I hate to say it, but Hillary is making a better case for the nomination.

[NJSecularist]

Obama has the delegate lead, but Hillary is winning key swing states that we needed to win in November - Ohio and Florida - by wide margins. She has very good appeal in those states. She could give McCain a run for her money in Florida, a state that McLame plays well in. In Ohio, she would have to be the favorite in the general election over McLame. After how badly Obama got his ass whooped in Ohio and Florida, he would put us at a distinct disadvantage in those states. Remember that Ohio is a state that thought Kerry was too liberal. While Hillary may be just as liberal as Kerry, she portrays herself in Ohio as a moderate just like her husband.

Obama has won key swing states like Colorado and Virginia too, but I feel like Ohio and Florida are more important to our chances. We are in a very tough situation here, and I believe we are at a point of no return. Delegates needed to be thrown out the window know because they simply don't matter. This will be decided on the convention floor, and the person who gives us the best chance to win in November should win the nomination, not whom has the most delegates.

[anonymous171]

1. The problem is Hillary is too much like McCain.

He will use that against her.

[anamandujano]

6. Yeah, because McCain is going to fight for universal health care and bring home the troops.

:eyes:

Good luck with that line of reasoning.

[anonymous171]

14. Voted for the war before she voted against it

Cluster Bombs and the Kyle-Leiberman. Also, since she would have spent the entire primary telling us that "hope and change" don't matter (since experience is the only thing that matters) all McCain has to say is "My Friends, my opponent said vote for experience, and I agree." McCain has way more experience than Hillary.

[JoFerret]

195. Silly remark

She - like Obama - is a politician. She carved out a centrist position on the war in the face of the Bush juggernaut of stupidity. We are now where we are. We have to end the war. Hillary can do that. With Wes Clark helping her she can rebuild the military and get the troops home.

[anonymous171]

219. I'm talking about how McCain will frame her.

[elixir]

240. Dust off those ol' adages and throw them like frisbees. Congratulations.

[woolldog]

41. She's not going to get that ridiculous health care plan passed

[Unsane]

51. Agreed. People should just stop factoring that in deciding whether to vote for her

Obama's is a bit more pragmatic. But anyone thinking we will actually get universal healthcare passed in the next 4 years is living a dream. I personally think we have bigger priorities right now (namely reeling in budget excess and getting the economy back on track).

[Hoof Hearted]

193. You don't have the right to presume to tell anyone what to factor into their vote.

[Unsane]

206. Huh? Sure I do.

Just like I can presume not to vote for Hillary. I can "presume" anything I want.

[JoFerret]

192. There will be damned good progress

...and as Obama's plan is almost the same (not quite as good) I don't see the issue. She does not underestimate the difficulty. He does.

I still wish her plan went further. We need a single payer system. Period.

[Seeker30]

226. So every civilized country on the planet has a 'ridiculous health care plan'?

Are you on the right board?

[woolldog]

227. Other countries have national health care.

That is not the same as a health insurance mandate on every citizen with some subsidies and tax credits.

Clinton's plan has the worst of both worlds. It doesn't go far enough and actually provide us national health care and at the same time goes too far by mandating insurance. It is a typical Clintonian attempt to solve a problem.

This will be a no go in the general election. People will rebel against mandates. It will hurt her in the GE. And if by chance she gets elected, there is no way those mandates are getting through congress.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

76. Mandatory private health insurance is NOT universal health care. Get it through your head.

I'm not even going to argue this point anymore.

As for bringing home the troops, I'm sure she'll do that. We'll want to throw a parade for them before she sends them to Iran.

[elixir]

223. Universal means everyone. A mandate requires everyone sounds like the same to me.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

229. Wrong.

Child support is mandatory. I wouldn't say it's universal, given the number of custodial parents clogging the courts trying to collect it. That's just one example, off the top of my head.

[elixir]

241. Right.

A terrible analogy, try again.

[Justyce]

How do you figure that? Both of our dems are

complete polar opposites to McCain on most issues.

[LulaMay]

12. How silly. Her positions on health care and the economy are more liberal than Obama

and Obama's claims about being against the war while she 'supported' it are so overblown. He didn't have to vote on the resolution, and said later he didn't know how he would have. He's voted like most Dems to fund. His boasting on the subject is made easy by convenience.

[nebula]

35. Her healthplan is far from liberal

Shillary's idea of universal healthcare is to mandate the purchase of private insurance.

That's nothing but a giveaway to her corporate insurance industry donors, of whom she is the biggest recipient in congress of their campaign money.

[in_cog_ni_to]

53. Bullshit. If we want UNIVERSAL Health Care, EVERYONE has to participate.

We either want it or we don't. If you don't want EVERYONE covered, you support Mr. Hope's idiotic plan.

[NDambi]

61. Count me in for Mr. Hope..I've got enough wage garnishments..no thanks Hilster

[LulaMay]

68. Yes. Don't people understand Social Security? FDR did. Obama doesn't.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

85. That's funny. I had no idea my SS contributions were going to private companies.

Who could then turn around and deny us our benefits because we had a "preexisting condition" or because our retirement was "experimental" or something. I thought it was an entitlement program that we all paid into. Thanks for enlightening me. :sarcasm:

[LulaMay]

94. It would be an entitlement program. His wouldn't. His plan is weak on the industry.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

225. And hers would bind us to the industry forever and in perpetuity.

Surely you don't believe that her proposal is going to pass through Congress with all those industry reforms intact do you? Nor will Obama's for that matter. Both plans are very shitty substitutes for single payer universal, with hers being slightly more so because it would force everybody into it.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

82. Fuck that shit. You are not taking money out of my pocket for private insurance companies.

It's time to kick that parasitic industry to the curb and get a true single payer system.

[Maribelle]

149. When you clog our emergency rooms without insurance, you steal from my pocket ...

and you endanger the lives of my family and friends that are suffering with bona fide emergencies.

Get it, hero??????

[mrreowwr_kittty]

228. Oh here we go again with the demonizing of the uninsured. We're the new "Welfare Queens".

Yep, we uninsured folks are all young, incredibly healthy, and have buckets of disposable income. We laugh with glee as we refuse to get properly covered, then stick morally responsible paragons like you and your kith and kin with the bills for our martini-sodden snowboarding accidents. Apparently there are so many of us, according to Clinton and her shills like Paul Krugman, that simply coercing us to buy insurance would magically reduce everyone's premiums to nothing.

Yeah right.

Contrary to the Reaganesque characterization of the uninsured that you've bought into, people who don't have health insurance don't have it because they work in shitty low paid jobs with no benefits, are self-employed and can't afford the exhorbitant premiums for an individual policy, or have a "pre-existing" condition.

Don't worry about me going to the emergency room. I'd sooner shoot myself than let sanctimonious jerks like you wag your finger at me. Oh and BTW, I'm sure you've seen Sicko by now so you know that there's no guarantee that the insurance company will pay for your ER visit either.

[nebula]

107. If you want your wages garnished for crappy insurance company healthcare

vote for Shillary!

[Maribelle]

155. If you don't want insurance, don't you even dare ever again clog our emergency rooms.

Don't even try it. People in my area have absolutely had it with the leeches in the emergency rooms.

[nebula]

176. Few can afford to pay for her overpriced corporate healthplan

[MojoMojoMojo]

77. "biggest recipient in congress "

Back up your statement please.
She is being bought with $370 thousand?


Hillary $370,482

Obama $241,507
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/select.asp?Ind=H03

[nebula]

99. See my post below

Hillary was the 2nd biggest recipient of health industry campaign money according to the NY times. Since GOP Senator Rick Santorum left the Congress last year, Hillary is now the #1 recipient.

[MojoMojoMojo]

111. That article is overblown ,No one is bought for $370000

If that is the case, dont overlook Obamas donations.
He gave them a better deal by selling out for not much less than Hillary.

[nebula]

128. I don't know what planet you're from

but here on earth $370 Grand, nearly a half million dollars, is considered a sizeable fortune.

Spin it any way you want, the fact remains; Hillary is the #1 recipient of health industry money in Congress.

[rodeodance]

197. * Hillary leads Barack Obama on health care by 21 points nationally .

http://blog.hillaryclinton.com/blog/main/2008/03/05/162040



The Path to the Presidency
3/5/2008 11:20:40 AM

With last night’s victories in Ohio and Texas, one thing is clear: the momentum has swung back to Hillary Clinton. Voters in both states agreed that Hillary Clinton would be the best Commander-in-Chief and the strongest steward of our economy. In fact, according to last night’s polls, those who decided who to vote for in the last three days overwhelmingly favored Hillary . It’s time for a second look.

………
……………
…………
5. Several of Hillary's base constituencies (women, Hispanic, labor, elderly and under $75,000) are key to a Democratic victory in November. Senator Obama has not brought these voters out in the same numbers.
……………….
* These political and demographic trends project positively into the general election and strongly favor Hillary.

6. The Red States: The central strategic argument of the Obama campaign is flawed. Senator Obama argues that his success in Democratic primary contests held in long-time Red States means he will carry those states in a general election. In reality, there are no “Red States” in a Democratic primary – there are only Democratic voters who live in Republican states and represent a small percentage of the general election population.
* Of the eleven core Republican states that have gone to the polls, Sen. Obama has won ten: Utah, Idaho, Nebraska, North Dakota, Alabama, Alaska, Kansas, South Carolina, Georgia, and Louisiana. John Kerry lost each of these states by fifteen points or more.
* The last time a Democratic nominee won Utah, Idaho, Nebraska, North Dakota, Kansas, and Alaska in the general election was 1964.
* Even if Obama is “transcendent,” as his campaign has argued, the historic electoral trends and the current political environment suggest that translating those primary wins into November success will be close to impossible.
* In short: Hillary is better positioned to carry the battle ground states that Democrats need to win in November and Obama’s victories in deep red states do not .

7. Hillary is the only Democrat with the strength, leadership, and experience to defeat John McCain. Senator Clinton is seen as the best prepared to be Commander-in-Chief.
* Nationally, 57% say Hillary Clinton is best prepared to be president, 39% Obama
* Hillary Clinton is seen as best able to take on the Republicans on their own turf – national security and terrorism. She is seen as a strong and decisive leader (a seven point advantage over Obama nationally).
* Hillary is seen as the one who can get the job done – leading Obama nationally by 13 points .
* Hillary is seen as the candidate to solve the country’s problems, leading Obama by 10 points .

8. John McCain will diminish any perceived advantage Obama has with independents. As has been widely discussed, one of John McCain’s key constituents is independents. And against McCain, Obama will be framed by the Republicans as too liberal (he was ranked by the National Journal as the most liberal Senator); untested on national security; and vulnerable on issues that would make him unelectable in November. These issues may be surmountable in a Democratic primary but will be an Achilles heel with independents in a general election.

9. The McCain Roadmap: McCain has already foreshadowed his campaign’s construct against Obama: His vulnerability is experience and judgment on national security.
* McCain: Obama’s ‘meet, talk and hope approach’ is ‘dangerously naïve in international diplomacy.’ “Meet, talk, and hope may be a sound approach in a state legislature, but it is dangerously naive in international diplomacy where the oppressed look to America for hope and adversaries wish us ill.”
* McCain: Obama is an ‘inexperienced candidate who once suggested bombing our ally, Pakistan, and suggested sitting down without preconditions or clear purpose with enemies who support terrorists.’ “Each event poses a challenge and an opportunity. Will the next president have the experience -- the judgment, experience informs and the strength of purpose to respond to each of these developments in ways that strengthen our security and advance the global progress of our ideals? Or will we risk the confused leadership of an inexperienced candidate who once suggested bombing our ally, Pakistan, and suggested sitting down without preconditions or clear purpose with enemies who support terrorists and are intent on destabilizing the world by acquiring nuclear weapons? I think you know the answer to that question.”

10. Steward of the economy. Hillary Clinton leads both John McCain and Barack Obama on the economy and health care. In the latest LA Times/Bloomberg poll (1/22), Hillary leads McCain 52/28 on health care and 43/34 on the economy.
* Hillary leads Barack Obama on health care by 21 points nationally .

11. Florida……..
12. Michigan…….
13. ……….

Previewing Today : Hillary appeared on NBC’s “Today Show,” ABC’s “Good Morning America,” CBS’s Early Show, CNN’s “American Morning,” FOX’s “Fox and Friends,” and MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.” … Chelsea holds an “Our Voice, Our Future” event at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia.

[nebula]

73. Hillary 2nd only to Rick Santorum

in attracting campaign money from the insurance industry .

Actually, since Santorum left the senate last year, she has been the #1 recipient.

July 12, 2006

But times change. As she runs for re-election to the Senate from New York this year and lays the groundwork for a possible presidential bid in 2008, Mrs. Clinton is receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from doctors, hospitals, drug manufacturers and insurers. Nationwide, she is the No. 2 recipient of donations from the industry, trailing only Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, a member of the Republican leadership.

www.nytimes.com/2006/07/12/nyregion/12donate.html

[Armstead]

216. No they are not. They are both wussing out on what is really needed.

[question everything]

Really? Since when is McCain pro-choice?

You can be sure that the supreme court nominees will be vastly different between the two of them and this is where the issue will be.

[anonymous171]

37. I said TOO MUCH LIKE, not exactly the same.

See my response to the first reply.

[in_cog_ni_to]

Riiiight. "I want to stay in Iraq for 100 YEARS" ....yep, they're too much alike.

:eyes:

[anonymous171]

48. See post #14

[polmaven]

152. Really close...

Didn't you hear? Her new campaign song is "Bomb, bomb, bomb....." (well, you know the rest. I have trouble even typing it.)

[Leopolds Ghost]

246. Hillary... "We need permanent bases in Iraq to protect our vital national interests there"

Same as McCain.

She criticized Kerry as a defeatist for wanting to eliminate permanent
bases from the drawing board and eventually withdraw all troops from Iraq.

[Andromeda]

230. Oh, sure.

Let's see how far he gets with that argument. All I can say is: Bring it on!

[Ian_walker]

258. UNITY is the best case. McCain is Half-Fat-Liberal

UNITY is landslide!
UNITY is Presidency, Senate and Representatives!
UNITY is 16 years!

It is a quick draw competition and Clinton is going for the gun...

It is simple really either or BOTH candidates can make the UNITY speech

[Beausoir]

2. It is going to be interesting, that much we know.

[NJSecularist]

9. Yes it is.

I am a big time Obama supporter, but the proof is in the pudding. In the two vitally important swing states - Ohio and Florida - Hillary gives us a much better chance. We can win the white house by winning those two states.

[Alhena]

3. But she can only win in a bloody convention- that's her biggest weakness

Obama has a lead now, so he can offer the party a nomination scenario which doesn't involve a bloody convention- the superdelegates can rally around him now.

[anamandujano]

8. 2025

[NJSecularist]

11. Same thing for Obama

Us Obama supporters have to realize the truth: this is going to the convention.

[grantcart]

62. you should have done a little math Obama needs only 46% of the

remaining delegates to get the nomination 747 delegates 284 super delegates. For the last 4 weeks he has taken super delegates at 89% 66-16. His magic number is only 464


He will have this locked up before Puerto Rico.

[rodeodance]

18. Obama and The Myth of Pledged Delegates

Forum Name General Discussion: Primaries
Topic subject Obama and The Myth of Pledged Delegates
Topic URL http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4906504#4906504
4906504, Obama and The Myth of Pledged Delegates
Posted by rodeodance on Wed Mar-05-08 12:05 PM

Its the process that counts folks:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stephen-schlesinger/obama-and-the-myth-of-ple_b_89977.html


Obama and The Myth of Pledged Delegates

Posted March 5, 2008 | 10:15 AM (EST)


There is no rule in the politics of Democratic Party conventions that says that the contender with the largest number of pledged delegates short of the total required for nomination should automatically, by dint of that achievement, be handed the party's designation. This argument is now being put forth by Senator Obama's campaign.


Such a contention is belied by the modern-day history of Democratic conventions. In 1912, the Democratic Speaker of the House of Representatives, Champ Clark, went to the Baltimore convention with the largest number of delegates, around 440, Woodrow Wilson was second with 324, trailed by a few others -- with two thirds of the convention vote required for nomination. Champ Clark was not then allowed to proclaim himself victorious simply because he led the pack. Rather the proceedings went through almost 50 ballots over a week's period that, after much maneuvering, resulted in Wilson accumulating enough delegates to secure the nomination.

In 1932, Franklin Roosevelt arrived at the Democratic Convention this time with the most delegates -- having won them through some primaries and some Democratic state organizations -- but still short of the requisite two-thirds majority. Despite this lead, the party did not hand him the nomination. He had to proceed through four ballots to achieve it.

….Read this omitted paragraph for another good example………

Now today some in the Obama campaign and in the media are dismissing the importance of Hillary Clinton's victories in Ohio, Texas and Rhode Island as unimportant. For they argue that, by any careful analysis of the delegate selection process under the present Democratic Party proportional representation system, whatever delegate totals Senator Clinton wins through the end of this year's primary season, will not be able to overcome Senator Obama's current unsurpassable lead over Senator Clinton and therefore Obama will deserve the support of the so-called "super delegates" and should gain the nomination. But that is not how it works as we have seen in past Democratic conventions. A lead in pledged delegates is not enough. You still have to convince your party that you are the best nominee. That is what the next stage of this election is all about.

[Texas Hill Country]

167. Well said.

[Leopolds Ghost]

242. And Woodrow Wilson dragged us into WWI.

He was a racist, too.

[Invidious]

4. Actually

If you turn just a couple red states blue, like Virginia or Colorado then Florida and Ohio aren't the deal closers they used to be.

[BeyondGeography]

5. CO, VA, MN, WA, IA, WI...she has some major geography problems of her own

Step away from the television, NJS.

[NJSecularist]

7. Oh trust me, I haven't watched TV since Texas was called.

I just can't. :(

[FrenchieCat]

42. Not she isn't.....

The media just fucked us, like they always do:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-jenkins/clinton-and-the-vast-medi_b_89465.html

Clinton winning Dems in Big Blue States isn't a compelling argument, whatsoever, unless one is a fool.

2 or 3 Supreme Court justices may be replaced, and if you believe that middle aged White women will give up their reproductive rights and decide not to vote for the Democrat at top of the ballot if it is not Hillary is lunacy. They are not going to cut off their nose to spite their face.

Also understand; there is a difference between the Obama voters and the Clinton voters.

Black folks are at the bottom of the ladder anyways, as they always are. Many of them believe that they can weather the storm, like they always have. They now realize that their vote doesn't count very much to Hillary Clinton, as she has already stated that they do not represent an "important" voting bloc to her. In essence, they pretty much have the least to lose of all of the voters.

Same with young and new voters, who are known for being apathetic. I don't think that Clinton is compelling enough to get them out to the polls in drove. Barack's movement is not quite as transferable as one would like to think.

Same goes for the Independent voters. They may not come out for Hillary....as they may choose McCain or simply stay home.

In reference to the Hispanic voters, please know that McCain holds basically the same stance on immigration as does both Hillary and Barack.....to a great extent. Out of all of the voters, they are the one least likely to be relied upon as a large voting block, as they showed in 2000 and 2004.

Note that Obama can easily put someone on the ticket that could garnet the Hispanic vote, and it wouldn't have to be Hillary Clinton.

Hillary cannot say the same in attempting to capture Obama's voters, other than to tell us that racists won't vote for Obama. however, there is a similar number of men that won't vote for Hillary because she is a woman...as well, those who simply will select McCain over her cause they can.


and in terms of being attacked and how well it worked; it will now be her turn....since she cried and cried about the media dogging out Obama. The press will have to agree, because there is so much there there that needs airing before the General Election......just to make her a "better" candidate; a line that you hear all of the time about Obama and the need to "toughen" him up for the GE.

What You Won't Find in the Clinton Museum & Library: http://prorev.com/missingclinton.htm

Clinton's '35 years of change' omits most of her career: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/26377.html

How Hillary Clinton Betrayed the Children's Defense Fund for Political Gain: http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/editorblog/034

The New Clinton scandals that haven't been explored to date
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=076fd56f-4aca-4683-a9d1-3c55d748946e&k=60222

Rezko has a tie with one of Clinton's biggest donors.
The inhouse atty. of a corporation headed by Clinton's big ($180,000) donor, IPA, is identified as "Individual H" in the Illnois criminal indictment of Rezko. This atty. is also a Clinton donor. Here's the link & the info
www.reversespin.com/?m=200709

More on Rezko and the Clintons
www.nytimes.com/2006/05/07/nyregion/07company.html

[Skwmom]

56. Plus, McCain will hammer Clinton with her ease of throwing any

loyal supporter under the bus if it will further her political career. I think he can raise MAJOR doubt in the minds of many Hispanic Voters. McCain will point to how he stood up for the surge when it was politically dangerous to do so.

[goldcanyonaz]

57. I haven't watched the MSM election coverage since Super Tuesday.

[Upton]

93. Missouri too

another swing state another Obama win

[sandnsea]

10. You keep making all kinds of arguments for Hillary

Sorry if I doubt you're an Obama supporter.

IA, NM, MO, are also swing states.

[NJSecularist]

23. I'm an Obama supporter, but I'm also realistic.

Yes, those are all swing states, but the last 2 elections have been decided by Florida and Ohio, and Hillary gives us a much better chance in those states.

[Bucky]

13. Winning over the Democrats in key states isn't relevant to winning in November

A proponderance of those voters are gonna back the Dem nominee no matter who it is. The key is who is winning the swing voters. On that, Obama is still the most likely to succeed.

[rodeodance]

22. He has lost his MO JO---

[MojoMojoMojo]

91. LOL Ive got his mojo and Im giving it to Hillary

[rodeodance]

198. ohmy gowd--you DO!!! ha ha

[JackORoses]

15. Keep your pessimistic manifestation to yourself.

Are you actually trying to persuade people that this is the case?
What other reason is there for this OP?

Get a grip. I pray there aren't many Obama supporters that give up as easily as some I've seen here today.

[NJSecularist]

27. I am not giving up - not in the least

But the Democrats will win the White House by winning either Ohio and Florida - or both - and Hillary gives us the best chance at that. Obama has performed absymally in those two states.

[ProSense]

40. "After how badly Obama got his asses whooped in Ohio and Florida"

That comment is suspect! n/t

[JackORoses]

80. Obama didn't even campaign in Florida.

You know this, yet you don't take it into account for some reason.

As for Ohio,
Primary election results should not be used to make estimations about a General Election result.
They are wholly different contests.

Hillary gives us no chance against McCain.
Forget Ohio, she might not carry any of the South or Southwest.

[NJSecularist]

97. Hillary has just as much chance to carry the Southwest as Obama does.

Obama has the better chance to win in the Southwest, but we aren't eliminate the Southwest if Hillary is nominated.

[JackORoses]

157. What abou the South? What about Colorado?

Hillary is not a better candidate.
It's just a fact.

[NJSecularist]

178. No, it's not a fact

That's the problem. Some of you guys are unwilling to debate and want to present your OPINIONS as facts.

What state will Obama win in the South?

I agree with you that Obama may have a better chance to win Colorado, but our convention is there and any candidate who we nominate will have a good chance to win there.

[JackORoses]

are you seriously arguing that Hillary is a better candidate?

If this is not the case, then it is a fact.

Do you think Hillary is a better candidate? C'mon tell me true.

[NJSecularist]

188. As of right now, Obama is the candidate who has a better chance to win

But elections aren't held in March. They aren't held in June. Elections are held in November. Obama is an unknown. He has not been defined yet by the Rethugs. We all know how they smear. We all know how they distort. I am arguing by the time November comes around, Hillary may be the candidate who has the best chance to win. If this wasn't the case, we'd be talking about Former President Dukakis or Incumbent President John Kerry right now.

[JackORoses]

196. You act as if Hillary doesn't have any skeletons.

Did you know that a trial is about to begin in which the Clintons are accused of Fraud?
That could make the news.

Hillary won't even release her Tax Returns for the past 7 years or her records as First Lady.
And what about the Clinton Library donors...

Etc, Etc. this list goes on, and this is just recent activity.

What about when the Repugs go back to the glory days of the 90's?
You do realize that Bill Clinton was only the second President to ever be impeached, don't you?
That might come up.

And traditionally Americans have frowned on any candidate with an Adulterous past. They want a strong model of marriage in the White House.

Please, quit trying to make Hillary look like a contender.

[juajen]

210. I knew you were from the dark side with all of their talking points.,

You know they did know that chances were she would be running. I do not believe there will be anything there, because they certainly knew this scrutiny would be coming. If you've forgotten, Bill's approval rating was right at 70% when he left, after the impeachment. The American people rightly called that what it was: a farce. A strong model of marriage in the White House is a true rarity. I believe the Carters were happy, but I can't remember any other sublime marriage without a tryst or two while in the White House, can you? Our Presidents usually reflect somewhat the people they represent, and none of us is perfect; nor do most of us expect them to be perfect. Where did you come from, anyway? Another planet, maybe.

Also, perhaps you didn't know that Senators have to reveal their finances regularly. Hillary's, I suspect, will be circumspect. She just likes to give ya'll something to talk about to keep you busy, that's all.

We don't have to try. Hillary has always been a contender. Anything else?

[JackORoses]

212. It really doesn't help your side to always accuse everybody else of being Repukes

The reason those points are talked about is because they are actual issues with Hillary.

Hillary has gotten by so far by the class of Obama and the willingness of the public to believe that she has already been vetted.
This is not the case. It is time to call all Hillary's chickens home.

It won't be pretty, and you might learn a thing or two about this lady you love so dearly.

There will be bad news in those Tax returns, mark my words.
She delayed them until now because she thought she would already have the nomination.
Now she will have to reveal them earlier than expected.
ooops!

[shaniqua6392]

203. Clinton did not campaign in Florida or Michigan either.

I think she can win against McCain.

[high density]

141. So you think Hillary Clinton has a better chance in OH and FL because she

won those states in the primary?

I think at best it's a jump ball with anybody. There's a lot of crap that can happen between March and November for any of these candidates.

Adding to the problem is that FL and OH voters on a whole don't seem to be the most reasoned people on the planet. We all know OH went for Bush in 2004, but now the MSM is citing all of these exit polls showing focus on jobs and the economy. What will they think is important when McCain gets on board his Flip Flop Fear Express and reminds them that the terrorists want to blow up their homes while they sleep at night, and only his experience can save them from it? How about when 527s remind them how scary the Democrats are on taxes? I think when it comes to dirty politics these people lap it up, and it's hard to get decent messages across in an environment like that.

[bicentennial_baby]

43. Agreed!

Some Obama people need to get their heads on straight and get back on track...now!

[NJSecularist]

103. Trust me... I still support Obama

I am not giving up on him. But I want to win the election. Period. From what I've seen, Hillary gives us a better chance.

[bicentennial_baby]

124. If you believe that, then I suppose you should support her

:shrug:

And including Florida in your analysis is, well, suspect.

[adapa]

16. CO+VA=22 elec. votes, OH+FL=47 elec college votes

[thoughtcrime1984]

54. So, the automatic conclusion is

that Hil would defeat McCain in these states and Obama can't. That's akin to A+B=D, does not compute. He outperforms her vs. McCain in all the polls, and her at the top of the ticket will most likely = President McCain.

[amborin]

17. yes, just posted also,....no one has won the GE w/o winning Ohio primary

in about 100 yrs.....

[Tropics_Dude83]

44. Agree with you NJ but for other reasons

Look at the white vote in Ohio and Texas,

White voters can't stomach and aren't ready to accept an AA president. America still has a LONG way to go on the race issue and racism is not dead, not by a long shot. After all, it's only been 35-40 years since the civil rights act.

[NJSecularist]

50. That was in the back of my mind too

The number of voters in Ohio who wouldn't vote for Obama because he was black is staggering.

[Tropics_Dude83]

58. Let's put it this way

If Barack Obama were Barack Obama but white or latino, he'd have wrapped up the nomination last night.

Why can't he seal the deal? Why can't he put HRC away? Because he is AA.

Hillbots, look at the Ohio exit polls and the Pew national poll, then tell me what I say isn't true.

Better to find this out NOW though than on Nov 4 when Obama leads Mccain by 10 in the GE and loses by 3 on election day I guess.

[Leopolds Ghost]

244. You speak true, Tropics Dude.

[Dawgs]

19. Wrong. Hillary can't win in the big cities, and she will lose to McCain in the rural areas.

Obama is a much better choice against McCain.

[aquarius dawning]

That is not a foregone conclusion.

[Mezzo]

suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuure she can't. Like they'll vote for McCain first.

LOL.

[Dawgs]

39. The conservative rural areas of Ohio will certainly go for McCain.

Do you deny this?

[zarath]

64. It's very true

Obama is consistently doing better in most urban areas that are more reliably Democratic in general elections.

As far as I can tell, with a few exceptions, Hillary has been doing better in areas that are likely to go for the Republicans in the general election.

Being successful in certain primaries is very different than being successful in the same areas in a general.

[Leopolds Ghost]

245. Let me Wrap My Brain around this... AAARGH!

Hillary is doing better in Red areas of Blue states and Red areas of Red states, but only states that have a significant black population to rally against.

Barack is doing better in Blue areas of Blue states and terribly in Red areas of Blue states.

[aquarius dawning]

88. You don't have a fucking clue about Ohio.

[zarath]

158. Didn't they go for Bush in 2004?

Rural Ohio voters, that is. Its not like Bush was an unknown quantity at that point.

[aquarius dawning]

175. How did they swing in 2006 though? And who did they swing for in 1992 and 1996?

[Texas Hill Country]

201. If Obama is the VP, she will have no prob with any urban centers.

[aquarius dawning]

20. Since when is Virginia a swing state? they haven't voted for a Democrat since Truman IIRC.

[NJSecularist]

34. It's been trending blue for a while

Kerry only lost by 5 points I believe. Their state has elected more Democrats than Republicans over the last few years.

[aquarius dawning]

100. I still don't see how you can call it a swing state until it has swung once or twice.

[NJSecularist]

101. WIsconsin is a swing state

And it has been solid Democratic for a while.

[aquarius dawning]

114. Since 1948? no. since 1992 (Bill Clinton btw).

[Inuca]

36. Since the demographics have changed n/t

[Recursion]

98. Since we started electing Democratic governers and senators

[Texas Hill Country]

208. I saw Mark Warner speak a couple times...

dont know much about him, but I really liked him from what I saw.

[RBInMaine]

21. THINK about this. Obama gets Hillary's voters, but she doesn't

get all of the crossover R's and I's that he gets. Think about it !!

[Mezzo]

25. B U L L S H I T ! !

complete, utter bullshit

[printpolitico]

45. LAME

I'VE HEARD EQUALLY AS MANY HRC SUPPORTERS SAY THEY EITHER WOULDN'T VOTE OR WOULD VOTE REPUBLICAN. So many voters are no longer yellow dog.
They vote for candidate and issues. I think it is arrogant of Obama to think this. Also, If you don;t live in the south go visit. Racism is alive and well. Don't think some
of these people will drop a lifetime of anger and vote for Obama because he is democrat. May not be right , but it is factual.
Theres a lot to calculate, and I think Obama is very naive. Hence my argument he is not yet seasoned and ready for the white house.

[Leopolds Ghost]

247. Racism is alive and well in Ohio, too, witness the primary exit polls

20% admitted they voted against Obama because race was a factor.

That's 20% of the whole electorate... 40% of Hillary's vote.

[leftynyc]

65. He does not get all

of Hillary's voters. That's a fantasy.

[casus belli]

123. He also doesn't get the entire GOP machine...

turning up just to vote against him. The disdain for Hillary runs deep on the right.

[in_cog_ni_to]

222. I'm not voting for him, so that blows your theory out of the water. I know MANY people

who will vote for Nader before they vote for Mr. I-care-more-about-Exelon-Nuclear's-MONEY-$$$$$$$$$$-and-the-Crown-family's (Maytag owner)-MONEY-$$$$$$$$$$$$-than-the-citizens-of-my-state Obama.

[VotesForWomen]

234. more threats from the 'tone changers.' nt

[Inuca]

24. Why do you consider FL?

Given when the "election" took place + the absence of campaigning, her margin there is completely irrelevant. If there is a re-vote, she is quite likely to win IMHO, but by a much lower margin. As to the overall argument, VA, MO, CO and possibly some other states that Obama won have a very good chance of turning blue. Not to mention the non-dem vote that is much more likely to go to Obama than to Clinton, especially with McCain as an alternative. All in all, there are too many variables and too many unknowns to make a valid comparison. The rest is mostly spin (I am not saying your post was spin, I am referring to the the kind of "analyses" I am seeing coming out of the Clinton camp).

[Mezzo]

28. BO campaigned in Florida. The delegates should be seated.

http://www2.tbo.com/content/2007/sep/30/obama-vows-do-whats-right/?news-breaking

[Inuca]

102. Get serious n/t

[NJSecularist]

46. Even if Obama campaigned for 3-4 days in Florida, he still would have got demolished

He had 2 weeks to campaign in Ohio and he still lost by 10 points. We need to face facts that there are some states where Obama doesn't run well in - Ohio and Florida - and they just happen to be key swing states. It doesn't matter how much time he had to campaign, he still would lose both states. They both favor Hillary.

[Inuca]

122. Two points

1. by how many points was he behind at the beginning of these two weeks? I do not remember the exact numbers, but I am almost certain the polls showed a difference of more than 20%. Same as the argument that was made, for instance, about BO losing MA inspite of Kennedy's and Kerry's endorsements. The endorsements did not matter! They were worthless! Again, without remembering the exact numbers, the difference was at least halved. The Obama campaign strategy was clearly from the start a "50 states" strategy (and a very well implemented one), going after the delegates. Losing by 10% in OH vs, losing by more than 20% makes a hell of a lot of difference. And by the way, 10% is not great, but is not being "demolished". That's what happened in RI, unfortunately.
2.while typing the above, I completely forgot what my 2nd point was, sorry :-)

[Leopolds Ghost]

248. "Key Swing states" my behind. Ohio and Florida were red states in 2004 with corrupt elections

Any state as hard hit as Ohio that would vote for Bush anyway either has
corrupt elections or will vote red no matter what. And the demographics
haven't changed like they do in VA and CO.

EDICT #1: IF ANY DEM WINS BOTH OHIO AND FLORIDA -- Colorado and Missouri
will have tipped LONG BEFORE any Dem gets even a stable lead in OH or FL
Due to the Corruption of the Electoral Process in those two states, OH/FL
WHICH REPUBLICANS CONSIDER KEY TO PERMANENT ELECTORAL POWER.

Terry McCauliffe and the Cryptocrats are only too happy to oblige them
by limiting the playing field to the Republican's chosen ground.

[question everything]

26. And OH governor is a Hillary supporter (nt)

[oviedodem]

29. Florida will NOT go blue; bank it.

[Leopolds Ghost]

250. I predict OH and FL go red even in an Obama landslide.

Just a hunch...

[NC_Nurse]

30. Not to me. She just looks more and more like a Repub to progressives.

And actual Repubs HATE her so they'll be sure to come out to vote against her.

[mmonk]

31. She won't win any southern state

or Wahington State and a few others. A coalition to win in the general is only possible through Obama IMO.

[NC_Nurse]

33. You got that right.

[mmonk]

63. We North Carolinians know what we are talking about but yet

they ignore us.

[SIMPLYB1980]

81. Well this North Carolinian thinks she can win NC.

Getting very Blue around Charlotte, The Raleigh Triangle area, Asheville, the High Country, and many other areas. Great chance for the Purple state of NC to go Blue this year!

[NC_Nurse]

89. Yeah, if you live in one of those areas it always looks like we'll win.

And then we don't.

[SIMPLYB1980]

235. We elected a Democratic legislature and elected Mike Easly in 2004.

[Dhalgren]

95. Obama won't win any Southern states, either. The South will remain

solidly Republican in '08 - bank it...

[mmonk]

108. I think he's our best chance. In NC,

he will get some military vote (already is getting support) and he will get more votes across a wider demographic especially with the universities. But what do I know, I only live here.

[Dhalgren]

119. I live in Alabama. He may win in NC (I would be surprised, but hey,

I have been before). He is unlikely to win in any of the Republican South - it is simply a numbers thing. If liberal, northern Democrats could win in the south, they already would have...

[NJSecularist]

83. She may not win Washington state

But she gives us a better chance in more meaty states like Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania.

And she still may win Washington State.

[Leopolds Ghost]

251. Uh, no Dem can win without Washington State

Washington state has been part of the liberal states coalition since 1860

[ProSense]

32. "While Hillary may be just as liberal as Kerry" Oh BS! And this:

Obama has the delegate lead, but Hillary is winning key swing states that we needed to win in November - Ohio and Florida - by wide margins...After how badly Obama got his asses whooped in Ohio and Florida, he would put us at a distinct disadvantage in those states

WTF?

"asses whooped"? How many asses does he have? A 10 pt advantage being up by more than twice that is not "whooped." Florida? Did Obama have a ground game in Florida like he did in Texas?


Moles in the house!

[NJSecularist]

55. Hillary is not as liberal as Kerry?

Explain why.

And forgive my spelling error. :)

There are certain states that no matter how long Obama campaigns, he just doesn't have a chance of winning them because they favor Hillary. And if he gets nominated, they both favor McCain.

[blm]

104. Kerry investigated and exposed more govt corruption than any Dem lawmaker in modern history

and Clintons covered up more government corruption of BushInc than any Dem lawmaker in modern history.

Kerry didn't lose Ohio - Clinton loyalists sabotaged Ohio Dem voters to protect 2008 for Hillary.

[karynnj]

67. LOL

There is NO real way to translate the win in a primary to a win in the general election. 1) the population involved is different and 2) it depends on the how people in the state rank the three.

To be utterly, simplistic to make a point:

Say A and B are the Democrats, and C is McCain.

Who does better if ALL supporters of A, have preferences of A>C>B and all supporters of B, have preferences of B>A>C. The answer is B. What if B got less less votes than A in the primary. B is STILL the answer.

The letters above are fictitious and do not represent any real candidates, other than C = McCain.

[Cha]

38. Forget it...hilary is making a case

for shit and you're falling for it. Too bad.

[MojoMojoMojo]

47. Thankyou for being unbiased and objective.

[Adelante]

49. Why not just change your candidate and get it over with?

I don't see why you keep posting as an Obama supporter.

[NJSecularist]

66. Huh? I'm being realistic here.

I am an Obama supporter, but above all, I am a Democrat. I want to fucking win the White House. I am tired of the necons running our country. I will support Obama if he wins the nomination, but as of right now I see Hillary making a better case. She has had better showings in Ohio and Florida then Obama. It's a pipe dream to think we aren't going to win the White House without going through Ohio and Florida.

[Adelante]

69. If Hillary is making a better case to you

You might as well openly support her.

[Strelnikov_]

75. "I want to fucking win the White House."

You think Clinton stands a chance in the general?

Obama has the best shot against McCain.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

52. Thank You For The Independent Thought And Well Put Reasoning.

[RiverStone]

59. The person with the MOST VOTES should be our nominee!

Gawd, remember 2000???

Obama currently leads the national vote total by 600K - even if you give her FLA, he still leads by 300K.

If anything other than the will of the People decide our nominee, you will see a mass exodus from the convention and the party.

And NJSecularist, if you "hate to say it" then why say it with Obama leading in the delegate count anyway? As an Obama fan, I'm surprised your posting this negative vibe stuff. Geez, why talk about tossing in the white flag with a lead in the 4th quarter....:shrug:

[NJSecularist]

71. I'm not tossing in the white flag

But Hillary's resume looks better to me right now. Obama has padded his delegate and vote lead in states that we have no chance to win in November: Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina.

I am still on Obama's side, but if Hillary wins Pennsylvania, she needs to win the nomination. She will have performed well in three vitally important swing states - Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania.

[RiverStone]

84. Time to change your avatar

Your call - your choice.

But if Hillary's resume looks better to you and your posting that's how you feel, then I think you have abandoned Obama's ship. Obama supporters do not promote Hillary as a candidate - period.

Again -in LEGAL primaries he has a 600K vote lead nationally. I think most of those folks are capable of discerning which resume they prefer.

[jlake]

60. I agree with you. I think Obama should recognize this and work out a deal for VP

before this gets any uglier.
However, I think it will go on through PA. And at that point, they will still be essentially tied (Hillary closing in)
But any goodwill or chance to work together will be gone....

[Skwmom]

70. A huge portion of the Florida and OH voters are going to be so mad at the

Clinton's power grab and disgusting tactics that they will sit home (and Clinton CANNOT win without that vote).

[rodeodance]

204. you need a new crystal ball.

[Tom Rinaldo]

72. In the final week of the 2004 election it came down to FL, PA, and OH

Kerry knew he had to win two out of three of those states to beat Bush. He very narrowly won PA and he very narrowly lost FL and OH and the election as a result.

Not only does Clinton run significantly stronger than Obama in OH and FL, she does in PA also. If we start out the 2008 election with McCain holding a key advantage in all three of those states we are in deep trouble.

The area where the Democratic Party has begun to gain ground in Presidential elections is the Southwest; States like Arizona, New Mexico and Nevada are moving toward us. Arizona is probably out of the question against McCain but the latino vote in Nevada and New Mexico makes our chances in both of those states much better with Clinton than with Obama.

In the 2006 mid term elections when the Republicans were desperately looking for a Democratic Senate Seat to target for a long shot chance of a pick up, they settled on New Jersey. We held that seat of course, but a new poll shows McCain beating Obama in New Jersey while Clinton holds it safely for the Democrats.

West Virginia is the type of working class state that Democrats have won in the not so distant past that Clinton runs stronger in than Obama. Arkansas should flip to blue if Clinton heads our ticket. In most of the key swing states that count, the Democrats do better under Clinton than under Obama. We are not about to win Alabama North Dakota and Utah anytime soon.

[NJSecularist]

79. Exactly. That is the point of my argument.

Anybody who doesn't think this election will go through Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania is kidding themselves. And we need a candidate who will perform best in those states. If Hillary wins Pennsylvania, she will have made a great case for the nomination. And I don't think you can deny her.

Obama probably has a better chance in swing states like Virginia, Colorado and Iowa, but I am not content in putting our hopes of getting into the White House on those 3 states.

[Leopolds Ghost]

252. "I don't think you can deny her."

Sure you can. She has no mathematical chance to win the nomination
without pulling a Mondale.

[Beregond2]

74. GE

Give me a break. These primary "wins" (barely) do nothing to suggest she would be a better candidate in the general election. The same people that voted for her would vote for Obama rather than a Repug. And your suggestion that the superdelegates should overturn the will of the voters is a recipe for the final desruction of the Democratic Party.

[woolldog]

78. I think the problem is

that you're looking at the electoral map for Hillary and Obama as the same. It's not. I think they both have a good chance. It's just that the electoral math and states in play look different

Hillary wins:

CA, WA, NM, MN, IL, MI, OH, PA, NJ, NY, ME, DC, CT, RI, VT, MD, and AK. That's only 262 electoral votes to McCain's 276. (And I'm not sure she'd win NM)

The battleground would be Florida. She is behind in Florida. This would be just like 2000 and 2004 another try by the democrats to pull off a 50+1 strategy.

I have Obama winning:

All the states HRC wins except Ohio and Arkansas. BUT He gets Wisonsin, NV, CO, OR, MO, NH, VA, IA and possibly KS. (I don't think she gets any of those except possible MO. That's not taking into account that Obama might pick McCain's pocket in the south and get one state.) That's 308 electoral votes to McCain's 230.

Play with this map and see for yourself. If he loses PA the count goes down to Obama 287 -- McCain 251

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/vote2004/politics101/politics101_ecmap.html

So the choice for Democrats is to try to compete on the same old electoral map, with Ohio and FL as the battleground states. Or to take a chance and play a completely different strategy, with the potential for a greater win, but an admittedly riskier strategy.

I think the latter strategy has a better chance of growing the party and turning the democratic party into a majority party.

[NJSecularist]

92. You make very good points, and I don't disagree

Wisconsin could go to the Rethugs if Hillary is nominated while Obama gives us a better chance there. Same thing with Colorado and Iowa. We could redraw the electoral map. We may not even need Florida and Ohio.

The question is: is that a risk we are willing to take? In the last few elections, Ohio and Florida have decided who will win the election. It's possible that they won't this year, and we could put our chances in other states like Nevada, Iowa, Colorado, Virginia, Missouri, etc. But as you said, that is a very risky strategy. Personally, I do not feel comfortable in any strategy that does not include Florida or Ohio. Others may feel differently.

[woolldog]

148. The idea that Ohio

is somehow out of play in the GE because Hillary ended up with 300,000 more votes (latest CNN count has Obama winning 970k and HRC winning 1.2 million) may not be accurate.

It is the riskiest strategy, but the one with the most rewards long term, as far as the democratic party in general, and also the 2008 congressional races.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

106. I Can't See Any Dem Winning OH or FL And Losing The Election

Those states are about three to four points more Repubublican at the presidential level... That would mean there are running well everywhere else...

Clinton won Ohio in 92 and 96 and FL in 96...Both years were Democratic Electoral College landslides...

[NJSecularist]

115. We win one of these states and we have a great chance to win the general election

That is my theory..

[DemocratSinceBirth]

140. I'm Not Here To Lobby For Anybody

You seem sincere...Just vote your conscience...

Every Democrat since Johnson who has carried Ohio or Florida has won the White House and every Dem who has lost those two states has lost the White House...

Hillary's not perfect for Florida but she's much more in tune with the state than Senator Obama or any of her erstwhile Democratic competitors including John Edwards...

Why?

Because she's liberal or center-left but not scarily so...

Lots of liberal Dems have run for senator or governor and heregot shellacked...

[woolldog]

138. Play with the link I posted.

It's not only possible, but plausible. I have Obama getting 308 electoral votes w/o Ohio or FL.

[Tom Rinaldo]

116. I disagree right off the bat

Yes both Obama and Clinton play better in some states, but I safely give Oregon and New Hampshire to both Clinton and Obama, not just to Obama. And I think Clinton's chances to win Nevada are better than Obama's, certainly not the other way around the way you have it. I give Nevada to Clinton. She won the popular vote in the primary, she has the latino vote. I also think Clinton can return West Virginia to the Democratic side while Obama can not. And I am afraid McCain might win New Jersey against Obama, that's what a new poll shows - Clinton though retains a strong Democratic lead for us there.

I think Clinton's chances in MO are as good as Obama's. I feel the same about Iowa, both Clinton and Obama are liked there. I think Clinton's chances are better in New Mexico than Obama also, and I don't see a single state on your list for Obama that Clinton doesn't have a real chance of winning except for KS, although he has a better chance in some of them than she does.

[woolldog]

134. I 'm basing my opinions

on the last polling data I saw for these states, which was end of Feb data.

I agree Obama would have to spend extra time in NJ and MA.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

86. People Need To Do What They Think Is Best And Vote Their Conscience

I have lived in FL since I was a kid and have been involved in several state wide elections... Hillary is the type of center-left Democrat who can get elected here...

The key to winning FL for any Dem is to kick ass in the southern part, split the central part, and avoid getting shut out in the northern part...

Clinton and Gore* won it... Kerry didn't embarrass himself despite being a poor fit, ideologically and tempermentally for the state...

Hillary can beat McCain here if Charlie Crist isn't on the ticket... I don't think McCain is going to put a single man with rumors flying around him on the ticket... Plus, he's too liberal for your average Repug...

[paulk]

87. you make a valid point, a non partisan point

and you will be attacked for it.

If we can carry the same states Kerry did, plus add either Ohio or Florida, we will win. If Hillary comes up with the better argument for that, there's a good chance that she'll be chosen at the convention. A lot of people are forgetting that the point of all this is winning in November.

One of the main reasons I've backed Hillary as opposed to Obama is because I've thought all along that her chances in the GE are better. Policy wise there isn't enough of a difference to get that upset about.

[NJSecularist]

96. All the Obama supporters (even me a few days back) have advocated a strategy that includes..

winning other swing states like Colorado, Iowa, New Hampshire, Virginia, New Mexico, Nevada, etc and avoiding Ohio and Florida because Obama doesn't run well in those states. But the more and more I think about that, that is a very risky strategy that I'm not sure I want to use. A few days back I thought Obama had a chance to come close in Ohio, and he would have a great chance to win the state - but after spending all that money and all that campaigning, he couldn't come close. I think Ohio and Florida will go to McLame if Obama is nominated, and that puts us in a big hole. Can he make up the delegates elsewhere? Sure he can. But it's a very risky strategy.

[paulk]

164. personally I think both Nevada and Colorado are a stretch

for either candidate. McCain will do well out here, just because he's also a westerner. That will for sure factor in, even in an election cycle where the Dems have the overall advantage.

I think we have a real shot at VA. If the trends from the last election continue (and I think they will) all the other swing states you mention should go our way.


-----------------


You have pointed out also the most worrisome aspect of Obama's defeat yesterday - that he outspent his opponent - outspent by a lot - and still came up on the short end.

[Leopolds Ghost]

253. We were in that hole to begin with. Kerry's states plus ANY additional 2 states gives us 270.

There is nothing unique about Ohio and Florida in that regard.

This magical thinking about Ohio and Florida as unique battlegrounds plays
right into Republican hands. They WANT us to think of Pennsylvania as a
swing state, and concentrate heavily on just two states they've invested
considerable electioneering infrastructure to lock up.

"Please don't throw us into that briar patch!" They are saying.

[cascadiance]

90. HINT! Limbaugh isn't asking his voters to ALSO vote for Hillary in November!

There's a reason why the freepers and he both have launched campaigns for Hillary to win these states, and it's not to have her take the White House in 2009!

[Leopolds Ghost]

254. Yes!

Ohio and Florida have long history of Republican skulduggery at the ballot box.

Concentrating on them is defeatist. It is saying "we can't rely on
any other states but the ones that threatened to tip in 2000,
meaning we can't make the pie higher and play in more states."

[Sir Jeffrey]

105. Why are all the Obama supporters committing message board seppuku?

The Clintons are going to try to steal the nomination from him. He can either fight for it or roll over and let them. If he rolls over, he doesn't deserve it IMO.

I think you are underestimating Obama's fight. He made a minor tactical mistake in not pushing back on CLinton over the last week. He knows how stupid it is for the Democratic candidates to try to destroy each other. Hillary wants to get stupid, and I suspect he'll let her have it.

And go look at an electoral map. Here is one:

http://www.270towin.com/

Obama can win the nomination without FL and OH by taking Kerry's blue states (which is probably a given), VA, and either MO, IA, LA, GA, CO, NM, or NV. Of that group of new states, Obama won VA, MO, IA, LA, GA, and CO.

This is why I have been harping on Obama picking Tim Kaine as VP. That pretty much gives us VA and puts McCain on the defensive in 8 states.

[OzarkDem]

109. Add Pennsylvania to the list, too

Another must-win state that she is likely to win in the primary.

[walldude]

110. the person who gives us the best chance to win

in November should win the nomination. Busllshit.. You know who should win the nomination? The person with the most fucking votes. This delegate thing needs to go right out the fucking window. Why should I bother voting in the primaries if my vote can be canceled out by some "super-delegate".

And as far as Hillary's case for the nomination, I wouldn't call "I have experience and John McCain has experience and Obama has.. speeches" the way to unite the party and win the nomination.

[NJSecularist]

120. It's too close that neither candidate has enough delegates to win outright

And winning the popular vote by less than a million shouldn't stop us from nominating a candidate who has a better chance to win the General election.

[walldude]

131. So basically you are saying

to hell with democracy. The vote should go to whoever can win, not the person the majority of people want in office?

[NJSecularist]

146. The popular vote difference is miniscule between the two.

[walldude]

159. So? It was miniscule between Bush and Gore

but if we didn't have this stupid Electoral College we wouldn't be in this mess. Say the difference is one vote. You are going to tell the person who holds that vote not to bother? His/her vote doesn't count? Doesn't sound like much of a Democracy to me.

[galadrium]

112. Bullshit, Hillary won because Repubs are joining in the primary

Allowing the Republicans to pick the weaker candidate they would like to run against. I hate open primaries, since when should the other side help pick our candidate.

[Texas Hill Country]

117. Your point disproves his cross party appeal... one more reason to go for Hillary

[galadrium]

130. Ummm no. Hillary's appeal to dittoheads is that she is the WEAKER candidate.

Rush and all the right wingnuts have been telling people for weeks to vote for Hillary, keep the primary fight going, and give democrats a weaker candidate.

[Texas Hill Country]

135. is that why she stomped him in the 2 states that actually matter... OH and FL?

[high density]

144. States that actually matter?

WTF is this stupid shit anyway. How many times have I put you on ignore under different usernames?

[Texas Hill Country]

160. In a GE, 48 of the states are essentially decided... there are 2 Battlegrounds... FL and OH.

The West, North-Midwest and Northeast always go Democrat... The South, Midwest and Southwest always go Republican. FL and OH are the two states that swing in each election... thus the phrase "and so goes the nation" in reference to OH???

In FL and OH Hillary won by huge margins. Those are the states that win the presidency... not Nebraska, North Dakota, Idaho and Kansas (which a Dem will never win in the GE)

oh, and I am new here, so don't worry, you dont have me on ignore yet :-)

[galadrium]

185. Yeah, bring up FL... the state that nobody campaigned in

She won because she had Republican help... and not the same kind that will vote for her in the general election, the ones that listen to Rush and follow his instructions to vote for Hillary.

[Texas Hill Country]

191. We shall see if FL gets a re-vote... looking more likely all the time.

[galadrium]

194. I'm not against them getting a revote as long as candidates have time to campaign

[Texas Hill Country]

200. I think that is the only compromise that will save the party at this point

especially since Dean is a total freakin wimp and should never have allowed the FL and MI thing to happen in the first place.

[galadrium]

202. What do you mean? Strip away the state's delegates?

[aquarius dawning]

129. Christ, Obamaphiles called us a bunch of retards when we brought that up about BO.

Now all of a sudden it's obvious? The Republicans don't care which candidate wins, they just want to see us kicking our own asses for as long as possible.

[galadrium]

133. Its a fact Repubs would much rather run against Hillary... why do you think that is?

Because she's more likely to beat them... yeah.

[Texas Hill Country]

139. that has become less true as time goes on.

[aquarius dawning]

170. It is not a fact. It's a weak ass talking point. The only argument that can honestly be made

is that MOST Republicans would prefer to watch us kick our own asses for as long as possible because there is absolutely no general concensus as to who the strongest Democratic candidate is amongst their ranks or ours and, to further exacerbate the matter, this election is so incredibly complicated due to the prospects of a black male or white female president that the Republicans are not able to mobilize a unified front for or against either of them. Many are more than pleased to sit back and watch us kick our own asses though and, mark my words, if they win, they'll be taking credit for this maneuver and rubbing our noses in it for years. I think there's little doubt that blood runs thicker than gender in true conservative veins however and that will become quite evident in November. They're going to enjoy destroying Barack Obama. Truth is, I think a lot of them hope he wins just so they can have the pleasure of smacking him down.

[galadrium]

179. Its not a talking point, its true and is supported by polls

In every single poll against McCain, Hillary loses and Obama wins. The Republican slime machine has been mobilized and has been successful in smearing her for decades. She has huge negatives. She's also been around for the last 2 decades so there is plenty of material for the right wingers to use against her. She's an established lightning rod for right wing hatred.

Obama is relatively new and most of the attacks against him, besides Hillary's, usually boil down to "his name sounds funny" and "he's a Muslim."

I'll support either of them against McCain, but Obama has the best chance of winning.

[aquarius dawning]

184. I think Ohio made it pretty clear that Obama does not have a better chance in the GE than Hillary

and I think you're pretty much full of shit for claiming that Republicans are voting for Hillary becasue she is perceived as the weaker candidate. I live in Ohio mind you and have pretty good feel of the buckeye state's pulse.

[Texas Hill Country]

187. Thus the phrase.. "and so goes the nation"...

100 years of being right... its prolly not gonna be wrong.

[galadrium]

190. I live in Ohio too... and listen to all the right wingers calling in on talk radio

Craploads of them bragging about voting for Hillary. "keeping her in it, so republicans can win it."

[557188]

173. Republicans crossed over to vote for the weaker Obama

Look at the numbers.

[thevoiceofreason]

113. Partner, you have an Obama emblem

But you have been pretty negative on him for a while. Yeah, yeah, I know, being realistic and critical thinking, etc. But your entire tone is not that of one seeking clarification or objectively pointing out things that convern you. Rather, it is more of a systematic shadow attack on him. If you are supporting Hillary, that's cool. Just come out and say it. We're grown-ups in here, by in large.

[NJSecularist]

125. When have I been negative about him?

I have been one of his biggest supporters...

Don't kill me because I'm trying to analyze this situation without my Obama blinders on...

[galadrium]

136. You're buying into the Hillary campaign talking points

[Leopolds Ghost]

255. self-delete n/t

[book_worm]

118. This is what the Hillary people are hoping for that some Obama people will begin to panic

despite Obama winning 27 states to her 14 and it will be 29 states by next Tuesday--2-1.

[NJSecularist]

132. Listen....I realize Obama has won alot of states.

But who cares if he wins Mississippi? Georgia? South Carolina? He has no chance to win those states in the general.

This is about which states that each candidate can realistically win in November.

[book_worm]

154. So when are you going to officially switch?

you're now making their case that Obama's victories don't count. Let's see how well Hillary does in getting independents who always decide an election to vote for her in November.

[azmouse]

121. Hillary can only win if the Super delegates overturn the will of the people.

She needs to go.

[Tom Rinaldo]

162. I find "the will" of caucus voters highly suspect

Don't get me wrong, they are part of the system both sides played in so their results are "valid", but flawed from a democratic perspecive. And the official independence of Super Delegates is just as much a part of the rules and therefor just as valid.

We have caucuses like in Washington State that went overwhelmingly to Obama while a Democratic primary vote held just a few weeks later with multiple times the voters participating gave Obama a much more narrow win. We have caucuses like in Nevada where Clinton had a solid lead over Obama in the popular vote but was awarded less delegates than Obama. We have a caucus in a State like Texas where a small subset of the Democrats who all cast votes in the primary got to "vote" a second time if they could fit the caucus hours into their schedule, with the result that a minority of people double voting swung the results from the much larger primary vote pool back toward Obama after Clinton won the primary. We have caucus results from a state like Iowa where candidates who did not initially meet the viability threshold cooperatted in trading caucus supporters in an effort to slow down the front runner in the race, who then was Hillary Clinton. Caucuses game the system. They are "fair" if you consider gaming the system fair. They count but so do the Super Delegates.

1,734,456 Democrats voted in this year's Florida Democratic Primary on January 29th. So far this election season the Democratic Party has held delegate awarding caucuses in 12 States. 1,176,579 Democrats participated in all of those Democratic caucuses combined. Which means that a total of 557,877 MORE Democrats took part in the Florida Primary alone, than took part in all of the Democratic caucuses held in 2008.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4636542

I think your concept of "the will of the people" is simplistic and misleading.

[Texas Hill Country]

169. I went to the Texas caucus and saw rampant no-no's... it was a total mess.

[VotesForWomen]

236. exactly; a tiny margin in this type of primary should not be allowed to tank the whole party in nov.

[Leopolds Ghost]

256. "We have caucus results in Iowa where candidates who did not meet the viability threshold cooperated

This is known as Instant Runoff Voting. It is a GOOD THING
and would lead to open elections if applied nationally to
eliminate the two-party duopoly. Other major democracies use it.

In fact, without Instant Runoff Voting there would be NO NEED
for a PARTY CONVENTION. Hillary is depending on runoff voting
to get the nod in Denver. That is what party conventions are
there for. It's just that ordinarily, an HONEST brokered
convention involves multiple strong candidates coalescing
around a single candidate, not a single losing candidate
trying to reduce the winner's margin!

[Capn Sunshine]

126. The main problem is Hillary's organization

Following the DLC mantra, they will triangulate, lose the Indy Base that votes Dem, and not protest or prosecute any vote thefts in New Mexico, Florida or Ohio.

Just like the last two times.

[Auntie Bush]

127. Congratulations!

There's an excellent well thought out non-bias post...but bound to create a firestorm of negative posts. I hope you have your flame suit on!
Thanks for the excellent post. It was excellent because of your thinking process...not for the conclusion.

[NJSecularist]

142. Thank you

In an ideal world, I'd like for Obama to be the Democratic nominee and for him to win the election in a landslide. But his performances in Ohio and Florida - two vitally important states - have me thinking that he may not be the best candidate for us in the general. I think his chances of winning either of those states are very small. They will both go to McLame if Obama is nominated. I thought he would perform better in Ohio, but he didn't. Hillary can make the claim that if she wins Pennsylvania that she will have won the most vitally important swing states.

[thewiseguy]

137. Hillary will never win Ohio over McCain

Get freaking real. No chance. And there was no contest in Florida.

What the hell are you on today?

[NJSecularist]

150. Ohio didn't really seem to think that Hillary had much to do with NAFTA in the primaries

Why would that change in the general? Hillary has just as much chance to win Ohio as does McCain.

As I said with Florida, there are certain states with Obama that no matter how hard he campaigns and how much money he spends, they still favor Hillary. Florida is one of them. Ohio is another. Hillary has a distinct advantage in those two states.

Why must I be attacked over and over again? I'm trying to have a discussion here..

[book_worm]

165. So Obama won't win the blue states

and you seem to think he won't win Florida even though that primary was very early and before Obama really gained ground and wasn't competitive. You think Hillary has a better shot in Ohio but does she have a chance in Virginia, Colorado, Washington (where polls show Obama tied with McCain and Hillary 8-points behind), Nevada (another state where Obama beats McCain while Hillary loses), Wisconsin (ditto), Minnesota (ditto), Missouri? We can come up with lists of states that don't look good for Hillary too.

I guess I'm not a fair weather supporter. If I believe in somebody I won't get swayed by this. Yesterday was a setback not fatal to Obama. He didn't have to win Texas and Ohio(he actually got a split decision in Texas). She had to win or she would be out.

[NJSecularist]

168. Fair enough

You think Obama is more favorable in other states. That he can go through the backdoor and win the election without the help of Florida and Ohio. I think that is possible. I certainly never said that Obama never had a chance to win the general election.

But do you agree that Hillary has a better chance to win in important swing states (to me and others) like Florida and Ohio over McLame... than Obama does?

[book_worm]

180. frankly I don't think that Obama is a lock to lose Ohio in a GE either.

But I do think that we need a strategy which doesn't depend on Florida and/or Ohio and I think Obama expanding the base in the west is the best bet.

[NJSecularist]

186. Hell, he may win Ohio in the general.

Nobody knows for sure. But yesterday's results sure aren't encouraging at all. I thought Obama would do better, I really did...

And I don't blame you for thinking we need a strategy that doesn't include Ohio and Florida, but I also think we do need a strategy that gives us a reasonable chance at winning at least one of those states.

[woolldog]

199. What world do you live in?

Winning those states isn't "going through the back door"

It's only that if you believe the only important states in the country are Ohio and Florida and Colorado, Nevada etc "don't count". They are not. That 50+1 thinking has lost democrats that last 2 elections they by all rights should have won. And here you are buying into it. Unbelievable

[depakid]

143. Why Ohio would vote for Clinton(s) -the architects of NAFTA

which has devastated their communities is beyond me -but then Ohio is a strange egg. A lot of things they do there make no sense at all. Something in the water is about all I can surmise.

After all, a river once caught fire there!

[Vinca]

145. This argument is completely without merit, no matter how many

times Hillary and her minions tell you differently. The idea that voters who cast a vote for Hillary would not vote for another Democrat over a Republican in the general election is silly. Hillary and Barack are nearly identical in their positions and both are the opposite of McCain. This argument assumes the Hillary voters are so stupid they are only voting for her because she's a Clinton or a woman or a Caucasian and don't really care about her positions. It's more likely, Barack could win her votes, his votes and some red and purple state votes.

[Cha]

166. Thank you for this statement loaded

with facts that does have merit, Vinca!

[SKKY]

147. Obama has won more states, more delegates, and more of the popular vote...

...Explain to me again how Clinton is making a better case for the nomination?

[Exilednight]

151. McCain will win Ohio if he goes against Clinton, and Florida is a loss for either candidate.

This thread is without real merit. Obama has won many swing states that Bill Clinton won in '92 that no Democrat has won since, including Bill Clinton in his second run.

[Steely_Dan]

153. Biden at a Brokered Convention

It is my hope that this will go all the way to the Convention with each candidate so damaged that a third person must be pulled in. That person would be Biden. Hey, a kid can hope, right?

-P

[Leopolds Ghost]

257. America had it's chance! They don't deserve that Solon, that Cincinnatus -- Biden!

On the other hand, barring a sudden calamity... :evilgrin:

[Justitia]

156. And the RW will eat her for lunch in the General. -eom

[otohara]

161. Wow, You Cave Easily

you don't think democrats will vote for Obama?

Think again about what your saying, the Senator from NY has extremely high negatives vs the Senator from IL. Over and over again, she loses, he wins in GE.

[NJSecularist]

163. The "she has high negatives" meme is getting old..

It's not even November yet... Obama could have the same negatives by the time it is October by the time the thugs try to define him..

[book_worm]

172. Good Grief, everything the Hillary people say in this thread you're

"Thank you" and "yeah that's right" and everything Obama people say it's that's "getting old." If you feel that way why don't you just come out and say you support her and be done with it. I hate to see you go, but do what you must do.

[NJSecularist]

181. Sorry, I will still support Obama and I will still be critical of Hillary

That won't change.

But it is my firm belief that Hillary gives us a better chance to win in key swing states like Ohio and Florida. We can agree to disagree here, we can agree that Obama gives us a better chance in states like Iowa, Wisconsin, Colorado, etc,but can we please stop with assaulting my"fanhood" (i.e my support for Obama)? Obama is still my candidate.

[Tom Rinaldo]

174. Both Old AND Misleading...

There is almost no difference in their negative ratings currently, let alone after the Republicans open up on Obama with everything they've got. New from Rasmussen:

"Looking to the general election, John McCain has a slight lead over both Democrats. McCain now leads Obama 48% to 43% and Clinton 46% to 45% (see recent daily results). A Rasmussen Reports video suggests that the Clinton victories in Texas and Ohio are good news for John McCain. In Washington State, McCain leads Clinton and is essentially even with Obama. The Governor’s race in Washington is also a dead-heat.

Nationally, McCain is viewed favorably by 52% and unfavorably by 45%. Obama’s numbers have slipped a bit recently and he is now viewed favorably by 50% of likely voters nationwide, unfavorably by 48%. Clinton earns positive reviews from 49% of Likely Voters nationwide and negative assessments from 50% (see recent daily results)."
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

[BringBigDogBack]

171. Hahaha. How? By having a shitty strategy?

Miss and Wyo officially don't matter.

And once again, by looking ahead to Penn, Hill will lose more delegates in Wyo and Miss than she will gain in PA.


Rinse and repeat. But there's about 600 dels left. Then it's byebye Hill :hi:

[Bread and Circus]

177. Caving in to racists, idiots, and ignorant fools is not the way to go.

[rug]

182. Knock me over with a feather.

[midora]

183. I Was Very Disappointed By Last Night's Results

but that doesn't mean I 'm going to defect to HRC because by winning 3 states last night she's supposedly "making a better case for the nomination". Texas and Ohio are major states, and I had hoped Obama would at least win Texas, but it didn't turn out that way. I'm convinced he would be a stronger candidate against McCain in the fall. I will support Obama until the end...whenever that may be.

[Beacool]

189. Democrats also need New Jersey

and it's a toss up if Obama can put it in his column. Hillary wins it handily by double digits against McCain.

[Cha]

205. No she's not...Obama with his

Delegate counts and the truth at his disposal is making a much better case than the desperate lying hilary. Do the math..and then donate to the Do The Math Fund..please.

z --

Our projections show the most likely outcome of yesterday's elections will be that Hillary Clinton gained 187 delegates, and we gained 183.

That's a net gain of 4 delegates out of more than 370 delegates available from all the states that voted.

For comparison, that's less than half our net gain of 9 delegates from the District of Columbia alone. It's also less than our net gain of 8 from Nebraska, or 12 from Washington State. And it's considerably less than our net gain of 33 delegates from Georgia.

The task for the Clinton campaign yesterday was clear. In order to have a plausible path to the nomination, they needed to score huge delegate victories and cut into our lead.

They failed.

It's clear, though, that Senator Clinton wants to continue an increasingly desperate, increasingly negative -- and increasingly expensive -- campaign to tear us down.

That's her decision. But it's not stopping John McCain, who clinched the Republican nomination last night, from going on the offensive. He's already made news attacking Barack, and that will only become more frequent in the coming days.

Right now, it's essential for every single supporter of Barack Obama to step up and help fight this two-front battle. In the face of attacks from Hillary Clinton and John McCain, we need to be ready to take them on.

Will you make an online donation of $25 right now?

https://donate.barackobama.com/math

The chatter among pundits may have gotten better for the Clinton campaign after last night, but by failing to cut into our lead, the math -- and their chances of winning -- got considerably worse.

Today, we still have a lead of more than 150 delegates, and there are only 611 pledged delegates left to win in the upcoming contests.

By a week from today, we will have competed in Wyoming and Mississippi. Two more states and 45 more delegates will be off the table.

But if Senator Clinton wants to continue this, let's show that we're ready.

Make an online donation of $25 now to show you're willing to fight for this:

https://donate.barackobama.com/math

This nomination process is an opportunity to decide what our party needs to stand for in this election.

We can either take on John McCain with a candidate who's already united Republicans and Independents against us, or we can do it with a campaign that's united Americans from all parties around a common purpose.

We can debate John McCain about who can clean up Washington by nominating a candidate who's taken more money from lobbyists than he has, or we can do it with a campaign that hasn't taken a dime of their money because we've been funded by you.

We can present the American people with a candidate who stood shoulder-to-shoulder with McCain on the worst foreign policy disaster of our generation, and agrees with him that George Bush deserves the benefit of the doubt on Iran, or we can nominate someone who opposed the war in Iraq from the beginning and will not support a march to war with Iran.

John McCain may have a long history of straight talk and independent thinking, but he has made the decision in this campaign to offer four more years of the very same policies that have failed us for the last eight.

We need a Democratic candidate who will present the starkest contrast to those failed policies of the past.

And that candidate is Barack Obama.

Please make a donation of $25 now:

https://donate.barackobama.com/math

Thank you,

David

David Plouffe
Campaign Manager
Obama for America

[Apollo11]

207. Polls are showing Hillary is our strongest candidate in the general.

The following is based on the results of Rasmussen Reports rolling polls. The pattern since Feb 5th is very interesting.

Around 3 weeks ago, Obama was beating McCain by up to 8 points. Hillary was losing to McCain by up to 6 points. So it looked like only Obama could beat McCain!

Now, McCain beats Obama by 5 points, but Hillary is almost tied with McCain. So maybe Hillary is the strongest candidate to go up against John McCain?

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/general_election_match_up_history

[midora]

209. Dream On

There's no way Clinton could defeat McCain. It's not going to happen. No wonder, she's hinting she might consider Obama as a running mate!

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

211. Hate to say it, but Hillary is a complete embarassment to our party. Another Lieberman, only worse!

[Barack_America]

213. IMO, neither Hillary nor Obama are likely to win Ohio and Florida over McCain.

They are barely swing states any more. They're pretty much red.

If you want a Dem in the WH, your focus is states like Michigan, Wisconsin, Missouri, Pennsylvania, Virginia, etc.

If Obama can't pull out Pennsylvania, I might be inclined to agree with you. But not on the basis of Ohio and Florida.

But, even still, I NEVER want to see our nominee determined by superdelegates. That sets a horrible precedent.

[LisaL]

214. Hah? How is OH red? It just elected Strickland, who is a democrat,

and a whole bunch of other democrats, rather than republicans.
But now all of the sudden it's red?
Gimme a break.

[Barack_America]

217. Red states elect Democratic governors all the time.

Who they favor for governor has almost no bearing on who they prefer for President. Particularly when the Republican is seen to be more of an independent.

[NJSecularist]

218. Ohio is certainly not red

It's purple, like always...

[superkia]

215. There are allot of people that havent even voted yet, if you...

believe Obama is better for our country, I would suggest that you not post things like this that give a negative outlook...it only helps push people away from him. A post about why you believe he is best would make sense if you are an Obama supporter, I'm not sure what you wanted to get out of this post but when I read it, your avatar confused me?

Who do you think is better for our childrens future, Obama or Clinton? When you have that answer, start posting and supporting that candidate with reasons why you think that and help others make an informed decision. All of the negative posts around here are self defeating.


Anyone that feels that the democratic candidate wont beat "Mr more wars" is ridiculous and has a clouded vision of the American people at this point in history. McCain ( should I call him bush III ) shouldn't be a factor in who is the better candidate.

[krkaufman]

220. I agree.... Al Gore, '08!! n/t

[elixir]

221. Agreed.

[anamnua]

224. Well done. A refreshingly honest no-BS opening post. nt

[totodeinhere]

231. Either Clinton or Obama will win Ohio in the general.

McCain is an enthusiastic NAFTA supporter. He can't win Ohio.

[Political Heretic]

232. She's winning "key swing states" in a split democratic vote

I don't understand this "she's winning key swing states" thing. Polls have shown that only a small fraction of party voters actually refuse to support the eventual party nominee. However we nominate will have the benefit of democratic 3 to 1 turnout. That person will win Ohio and Flordia with ease.

[VotesForWomen]

238. still makes her the better candidate there in nov. nt

[VotesForWomen]

233. but... but... Obama kicked Hillary's ass in Utah! nt

[Lord Helmet]

237. oh baloney

time to change your avatar dude

[jgraz]

239. I call bullshit

Why do you have an Obama avatar if you're pushing Clinton talking points? The real giveaway here: including Florida as a valid victory for Clinton. Only hard-core Clinton partisans do that.

Mix in the "Kerry was too liberal" trope and I'm wondering if you really should be using the avatar of any Democrat. :shrug:

[Raffi Ella]

243. Yup!

Hillary has what it takes to win in a general.

Hillary has the experience and the fiercely Democratic Spirit to clean up after the nightmare that is BushCo.I want her bulldog spirit up there FOR US.I want a DEMOCRATIC FIGHTER!We Democrats deserve and need that after what has gone down over the last 7 years.

And remember this you guys - they say their records are almost the same.I realize you love Obama but he'll probably be her running mate and then he'll run and win(no doubt)in 2016.

[jpak]

249. Yes - we should throw out the delegates and let Clinton crown herself Emperoress

WTF...