Put a lid on it already.

Hey Wolfie...can you tell us all what happened to that 20 plus point lead your candidate had on the field before the primary started? And I wont even talk about the parsing of your numbers (again!). Any guarantees you guys wont screw it up again? Now go sit in a corner please.

Posted by: Ohillary | May 28, 2008 4:12 PM | Report abuse

The Swing State Advantage, as it is called does not take in account the New States that have a "STRONG" Democratic following for OBAMA...

Again, the Clintons and their Supports do not flip the coin if the otherside does not work in their favor...

The American People are a lot more educated regarding this process because of being fooled so many times by the Republicans.

Counter Play... is how Chest Games are WON!

Not taking the pieces off the board!

Posted by: puddlescited | May 28, 2008 4:12 PM | Report abuse

why did the candidates just spend zillions of dollars on this primary? As well as the counties across the nation spending hard earned tax money on the primaries at each polling location

Why didn't we just ask Wolfson and Clinton to do a poll and find out who most likely to win in November and pick that one to go up against Republicans? That's about as "democratic' as anything else Billiary has come up with.

Mind Boggling.

This woman has a well developed sens (over developed?) of her value and abilities.

Posted by: krkyoldhag | May 28, 2008 4:11 PM | Report abuse

Nick, Ithaca and Classy

Here is one for both of you, to disprove your point

http://primebuzz.kcstar.com/?q=node/12054

Posted by: Frank | May 28, 2008 4:11 PM | Report abuse

Do not give in to Hillary - she is even worse than Bush.

I have enough of these incredible egoistical and misspeaking Clintons.

I do not want her as president -the whole world already thinks she is a sick joke.

Posted by: birgit | May 28, 2008 4:11 PM | Report abuse

What is this hogwash about beating McCain in the fall.....she can't even beat Obama now! Hogwash, BS, chicken feed.....go back to Arkansas!

Posted by: Cyrus Clarke | May 28, 2008 4:07 PM | Report abuse

If this nomination is taken from Obama... because somehow after many months of trying the Clinton's came up with a cheating formula that worked in their favor...

Everyone would become an independent... and the Democratic Party could no longer be defined as "one of power parties of the USA"....

Of course it won't happen for another 4 years... because everyone's primary objective would be to get the Republicans out of office...

But the Democratic Party will eventually pay if this form of treason takes place!

Posted by: puddlescited | May 28, 2008 4:07 PM | Report abuse

Ann Chestnut... you said "no punishing Fla. and Mich. -they did nothing wrong"

What? They did nothing wrong!!! You been in the cave recently.

They broke the rules. Pure and simple.

That's the trouble with the Clinton supporters. Just because they are desperate in getting woman president, they open their mouths with their heads buried deep in the sand.

They plead ignorance to the facts that Hillary just can't win, that the race for nomination is not an American Idol competition, it is based on delegate count.

If Hillary supporters are not practising sexism, I don't know what else.

Posted by: Frank | May 28, 2008 4:06 PM | Report abuse

BOTOX, FAKE BLUE CONTACTS, BLONDE HAIR DYE, YELLOW PANTSUITS

Are these the ingredients of a Presidential contender? So sad that so many stupid old women don't see the fraud of Hillary Clinton.

Posted by: Christopher London | May 28, 2008 4:06 PM | Report abuse

The argument that young voters and blacks will be disenfrancised if Hillary gets the nomination doesn't sway me. As a young person I worked hard to get George McGovern elected in 1972. He had so much support from young people and others opposed to the Vietnam War. He lost the GE by the biggest margin in history. Also, I encourage Obama supporters to stop denigrating Hillary supporters. We're going to need all the support we can get and aggravating 1/2 the democratic voters in this country is not smart.

Posted by: Huntley | May 28, 2008 4:05 PM | Report abuse

Bring Obama on....McCain will serve him on toast at the Inaugural Ball!
Thank you....

Posted by: Robert Anderson, NY,NY | May 28, 2008 4:05 PM | Report abuse

Since most of you Obama's supporter do not read what you do not like, here is the case
http://www.gallup.com/poll/107539/Hillary-Clintons-SwingState-Advantage.aspx

I personally care for neither but if Hillary is the nominee I might, just might think about voting democratic and not for Mccain

Posted by: Nick,Ithaca | May 28, 2008 4:04 PM | Report abuse

Read the Gallup poll results: Clinton is a stronger candidate than Obama when up against McCain.

(http://www.gallup.com/poll/107539/Hillary-Clintons-SwingState-Advantage.aspx).

This is a fact - right now -partisan politics aside.

Posted by: classy | May 28, 2008 4:04 PM | Report abuse

I'd like to see which polls the Clinton Camp is actually using to ge their numbers.

The latest Zogby poll has Obama +10 over McCain and Clinton +1, not to every National Democratic pprimary poll has Obama over CLinton anywhere from 4-10 points. Obama, also leads McCain comfortably in every state Kerry carried in '04, along with Iowa, Virginia New Mexico and Wisconsin.


Posted by: swalker3 | May 28, 2008 4:04 PM | Report abuse

One more reason Hillary needs to go away, too many whiney pussified male weasels as her spokespeople. Can we please flush some of these people down the drain already?

Paul Begala
James Carville
Mark Penn
Lanny Davis
Terry McAuliffe

Posted by: Christopher London | May 28, 2008 4:02 PM | Report abuse

Bsimon, good point. I am a McCain Republican, but I'll be the first to admit my man's gaff was worse ... not insurmountable, but worse.

I am beginning to wonder, though, if the polls have a point. Clinton may be poisoning the well so much for Obama that she may assist McCain in being seen as the "safe" choice in November. His age m3eans that he almost certainly would serve only one term. If people understand that to be the case, then his chances improve. Four years is a lot less time to wait than eight, and it gives Obama those four years to actually gain ... I can't believe I'm going to use Clinton's line ... experience.

Posted by: ccarter | May 28, 2008 4:01 PM | Report abuse

I think the only reason Hillary is polling better against McCain is because she's still in the race and is still viable but I think Obama's support will improve once this long and drawn out democratic election is done.

Its hard to anticipate the General election when Obama hasn't officially won it. I can understand Clinton waiting until all contest are done but if she drags this out it won't help her or Obama and could really damage the party for good.

Posted by: someguy34 | May 28, 2008 4:00 PM | Report abuse

To me all the electoral vote projections mean traitor democrats would rather vote for McSame if Hillary doesn't get the nomination. Just what the nation needs traitor democrats, 4 more years of a bush clone.

Posted by: Joe | May 28, 2008 4:00 PM | Report abuse

Please, just count ALL the votes and delegates (no punishing Fla. and Mich. -they did nothing wrong) then get the nominee elected.
To work hard to solve our nation's many problems.

Posted by: ann chestnut | May 28, 2008 3:59 PM | Report abuse

Please know that I sympathize with Clinton supporters! (my 86 year old mother is one) It would be nice for all the elderly ladies to finally have their woman president, but Hillary Clinton just isn't the one. She has way too much baggage, and looks seedier all the time. She doesn't have the tempermant to be a good leader. She has been caught lieing and exagerating too many times. Sorry Mom, you probably won't live long enough to see a woman in the White House. Obama is ahead, and the democratic party will not take it away form him.

Posted by: lizard5 | May 28, 2008 3:57 PM | Report abuse

The following analogies best describe Hillary's case and argument:

1) Just because you THINK you can win the Super Bowl, you refuse to accept the results of the final AFL game.

2) The game has started. You are about to lose. You ask the referee to move the goal post.

3) Every chess move, Hillary makes, she got checkmate. She has maximum two moves. And the clock is ticking. What does she want? She wants the referee/umpire for
- Obama to remove some of his pieces so that she is not checkmated
- Obama to reconfigure his pieces so that the checkmate becomes ineffective
- Obama makes NO move to checkmate
- Allow her to add her pieces to the chess board
- Allow her to reconfigure her pieces

The spotlight is now not on Hillary or Obama, it is on the referee, the DNC.

We will know whether the DNC is just a bunch of political wimps or useless rule enforcer.

Posted by: Frank | May 28, 2008 3:56 PM | Report abuse

It's not even funny anymore, I seriously think she has a "screw" loose now...

Posted by: GW | May 28, 2008 3:56 PM | Report abuse

By Hillary's logic, after the Giants won at Lambeau, they should have sent the Packers to face the Patriots in the superbowl because they had a better chance of winning it. Obama EARNED his spot as the nominee no matter what the polls indicate at this moment. And I think he will win in November as well.

Posted by: G$ | May 28, 2008 3:55 PM | Report abuse

If you see similarities between the assault on our democracy in 2000 by the Bush/Cheney/Baker/Rove Neocon crowd and Hillary's last gasps of political air in Florida, it is no coincidence. The Clintons are Machiavellian Political Predators who feed on the ignorance, apathy and naivete in the electorate. It took the better part of two decades of shape shifting, lying and deception for the vast majority of Americans to conclude in earnest that the CLINTONS ARE UNPRINCIPLED, IMMORAL, RECKLESS, POWER HUNGRY LIARS willing to do or say anything in an effort to attain or hold on to power. Like leeches they attach to and feed off the body politic. AMERICA NEEDS A COLONIC to cleanse itself of the stench of Clinton politics so that we may flush their political fecal matter from the bowels of our democracy and emerge detoxified as a nation. What emerged on the American political scene in 1992 was one of the GREATEST FRAUDS perpetrated on the American people. That Bill Clinton, a disbarred, impeached, nearly indicted former President who avoided prosecution for rape, sexual harassment and other sexually predatory behavior with his wife as his accomplice and protecter, remains a semi relevant political voice in this country is sign of the TOXICITY in American politics.

Posted by: Christopher London | May 28, 2008 3:54 PM | Report abuse

Umm no offense to Hillary Clinton, But polls are not 100% accurate. A poll is a good guesstimation (guess + estimation). You don't pick a candidate based on polls alone, especially when there are voters and superdelegates who already have Senator Obama in the lead. Has Senator Clinton lost her marbles or what. Some call her a fighter for continuing but I think she is just a poor sport who can't see past her own ambition.

Posted by: joe v | May 28, 2008 3:52 PM | Report abuse

what do you guys think about an Obama-X vs McCain-Clinton match-up?

Posted by: jabos | May 28, 2008 3:52 PM | Report abuse

Sometimes Hillary wants concrete arguments, sometimes she wants hypothetical arguments (polls) that are unreliable and ALL candidates agree with not basing anything on one poll.

But you got to grasp for straws somewhere....

Am I the only one who thinks sexism is not fought by pursuing the "uneducated white voters will vote for me" line? Feminism is a large topic, I wish large groups would stop righteously acting like they speak for everyone or even some universal idea of woman.

We already have a president who is in denial we don't need to elect another with the same truth problems. The era of expertise as bulletproof vest is over. The Iraq war and Katrina taught us that a resume doesn't mean anything.

Posted by: Iowa Grant | May 28, 2008 3:50 PM | Report abuse

Goal-Post Moving! Goal-Post Moving! Goal-Post Moving! Goal-Post Moving!

Because the Democratic Party has yet to pick a nominee, polling, such as that cited by the Clinton campaign, is questionable. Hillary is about to be shut-out. If the Clintons don't work D@mn hard on getting Obama elected their collective legacy will be SH!T

The evil that is GWB's 3rd term served by John McLobbiest will be too much for a majority of voters to take.

Posted by: Roofelstoon | May 28, 2008 3:49 PM | Report abuse

Truth Seeker writes
"Doesn't Obama's mistaking Auschwitz for Buchenwald tell you something? This guy admits he is not a "detail" guy but this mistake is pure laziness and we have had 7 plus years of a lazy President. "

Well, of the three running, I'll take mistaking Auschwitz for Buchenwald over misremembering being shot at, or confusing Shia & Sunni. You're right, details can be important. But _which_ details makes a hell of a difference too...

Posted by: bsimon | May 28, 2008 3:49 PM | Report abuse

The supporters of Obama bank his election in November on many suppositions:
1) that once Clinton is out of the race, he will become more electable; 2) that once Clinton is out of the race, her supporters will support him. In an ordinary race, managed the "old style politics" way, that may have been true. But the new style politics of Hope fueled by Hate, will not make it so. Non supporters of Obama have been invited to "leave the Democratic Party because we don't need you", have been called "racist trash" when we were the generation that marched and protested in support of civil rights before they were even born; and have witnessed a "free press" ridicule, scorn, insult, slander, and caricature a serious candidate because she is female. We have been told to "get out of the race" while voters were still voting for her and she was still winning. We have been told we were "harming the party" when the most harm done has been by the Party itself in their exclusivity and Rovian techniques that they have used on their own party members. There is no way I can "unify" for November; I do not condone any of it, I think it is dangerous.

Posted by: nana4 | May 28, 2008 3:49 PM | Report abuse

Collin Powell brushed Bush off his shoulders a long time ago....

Rice is another story...but considering she is as much in the soup with this war as McCain and Bush... It still would leave a bad taste in people mouths!!!!!!

Posted by: puddlescited | May 28, 2008 3:49 PM | Report abuse

Clinton will win the nominee and win the November election is a possibility..Will the black people who witness that they cheated Obama for Hillary's nominee react or stay silent and accept that? What about those young people and others who felt that this was taken away from him??????????????there will be serious consequences and political chaos......Look out!!!!!!!

Posted by: Rajendra Ram | May 28, 2008 3:49 PM | Report abuse

Hillary's argument that she can beat McCain in November is unconvincing.

The Reason:

Read this well-thought out analysis of the scenario when Obama takes on McCain.

http://newscompass.blogspot.com/2008/05/hillary-and-bill-are-wrong-obama-will.html

Her arguments are subjective and does not take into account the new politics and the new demographics of voters in November.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 3:47 PM | Report abuse

She can't even run a marginally effective campaign. Where the hell does she get the gall to say that she's best prepared to lead this country??

Please.

Posted by: HoHum | May 28, 2008 3:46 PM | Report abuse

Obama can't win the GE. A core of Clinton Democrats, including myself won't vote for him. We don't go for speeches, we go for hardworking experienced candidates. Most of us would welcome Gore as the very best choice and a definite winner. I have said all along, that if Obama had Colin Powell's credentials, I would have no problem voting for him! The Gore/Powell idea would be great! Powell deserves better than the way Bush used him.

Posted by: LaurenR1 | May 28, 2008 3:45 PM | Report abuse

I love all these crazy people who keep talking about substituting in Powell for Barack or Condoleeza for Hillary.

You know it's not just an automatic thing to plug the same race/gender and get those votes right? If all women would vote for any other woman, regardless of her qualifications, that means that feminism and a lack of sexism is much further away than anyone could fear. Same with the black communities supporting any other black candidate. Women didn't rush to Mondale because of Ferraro and Jesse Jackson never won the nomination.

Let's all at least pretend that people care about the issues of the candidates.

Posted by: Franklin | May 28, 2008 3:45 PM | Report abuse

I would really like an OBAMA/EDWARDS Ticket....

Just to see it in print give me the willies!!!!!!

Posted by: puddlescited | May 28, 2008 3:44 PM | Report abuse

Four more years in the wilderness would be a grievous thing for the Democratic Party and the country. Another president undeserving of our trust would be a much worse thing for everyone but Mrs. Clinton. Mrs. Clinton cannot regain the trust she has lost between now and the election. Worse, if she really believes that only she can win she is a fool. If she actually makes that claim, but is not nominated, she will have created a self-fulfilling prophecy because her support for the Obama ticket could in fact make a positive difference for the Democratic Party, the country, and her own diminishing reputation without, however, galvanizing the Republicans while alienating the young first time voters.

Posted by: Alexander Mac Donald | May 28, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

WINNING WITH A CLINTON IS LOSING. Many right brained thinking Americans have come to view the Clinton years as an overly self indulgent power drama game. America and Progressive causes and issues LOSE under Clinton rule. Democrats lost seats at every level, state, local and federal. Good ideas were demonized because their spokespeople, "The Clinton's" had no moral standing. The politics of triangulation are a cover for do nothing, lie, deceive and manipulate voters on all sides so you can appear to be conservative as well as progressive but in the end it is the politics of stalemate and governance by fraud with trick mirrors at a political carnival.

Posted by: Christopher London | May 28, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

The Gallup Poll needs to get up off of Hillary's sofa... and give it's self a reality check!

Or maybe these figures are based on what was occurring two months ago...

But not as of now!

Posted by: puddlescited | May 28, 2008 3:41 PM | Report abuse

Is it me... or what?

If you cannot win your party's nomination to run in the general election....

How in the Heck can you present an argument that you will win in the GE??????

Really, this argument is actually very ARROGANT!

ps...With all the new voters brought into this process I am sure if some of her supporters choose not to vote... it will not be end all for the winning nominee if it is not her! Again very Arrogant of her and her supporters to think otherwise.. I mean, what other options to they have... More WAR; More EVICTIONS, More JOB LOST....

please!!!!!!!!

Posted by: puddlescited | May 28, 2008 3:37 PM | Report abuse

> -- bsimon

This is a very good suggestion, Chris. You can put some alcohol in the Kool-Aid to gin things up, but you're still starting with Kool-Aid.

Chris, did you read that New Republic piece about MSNBC?

Posted by: scrivener | May 28, 2008 3:37 PM | Report abuse

John Edwards consistently polled the strongest in matchups against John McCain - until he dropped out of the race. Then Clinton and Obama both got a bump. The Democratic base obviously didn't chose Edwards because they didn't feel he was their strongest candidate, despite his *apparent* overall polling advantage against McCain. Now Clinton is in the same position. As with Edwards, so with Clinton: the Democratic base can tell who is the stronger candidate, and they have voted for Obama. His polling against McCain will improve when Clinton leaves the race. More importantly, Obama's coalition of Democratic faithful, Independents, cross-over Republicans, and first-time voters is a stronger voting bloc than either Clinton or McCain can put together. They are also a harder constituency to poll - especially the numerous young voters who overwhelmingly support Obama.

Posted by: thisniss | May 28, 2008 3:36 PM | Report abuse

DNC is losing the election omn Nov if they dicided to cut half of FL and Michigan delagates. Sorry for Dem.

Posted by: joe | May 28, 2008 3:35 PM | Report abuse

FL 44-40 and OH 45-41, OMG, it's an insurmountable lead within the margin of error!!! Quick, Hillary's our only choice!!! Phuleezz

Posted by: kreuz_missile | May 28, 2008 3:34 PM | Report abuse

Truth Seeker,

What's more troubling? A candidate that thinks she was shot at, was confronted by the lies, and then embellished it. Or a candidate that mistook one of many concentration camps when telling a family story.

If you think Hillary's loss of status as a front-runner is such good experience or her vote for the Iraq War as burnishing her liberal credentials, you're sort of pathetic with that appellation you gave yourself.

Posted by: Ben | May 28, 2008 3:32 PM | Report abuse

"...What chance would either Obama or Clinton have if McCain had Collin Powell or Condy Rice as a Running-mate...."

An easier win...you wouldn't even have to make that case that McCain is Bush III...even dummies could connect the dots for themselves.

Posted by: JohnC | May 28, 2008 3:30 PM | Report abuse

Gallup Poll May 28, 2008
In the 20 states where Hillary Clinton has claimed victory in the 2008 Democratic primary and caucus elections (winning the popular vote), she has led John McCain in Gallup Poll Daily trial heats for the general election over the past two weeks of Gallup Poll Daily tracking by 50% to 43%. In those same states, Barack Obama is about tied with McCain among national registered voters, 45% to 46%.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/107539/Hillary-Clintons-SwingState-Advantage.aspx

QuinnipiacMay 22, 2008
McCain Leads Obama In Two Of Three Key Swing States, Quinnipiac University Swing State Poll Finds;

Clinton Has Big Leads In Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania ---

FLORIDA:
Clinton 48 - McCain 41
McCain 45 - Obama 41

OHIO:
Clinton 48 - McCain 41
McCain 44 - Obama 40

PENNSYLVANIA:
Clinton 50 - McCain 37
Obama 46 - McCain 40

Plagued by a defection of Clinton supporters and white working class voters, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, the leading Democratic presidential contender, trails Arizona Sen. John McCain, the likely Republican candidate, in Florida and Ohio, according to simultaneous Quinnipiac University Swing State polls released today.
http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x2882.xml?ReleaseID=1180

Posted by: Angel | May 28, 2008 3:30 PM | Report abuse

You mean to tell me the few delegates and super-delegates are supposed to determine the next black president of America?

Posted by: J. Kuan | May 28, 2008 3:30 PM | Report abuse

Obama doesn't have to attack Hillary anymore. She's doing a superb job of destroying her own credibility. It's enjoyable to watch though. The more she struggles and fights to prove her point, the more mistakes she makes and in the end, we see her true colors. If anything, she's convincing the remaining super-delegates to cast their votes for Obama.

Posted by: jennifer | May 28, 2008 3:29 PM | Report abuse

Only in Hillaryland does lying, cheating, and delusion of the facts worthy of the Bush Administration.

Your going to see a different set of polls once Clinton is out of the race or the public
accepts Clinton is out of the race.

and if you people in Hillaryland think the Republicans don't have a file on Bill Clinton's woman since 2001 or his business dealings or bring out all the old stuff then
you really did inhale.

Honestly

Posted by: Michael Templer | May 28, 2008 3:29 PM | Report abuse

"Wolfson repeatedly noted that he was not saying that Obama could not win a general election, simply that polls show that he is currently trailing McCain."

Doesn't Obama's mistaking Auschwitz for Buchenwald tell you something? This guy admits he is not a "detail" guy but this mistake is pure laziness and we have had 7 plus years of a lazy President.

This guy is NOT ready for prime time and the "polls" show everyone that VOTERS know it even if the MEDIA and the Party Elite don't.

Wake up. You are courting disaster in November if you continue supporting Obama.

Posted by: Truth Seeker | May 28, 2008 3:28 PM | Report abuse

Dear Superdelegates:

Electable, Inevitable and more I promise.
Anoint me as Your nominee, all will be gay and happy.

What, the DEMOCRATIC voters did not give me their votes? Who cares, You, Superdelegates should listen to the Inevitable, the Electable!

Sincerely yours, Hillary.

Posted by: piktor | May 28, 2008 3:20 PM | Report abuse

Why are people listening to this arguement regarding Michigan and Florida being seated as the earlier results?
The Clintons mentality of winning at all costs is morally bankrupt.
Is the U.S. going to join the likes of Kim Jong Il, Hugo Chavez and Castro with there single candidate ballot as the Michigan primary?
Why does Clinton beleive she is the only one who should be awarded delegates form Michigan?
Because she is win at any cost, even if it is undemocratic, I am best for this country even though I am losing by the current Rules, Rules are made to be broken, its my turn, wait your turn, you sexist bigot, Hard working Whites won't vote for you,I won the important states, every vote should count, 3 am coronate me Hillary>

Posted by: Bob | May 28, 2008 3:14 PM | Report abuse

"Chuck Todd debunked the Hillary math last night, showing how in the last three presidential primaries, once the nomination was all but determined and the front runner stopped running against the also-ran, the second-place finisher experienced a bump in the polls. Obama isn't attacking Hillary anymore, which to some makes her look a little better."

Just like scrivener with Gore. Al Gore chose not to run for a reason, the party isn't just going to see him as a savior now.

Posted by: kreuz_missile | May 28, 2008 3:12 PM | Report abuse

Regardless of whether Hillary has a better chance against McCain or not, this country cannot afford to elect somebody who does not play by the rules. Hillary has caused this country to go through so much trouble because she continues to ignore the rules set forth by the democratic party for Florida and Michigan. She was all for the rules before the election, now she is against it.

Posted by: Jimmy | May 28, 2008 3:12 PM | Report abuse

These guys should actually read current polling (not a new problem for the Clinton campaign). MyDD's ( a liberal blog, but one of the more pro-Clinton ones) current EC count (using the most current polls) does show Clinton doing marginally better, but both easily beating McCain, Obama 290 - 248, and Clinton 338 - 200, and that assumes both lose WI and MI (where both are currently tied with McCain in recent polls, but a tie defaults to older polls and in each case I expect the eventual nominee to solidly win). Both candidates win in November, and besides that percieved electability is the wrong way to nominate a candidate- that's how we got Kerry in 2004.

http://www.mydd.com/

Posted by: kreuz_missile | May 28, 2008 3:08 PM | Report abuse

You down and/or win with your candidate. If the DEM party takes this mantra, they will win. Regardless of who heads teh ticket. Any other way, get your backpacks and draft cards ready.

Posted by: Huh | May 28, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

sorry, that was Harold Ickes, not "Howard."

Posted by: common sense | May 28, 2008 3:04 PM | Report abuse

Dear Mr. Wolfson,

You have to win the primary in order to be considered for the general election.

It's this basic knowledge that may have been helpful to you when you chose to run the worst campaign I've ever seen.

Yours truly,

Reality

Posted by: dan | May 28, 2008 2:05 PM

Unless you're Joe LIEberman. And then, all bets are off.

Posted by: tellthetruth | May 28, 2008 3:04 PM | Report abuse

I haven't heard _any_ Clinton supporters answer this simple fact:

Hillary Clinton is on record saying, a few months ago, that she agrees with Michigan and Florida not counting. There is also a pledge to go along with this statement. And there is also a vote by Howard Ickes in favor of stripping the two states of their delegates to along with this pledge.

What changed between then and now?

Posted by: common sense | May 28, 2008 3:03 PM | Report abuse

The biggest problem with her argument is that it is not true. Democrats have worried for years about a potential Clinton nomination because of the fact that she is so hated among indpendents and republicans and we feared she was NOT a winning candidate. Her negatives are very high. 60% of voters think she is "untrustworthy"!!!! And recent polls show Obama stronger than Clinton against McCain.

Posted by: Angela | May 28, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Chris
you keep writing these article about Hillary Clinton, the liar and Barack Obama and in all of them you somehow find a way to undercut SENATOR OBAMA. I am sure that you and all of you other so-called political analyst know that if Obama doesn't get what he has diligently worked for, without all of the backstabbing and whining, you better believe that this so-called coalition that Hillary claims she can bring to the table will include nothing but the "working class white people." I know tons of people who would never vote for Hillary Clinton including myself!!!!! I will vote for John McCain first and I can't stand him but I hate Hillary even more. She is a liar and gives a bad name to all women no matter what race they are!.

You seem to want to get Hillary's point across no matter how ludicrous it is. For that, I will tell everyone that I kmow and then some to stop reading your biased column.

Posted by: Chris you idiot! | May 28, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

scrivener -

Very funny. I was simply trying to say that I do not think it will be a blowout. I believe Obama will, in fact, win. I'm just not so foolish as to say it for certain, because no one can predict the future.

As for Gore's "refusal" to endorse Obama, there has been no such thing. "Refusal" suggests that he has been asked and declined and, as far as I know, there is no evidence of that. I suspect that Gore is simply waiting for the primaries to be finished, as are the other 200 or so uncommitted superdelegates, and that he will endorse Obama some time shortly after next Tuesday. We shall see.

Posted by: jac13 | May 28, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Chris -
I think it would be more interesting if you approached the question from the superdelegate angle, rather than the Clinton campaign angle. In this story, as is usual, you start with the talking points from the Clinton campaign & carry the discussion from there. How about a new approach? Here's my suggestion:

People should be asking the superdelegates why they're treating the Clinton campaign with kid gloves. As the campaign itself admits now, its not going to go away until it is told to. So why don't the superdelegates tell it to? That is the interesting story here. The tired, tortured talking points from Wolfson, et al offer zero insight into the process.

p.s. blert- please respond to Mark's note.

Posted by: bsimon | May 28, 2008 2:59 PM | Report abuse

In Florida no one cares. No one cared when the vote was taking place. That record turn out of voters was to change our state constitution regarding property taxes. No one cared about the primary, especially since it didn't count anyway. We wanted our taxes and insurance lowered. Hell, I pay $14,000 a year in property taxes and $8,500 a year in home owners insurance. You bet there was a big turn out and our vote did count, for the issues we were voting on in Florida. Come November we will vote in the general election. Who are these people speaking for the Florida voters? We didn't care back then, (and neither did Hillary either by the way) and we don't care now. No one feels disenfranchised, thats just BS.

+++++++++
So these polls that Clinton cites are being taken about six months before the election. What did the polls taken six months before primaries started say? Oh yeah, that Clinton was inevitably winning the nomination by a landslide. So much for that argument.

Superdelegates have been in politics long enough to know that polls have no predictive value, especially this many months in advance.

Funny, too, is the fact that Clinton's staying in the race is part of what is dragging down Obama's poll numbers. Clinton has driven artificial wedges between Obama and her supporters, between Obama and white, uneducated, blue collar voters, and especially between Obama and Florida voters. As long as Clinton is setting herself up as the champion of voter enfranchisement (which she is not--her campaign helped set the penalty along with everyone else at the DNC, and it was a lone Obama supporter who voted against the penalty way back when the rules committee initially voted on this), Obama has a steep uphill climb to win back votes in that state. Were Clinton to back out of the race, Obama will have shored up his base within a month or two, and he'd be running toward a landslide against McCain, who is having trouble appealing to almost everyone in his own GOP base.

Posted by: blert | May 28, 2008 2:44 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 2:58 PM | Report abuse

Bill & Hillary have done more damage to their on persona than anyone else could have done. What did they think would be accomplished by this. Blind ambition does more damage than anything. At one time I would have voted for Hillary until I saw the tone of their campaign.

Posted by: Oldbuck | May 28, 2008 2:53 PM | Report abuse

The Clinton's electoral college argument is so weak that no one in the country is buying it. Why do you keep referring to their tortured logic as if it were true?

Posted by: Dave Cullen | May 28, 2008 2:50 PM | Report abuse

I see scrivener is still wearing his tin foil hat.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 2:47 PM | Report abuse

So these polls that Clinton cites are being taken about six months before the election. What did the polls taken six months before primaries started say? Oh yeah, that Clinton was inevitably winning the nomination by a landslide. So much for that argument.

Superdelegates have been in politics long enough to know that polls have no predictive value, especially this many months in advance.

Funny, too, is the fact that Clinton's staying in the race is part of what is dragging down Obama's poll numbers. Clinton has driven artificial wedges between Obama and her supporters, between Obama and white, uneducated, blue collar voters, and especially between Obama and Florida voters. As long as Clinton is setting herself up as the champion of voter enfranchisement (which she is not--her campaign helped set the penalty along with everyone else at the DNC, and it was a lone Obama supporter who voted against the penalty way back when the rules committee initially voted on this), Obama has a steep uphill climb to win back votes in that state. Were Clinton to back out of the race, Obama will have shored up his base within a month or two, and he'd be running toward a landslide against McCain, who is having trouble appealing to almost everyone in his own GOP base.

Posted by: blert | May 28, 2008 2:44 PM | Report abuse

I wish Howard Wolfson good luck finding another job after peddling this crap. He is a loser, just like Hillary Clinton!

Posted by: gipper1 | May 28, 2008 2:42 PM | Report abuse

To jac13:

"Close" only counts in horseshoes.

Coming "close" to winning is still losing.

Your post provides another good reason for Hillary to throw her delegates to Gore.

Posted by: scrivener | May 28, 2008 2:42 PM | Report abuse

Gore is worth a few hundred million dollars and has finally secured his legacy in history. He would not enter this mine field of an election if you were holding his family hostage.

+++++++++
NOW IT'S HILLARY'S TURN TO PLAY HER DELEGATE CARDS
IN A COUP TO TAKE DOWN OBAMA

... A Gore/Powell Ticket for the Dems in '08?


All the negative talk from Hillary and Bill Clinton against the Obama candidacy in the face of their own demise could add up to this:

The Uber-Democrat power couple is considering throwing its support, and Hillary's delegates, to an alternative candidate who stands a better chance of winning the general election than Obama.

They know there's no chance in the hell that Hillary has created for the party that leadership and core constituencies will back a Hillary candidacy. So, just perhaps, they're about to stage their own delegate power play in a bold move to checkmate Obama.

Here's the evidence for a Hillary-led delegate coup against Obama:

1) The Clinton's talking points. They know the party and the supers have had enough of the divisive Hillary candidacy, but they believe they've got the facts on their side -- that Obama can't win the general due to his inexperience, his naivete, and his dismissive attitude in the late-season primaries toward rural and suburban white voters, whom he cavalierly wrote off in the states where Hillary triumphed.

2) Superdelegate hesitancy to embrace Obama. Where's the "flood" of supers racing toward the Obama camp? It's still a mere trickle. The supers don't like the idea of nominating a likely loser any more than do the Clintons, or the lunch-bucket Dems who lodged their protest votes against Obama by supporting Hillary.

3) Al Gore's refusal to endorse Obama. This is key. Edwards, ever the opportunist, actually believed Obama could win the nomination and, presumably, the general, so he cast his political fate with the Obama campaign. That could prove to be a costly error. Had he hung back, as Gore has done, he could have been a successor to Obama if and when the supers reject his candidacy. Given the Clinton's enmity towards Gore (and vice versa, for sure), Edwards would have been far more palatable to Billary than Gore.

But Gore is last man standing; and Hill and Bill would much prefer that Gore get the nomination than Obama, whom they see as a rookie usurper.

Remember all my talk a few weeks back about a third way candidacy, with Obama taking the lead at unifying the party by tossing his delegates to Gore? Well, it appears that Obama believes his own press to the point of self-delusion. As a result, he could be the one to go down hard, even harder than Hillary, who would go back to the Senate as the party unifier and savior of the Dems' general election hopes.

It's Hillary's final solution -- the chance to pull a major power play, back a compromise candidate, unite the party and better prepare the party for victory in the fall. No other third way candidate has the gravitas and the star power to pull off a late-season nomination coup. Only Gore could do it.

And by his refusal to endorse Obama, Gore is sending a powerful message to the superdelegates: You can't go with Obama and still expect to win, and I can save the party and redeem my rightful role as the party standard-bearer with your pledge of support.

For this to happen, powerful Obama backers like Kennedy, Kerry and Dodd have to be convinced that Obama can't win in a matchup against McCain. The polls are showing that he can't. The supers are sitting on their hands, waiting for a sign from Al Gore.

In a very few weeks time, as the Obama candidacy slips further into the realm of the improbable (to use Obama's own word), Gore will give that sign. He may have to make Colin Powell his running mate to prevent all hell from breaking loose among fervid Obama supporters -- and Gore might do just that, winning back blacks who might otherwise sit out the election, and forging a unity ticket that will appeal to Republican moderates.

Posted by: scrivener | May 28, 2008 2:37 PM

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 2:41 PM | Report abuse

NOW IT'S HILLARY'S TURN TO PLAY HER DELEGATE CARDS
IN A COUP TO TAKE DOWN OBAMA

... A Gore/Powell Ticket for the Dems in '08?


All the negative talk from Hillary and Bill Clinton against the Obama candidacy in the face of their own demise could add up to this:

The Uber-Democrat power couple is considering throwing its support, and Hillary's delegates, to an alternative candidate who stands a better chance of winning the general election than Obama.

They know there's no chance in the hell that Hillary has created for the party that leadership and core constituencies will back a Hillary candidacy. So, just perhaps, they're about to stage their own delegate power play in a bold move to checkmate Obama.

Here's the evidence for a Hillary-led delegate coup against Obama:

1) The Clinton's talking points. They know the party and the supers have had enough of the divisive Hillary candidacy, but they believe they've got the facts on their side -- that Obama can't win the general due to his inexperience, his naivete, and his dismissive attitude in the late-season primaries toward rural and suburban white voters, whom he cavalierly wrote off in the states where Hillary triumphed.

2) Superdelegate hesitancy to embrace Obama. Where's the "flood" of supers racing toward the Obama camp? It's still a mere trickle. The supers don't like the idea of nominating a likely loser any more than do the Clintons, or the lunch-bucket Dems who lodged their protest votes against Obama by supporting Hillary.

3) Al Gore's refusal to endorse Obama. This is key. Edwards, ever the opportunist, actually believed Obama could win the nomination and, presumably, the general, so he cast his political fate with the Obama campaign. That could prove to be a costly error. Had he hung back, as Gore has done, he could have been a successor to Obama if and when the supers reject his candidacy. Given the Clinton's enmity towards Gore (and vice versa, for sure), Edwards would have been far more palatable to Billary than Gore.

But Gore is last man standing; and Hill and Bill would much prefer that Gore get the nomination than Obama, whom they see as a rookie usurper.

Remember all my talk a few weeks back about a third way candidacy, with Obama taking the lead at unifying the party by tossing his delegates to Gore? Well, it appears that Obama believes his own press to the point of self-delusion. As a result, he could be the one to go down hard, even harder than Hillary, who would go back to the Senate as the party unifier and savior of the Dems' general election hopes.

It's Hillary's final solution -- the chance to pull a major power play, back a compromise candidate, unite the party and better prepare the party for victory in the fall. No other third way candidate has the gravitas and the star power to pull off a late-season nomination coup. Only Gore could do it.

And by his refusal to endorse Obama, Gore is sending a powerful message to the superdelegates: You can't go with Obama and still expect to win, and I can save the party and redeem my rightful role as the party standard-bearer with your pledge of support.

For this to happen, powerful Obama backers like Kennedy, Kerry and Dodd have to be convinced that Obama can't win in a matchup against McCain. The polls are showing that he can't. The supers are sitting on their hands, waiting for a sign from Al Gore.

In a very few weeks time, as the Obama candidacy slips further into the realm of the improbable (to use Obama's own word), Gore will give that sign. He may have to make Colin Powell his running mate to prevent all hell from breaking loose among fervid Obama supporters -- and Gore might do just that, winning back blacks who might otherwise sit out the election, and forging a unity ticket that will appeal to Republican moderates.

Posted by: scrivener | May 28, 2008 2:37 PM | Report abuse

Those numbers are good for about ten minutes. A week in a political season is a life time and nothing today will relate to November at all. Between now and November Mccain will go down, this is a guy losing 30% of the votes now in primaries he is running in alone. The Obama machine will destroy Mccain. By November if Mccain can pull 35% of the vote I would be surprised. The election in November will not even be close.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 28, 2008 2:35 PM | Report abuse

Obama has run a very good primary campaign, and I have every expectation that he will run an even better general election campaign. Much as I hate to say it, I'm glad he didn't wrap it up early -- say, with a win in New Hampshire -- because he has actually become a better candidate as a result of Clinton's challenge, and has been vetted in a way he otherwise never would have.

I'm not sure if he will beat McCain, but then I don't know how Hillary or any of her supporters can say they are sure she would. I do think this: Obama will run a creditable, effective campaign, and if he does not win it will be close.

Posted by: jac13 | May 28, 2008 2:35 PM | Report abuse

Per the Rice and Powell comment...Rice has never run for elected office, and shows no desire of doing so. My guess is that she goes back to Stanford. Powell is as old as McCain, and while he has gravitas, has indicated no willingness to get into politics. Besides, all of Powell's public statements so far indicate that he leans towards Obama.

Posted by: P Diddy | May 28, 2008 2:32 PM | Report abuse

Barack Obama can present a welcome alternative to 4 more years of Bush-style war and economic floundering. Clinton, on the other hand, can rally wavering Republicans to vote against the family they love to hate. Obama just seems the stronger candidate.

Posted by: JoeS | May 28, 2008 2:27 PM | Report abuse

"Ding-Dong", the witch is dead!!!

Posted by: tom albright | May 28, 2008 2:23 PM | Report abuse

Yes, as much as I hate it, I have to admit that Obama could lose in the GE, but it will be Hillary's doing and not Obama's. As Hillary has beautifully demonstrated, people have been known to do all sorts of irrational things, including committing suicide as will be the case here if they vote for McCain the GE, in spite.

Posted by: KT11 | May 28, 2008 2:22 PM | Report abuse

Polls shift and change with whims of the wind, or the latest misstep or the next lurking scandal. Hilary in my opinion, at this chapter of her campaign is completely bereft of credibility. Her win at any cost strategy has compromised her in ways unimaginable,leaving her looking more and more like a psychopath. We have one of those in white house already, this country doesn't need another.

Posted by: tydicea | May 28, 2008 2:19 PM | Report abuse

Clinton assumes in her argument that the Obama people would vote for her if she somehow steals the election. And we all know what happens when you assume things.

Posted by: Andy R | May 28, 2008 2:18 PM | Report abuse

Are we back to the "working americans, hard working americans, white americans" thing? I think a number of people have issues with Obama's race and his name and that is why they are saying they won't support him. As an earlier post said, I would rather lose with Obama than win with Clinton. Change isn't always easy but somethings are worth fighting for.

Posted by: Bill J | May 28, 2008 2:18 PM | Report abuse

Chuck Todd debunked the Hillary math last night, showing how in the last three presidential primaries, once the nomination was all but determined and the front runner stopped running against the also-ran, the second-place finisher experienced a bump in the polls. Obama isn't attacking Hillary anymore, which to some makes her look a little better. But it's an imaginary bump, because if she somehow won the nomination she'd get a frontal assault from the GOP that would drive her negatives way up. Hopefully in a week, we can end this thing once and for all.

Posted by: JZ | May 28, 2008 2:16 PM | Report abuse

What chance would either Obama or Clinton have if McCain had Collin Powell or Condy Rice as a Running-mate

Posted by: gcamp | May 28, 2008 2:14 PM | Report abuse

With Clinton's very high negatives, especially among independents, the way her campaign has denigrated Barack and racist comments alienating many African-Americans, she has little chance of winning, were she the presidential nominee. By trying to change party rules, the Clintons and their most fervent supporters show they do not believe party rules apply to them. This also seemed to be their mentality about playing by the rules of the Constitution, the oath of office about enforcing laws, during the Monica Lewinsjy perjury scandal.

The Clintons have been trying their best for at least several weeks to undermine Barack's chances of winning in the fall. National polls have fluctuated and will continue to change over coming months. There have been numerous examples in other recent elections where there were significant changes in polls between late spring and November results.

Barack has won the nomination fairly, playing by the party rules. The Clintons can not accept this, so they seek, as many persons have commented, for Barack to lose, so they can try to get back into their White House again in four years, based on the premise of collective amnesia by most Democrats and independents concerning their role in the victory of McCain. This strategy is rational and has a very good chance of being successful.

Posted by: Independent | May 28, 2008 2:14 PM | Report abuse

Polls are fickle things. They seem to be shifting Obama's way, currently, as it becomes clear he will be the nominee. For Hillary Clinton to assert clairvoyance now doesn't seem credible, given that she and her advisers, including the inimitable Mr. Wolfson, believed she would have the nomination wrapped up after Super Tuesday. I doubt that any superdelegates are fooled by the bluster of the "genius prognosticators" in the Clinton camp.

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

It must be obvious to everyone by now that the Clintons are never to be believed, that their self-interest governs everything they say and do, and that the $100 million they have obtained by their first White House venture is not enough.

The only puzzle is why their narcissism draws any attention from the public. Future historians will wonder at this, too.

Posted by: sailhardy | May 28, 2008 2:11 PM | Report abuse

I would rather have a cynical Sen. Clinton in the white house than have a "hopefull" Sen. Obama lose to Sen. McCain

Posted by: Amod | May 28, 2008 2:09 PM | Report abuse

Dear Mr. Wolfson,

You have to win the primary in order to be considered for the general election.

It's this basic knowledge that may have been helpful to you when you chose to run the worst campaign I've ever seen.

Yours truly,

Reality

Posted by: dan | May 28, 2008 2:05 PM | Report abuse

It's also interesting to note that several recent polls have showed just the opposite: That Obama would win and Clinton would lose to McCain. So I guess it's a question of which poll one chooses to listen to here. Certainly not enough to over-rule the will of the people in any event.

Posted by: Mike Stevens | May 28, 2008 2:05 PM | Report abuse

Am I alone, Democrats, in thinking that I'd rather have an optimistic Obama lose to McCain than to have a cynical Clinton win?

Posted by: nosocksboy | May 28, 2008 2:04 PM | Report abuse

ProudToBeGOP, Alan in Missoula, blert, and Colin:

please contact me at

mark_in_austin@operamail.com

Posted by: MarkInAustin | May 28, 2008 2:02 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company