Craig Crawford's Trail Mix

Gee I am the first to comment. School is closed, I let the dogs out and now I am going back to sleep. HOWEVER, I could not help myself to say I TOLD YOU SO.!!!!!! We delievered Ohio to Hillary. Standing in the rain yesterday with her sign takes on a whole different feeling. Obama"s balloon is busted.
Hillary for President!!!

Good Morning-

ITA with Craig's analysis. While the party powerful want to go with Obama to bring new Dems in, they can't ignore the 10,000,000 plus that have voted for Hillary--the party's base.She did take the big electoral states and we'll need those in November. He does take the young vote and that's exciting and could keep Dems in charge for years. Hillary/Barack--I love it.

Craig,

I wish I could catch you on Imus, but WABC changed their Web site, and my computer doesn't like them any more.

I can't picture Hillary taking the #2 slot, but I can see your point as far as the super delegates wanting to take what looks like the easy way out. What seems to be lost here is the folly of all those states which moved their primaries up in the calendar, just so they could be relevant.

The person I spoke about earlier posted this at 4:53am.

So the website at C&L has 10% difference-which is better than 16%....but the Big Counties and the BIG Cities I can not find the results- of Cuyhoga or Cleveland- or the EARLY voters...or dayton, cincinattie, or Toledo....Something stinks...but I am too tired....

So where are these vote result totals?

God Bless.

Carol, Working the front lines for Hillary, you are a great American!
Enjoy your rest today

Craig, What does a OB, HC ticket give you? Two peas in a pod? Hey both together equal the experience of JM little finger.
It would be very interesting to see a OB + HC ticket vs JM + MR.

McCain / Romeny wins.
The Best Security and Commander in Chef with a true American Hero
The Best Economic leadership

"So far Mr. Obama's surrogates have argued that only elected delegates should count. Yet the Democratic system allows for superdelegates, made up of ex officio party members and elected officials, which the Obama camp suggests should echo the popular will. If only it were as simple as that.

Superdelegates were invented and given considerable power in order to calm the runaway enthusiasm of temporary, extreme, callow primary voters who might elevate an unelectable general election candidate. Mrs. Clinton's supporters can argue that the Democratic party constitution should not be tampered with. If the party had wanted a one person one vote system of picking a candidate, that is what would have been chosen."

http://www.nysun.com/article/72304?page_no=2

Craig,

For once, I think you're right. With Clinton keeping up the charade that she can win, it only entrenches her supporters. My bet: the superdelegates will give Clinton a week to gracefully step out. If not, then they'll coordinate a slow bleed where they slowly build Obama's delegate/superdelegate lead so that Obama will be in a position to go over the top prior to Denver. That will force Clinton's hand and allow her supporters to understand the inevitability of the Obama nomination. And by the way, the more negative Clinton goes, the faster that process will happen.

For the Clintonites, Clintonistas and anyone else who enjoyed last night.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6FwEJwwYcQ

For the Obama fans.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbqC1I2SxGM

Good Morning Y'all (S-peshully B'rye -You couldn't wait for Wednesday. Well, it's Wednesday.)

Craig - I think you were the first one who said not to count McCain out when everyone else thought he was a goner.

Huck gave a great concession speech. Maybe he can handle McCain's concession speech when Hil'ry wins in Nov. Of the remaining three, she does hold the center ground.

alpha, I cannot believe you said that. Hillary will go all the way. The longer this goes the more will come out about Obama and that will not be good.
Over half of the democrat delegates wanted her to stay in the race even if she lost and she won.
I have no idea what will happen but Hillary will be in there to the end. True Grit.
Thanks ping pong, it was lots of fun. I have never been political, and I will be 68 on the 13th.
In fact tonight I am going to my FIRST democratic committee meeting in my city of Wooster. Should be interesting.

CLINTON TAKES TEXAS AND OHIO
Obama wins Vermont, but his streak ends - McCain clinches GOP nomination
DEMOCRATS: Much-needed victories in 2 big states give Clinton campaign new energy
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/03/05/MN9MVDQEU.DTL&tsp=1

Next up Pa and Indiana and they will go like Ohio

Why should Clinton get out...
The Obama campaign should stop trying to supress people's right to vote and to have their votes counted
It's bad enough he lied to the people of Florida

Political awakening could be costly

"Third, until early March, Obama, as the non-Clinton in the presidential contest, has gotten a virtual free ride in the press. A recent study by the Center for Media Affairs has documented that since the New Hampshire primary, 83 percent of Obama’s coverage has been positive vs. 47 percent of Clinton’s.

Fourth, Obama supporters are living in a fool’s paradise if they imagine this will continue. Outlining just a few obvious lines of attack available to GOP smear artists brought a barrage of outraged emails likening me to the Drudge Report or the KKK. “Either you want John McCain to be president,” an overheated Obama supporter wrote, “or you are in league with the Neo-Nazis or other hate groups.” The awakening, should it come, could prove costly and painful"

http://www.nwanews.com/story.php?paper=adg§ion=Editorial&storyid=218761

Hillary wins 3 states in a row last night? Does that mean our national nightmare isn't over yet? LOL!

KGC,

Not trying to suppress the vote. The numbers say that she simply can't win.

Obama can't get there either so what's your point

Ah, you are right. But he will lead in total pledged delegates, more states and total population vote. It will be political suicide for the Democratic Party to overturn the will of the voters.

you also said he would win in Texas and Ohio and how did that work out...

you must using Karl Rove's math

I think Clinton will carry Oregon and that will change your calculation and she will also carry Indiana and when you switch those from the ones Obama is claiming things look very different.

Ah, I want you to look at the total delegates in Texas and see how they're distributed. I'll bet you a Snicker bar that Obama is going to come out ahead.

She's going to win Oregon??? What previous trend tells you that? Now Indiana is a toss up anyway. But Oregon? Not going to happen for her.

She won Texas because the Reich Wing had Republicans voting for her.

While the Republicans who are actual crossover voters voted for Obama.

They feel {The Republican Fascist Nazi's} that she will be an easier nominee to beat in the General then Obama. That is if we have elections in the fall.

God Bless.

She will win Oregon it is not a caucus state. Oregon is more like California and they have a closed primary.

Oregon is going to be very tough for Hillary. With the exception of Southern Oregon, the demographics are very similar to Vermont (Portland and Eugene are much more liberal than Seattle.)

And she is ahead in the polling for both Indiana, Pa and Oregon, What do you have that says differently

Plus a lot of Obama's "Pledged" delegates come from caucus states where tiny numbers decided...how does that prove anything, When people actually vote Clinton wins not when people are bussed in en mass to dominate the room.

Alpha said, "Ah, I want you to look at the total delegates in Texas and see how they're distributed. I'll bet you a Snicker bar that Obama is going to come out ahead."

That's kind of the rub, where one candidate wins the popular vote but still loses the tally for delegates. Kind of flies in the face of your sentiment of letting the voters govern the outcome.

Mr Obama's strategy of marshaling every effort to get people to the caucuses has been exceedingly effective. Every caucus has been overflowing with his supporters. That, in large part, accounts for the tremendous number of pledged delegates that he's amassed.

But, I don't believe that strategy is consistent with the intended purpose of the caucus system which, I believe, is to allow committed party activists to substitute their judgment for the that of the unwashed masses. After all, who knows more about electability and the other intangibles than the activists?

So, I suppose the question boils down to whether or not superior gamesmanship trumps superior electability.

In Oregon she has the gov and her campaign is being run by Ron Wyden's chief of staff.

"Hillary/Barack--I love it."

Me too and frankly if the Dem party tries to do it in reverse...it won't work. Hillary/Obama 08 is a 16 year ticket.

Hopefully Obama will see that and do what's best for the party and not for himself.

:-D

I would love to see her take Oregon. I was born and raised in Oregon and went to the University of Oregon in Eugene. I am simply thinking in terms of the demographics of that state...it is going to be a tough one and certainly not in the bag. I was in Portland last week on business and saw a lot of Obama stickers...but I stayed in the Pearl District so that might have something to do with it.

John Thune was floated this morning as a runningmate for McCain

Young...

Conservative...

Early McCain supporter...

Father has a relationship with McCain from way back

http://thune.senate.gov/public/

PS...supposedly plays b-ball with Obama

Obama supporters like to count the number of states he has won. Here is a News Alert for you: All states are not equal. Idaho does not equal Ohio, Utah does not equal California, North Dakota does not equal Massachusetts, etc. Also, many of Obama's states are Red - not in play in the GE for Dems.

You play the game as it's laid out, not as you want it to be. Hillary had the opportunity to compete in caucus states. Her lack of organization reflects her weakness in those states. You can't fault Obama for not only winning those caucus states, but winning in such numbers that he can't be caught.

Wendy, Clinton better hope that Obama picks her as VP. Why would the leader decide to take a backseat? Hillary should understand that this is the best chance for her to get close to the presidency. She's older and doesn't have too many chances.

I doubt Obama will pick her, but if he does, I can see that working. Bill Clinton will be back in the good graces of African Americans and the will of the voters won't be subverted. So...

Obama/Clinton...winner.

Oregon is not Vermont. Vermont has a socialist senator and voted to indict Bush/Cheney (personally I think that is a good thing) Oregon is much more libertarian in its approach. It is pretty much blue now but used to be a swing state. I think she is a better fit.

Hey Gordo,

Got a note for you. Those states you discount have Democrats. They're part of our nomination process. They count. And by the way, any Democrat is going to win all of the Democratic blue states. So that's a false argument. Just because you lose them in a primary contest has nothing to do with the stark Democratic vs. Republican choice the general election voter has to face. So those are false arguments.

That's right play the game as it is laid out. Obama is the cheater. He said he would seat the Florida delegation but when he lost he changed his mind,

Wendy: Agreed. Unite and Conquer.

Alpha, I think early this morning Patsi did a brilliant job of distilling the essence of the reason for the support Mrs Clinton is receiving and deserves:

"And Bear -- let me say this. I've had it with the race crap. Deep in my DNA, starting with my earliest female ancestor in Ethiopia, I know who has had it worse in this world. Women. Maybe not in the US, but in the history of humankind, you men -- black, white and indifferent -- have kicked ur asses every damn time you could. Just look at countries where race is not an issue. Women are treated like junkyard dogs, raped, stoned and killed. So stop telling us we have to lay down and take it.

Posted by: Patsi | March 5, 2008 12:34 AM"

HRC kicked some serious butt last night!!! As a Republicans for Hillary, and since McCain has now locked up the Republican nominee, I appeal to all Republicans to vote for HRC in all upcoming open primaries. The veil is slowly being removed from the Obama mystique revealing a mannequin draped in a nice suit.

KGC: Yes, I see your point but I still believe in-city Portland and Eugene are Obama Country.

My parents still live in Southern Oregon and my mother voted for Bush in the last two elections. However, she is voting for HIllary this round so what do I know?!

I think there is no doubt the Democrat will carry California, New York and most of the NE but I am not so sure Obama can carry Ohio and given his attitude he has written off Florida and he is not going to carry most of the primary states he has won. So what does that do to his electability argument?

mornin' all,

Man, were you guys nasty last night! AP you kept asking about the Cuyahoga county results - not to advertise for a CQ competitor, but CNN posts that info. And your report that the reicht wing had repugs voting for Hillary is contrary to the exit polls they were reorting on the tube, which showed them voting for the saviour and contrary to the argument of the Obamamanians here who claim he draws independents and repugs in to the mix for him.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/county/#val=OHDEMMAPPRIMARY1

Obama won 5 counties in OH, and Cuyahoga was one of them. He won 3 of the 4 major metro areas, but didn't win in the Toledo area - the Mudhens went for Hillary. A perusal of the maps for the states he's won and lost make it pretty plain that he's focusing his attention on the large metro areas and Hillary is focusing on the hinterlands.

KC, you forgot to mention that many of those small states have something less than a snowball's chance in hell at best of voting for Obama in the general election. :-)

Exit polling? When are you going to learn people have learned to lie on exit polls. Nothing better than making those pin-heads of the MSM look foolish. Matthews must be sick this morning.

Carol, fear not. The folks here wo are calling for Hillary to quit the race are among the 1/3 of Demvoters who think she should. The other 2/3 said she should continue if she won either of TX or OH - well, she won both. And if you add the roughly 350,000 votes she got last night to her prior votes - she has now surpassed Obama in total votes for her in primary states. (USAelectionpolls.com had her behind by 84,000 before last night's results, and they don't count caucus numbers because of the inherent unfairness of that system).

http://www.co.stark.oh.us/internet/docs/BOE/p08.htm

She kicked his butt in Stark County considerd the bellwether county. The NYtimes puts a reporter in Canton every year because of its reliability in picking the winners. (Stark County voted for Kerry in 2004 more evidence the election was stolen)

Craig

It ain't gonna happen. Not as things are working themselves out. If Obama continues his lead in delgates he is not going to take the back seat, and shouldn't. For HRC, The last thing she needs is to have her name associated with the people that lost the "can't lose" election. For her, politically she is better off back in the senate where she can say "I told you so" when Obama loses. Or, if by some miracle, Obama wins, she will have more influence and fun in the senate than as Obama's VP.

Jack

alpha1906 -----------------------

Red states count for ZERO in the GE. Only Swing states! Obama has been able to "game" the system with the help of MSM.

Hillary will do well in Oregon...if she loses it will be by a tight margin...just as if she wins.

and BTW...Hillary did VERY well in the TX caucus' much better caucus showing than she's had of course except for NV and NM -

since we have 7 weeks to PA - I would love for Clinton to send her entire staff to WY and surprise the you know what out of O' by challenging him there. Perhaps not win...but come awfully close.

And on a final note a friend of mine who is in OH, a PoliSci prof and women's studies scholar said she finally voted for

Hillary because she got tired of everyone calling her a bitch. As much as the guys think it's ok...women who might have voted for the guy are swinging back to Hillary because of the sexist crap. Something to keep in mind moving forward.

PS her only reasoning for voting for Obama was because Hillary voted for the war and she was tweaked at her...not because she thought he was a better candidate. She actually, in the end, thinks Hillary will make a better President.

Food for thought...must go get ready for work.

HRC would never accept VP. Just ain't in her DNA.

Anon-Para -- Here's a better conspiracy for you to dwell upon:

http://relay4thetruth.blogspot.com/2007/11/naomi-wolf-americas-fascist-coup-owes.html

Wendy,
"everyone calling her a bitch.'

I see nothing wrong in calling her a bitch if she becomes POTUS. I think she would rather be called a bitch by our enemies, then being thought of as a weak leader because you are a female.

kc, BINGO! The pres election will in all likelihood go the way of FL & OH, and there is one candidate who stands a better chance than the other of beating McCain there - and that would be Hillary. The superdelegates will consider that when they make up their minds along with whether their district voted for Obama or for Hillary.

Obama lied to the dem voters in FL when he said if he were the nominee, FL would be seated, until he realized that if FL were seated he would not be the nominee. Now that FL's gov is wiling to support letting the Dems have a primary there, I suspect there is a bunch of stuff going on behind the scenes to make/prevent that from happening. Let's see how the Obama supporters respond if FL holds a primary that might count - think they'll cry foul?

Alpha I know you want Obama to be the nominee as much as I want Hillary to be the nominee. Our undying support for our candidates is no secret.

If Hillary is the VP...so be it...

But O' had a look of stress on his face last night. The speech was not as confident. He knows the upcoming races do not favor him.

Hillary will walk into the convention having won the states the Dems need, he'll still be dealing with "issues" like Rezko, she'll have the momentum. She'll also be able to point to places like WA where she got her butt kicked in the caucus but only lost the primary by 2%. She'll be able to say to the superDs that - I won the big blue states. I won the swing states. I won the democratic base. I won the primaries. They don't caucus in the general election...everyone gets to vote...and when everyone votes I win or do very very well.

Those superDs are going to look at her body of work over the election. Hopefully they're going to think about how they can hold onto the White House for more than just 8 years and they're going to go to Obama and say...take VP...you have our full support in 2016 and we'll own the Repubs for 16 years.

Now it will be a real test for him if he can step aside and take the VP slot and do what is good for the party rather than himself. It will show his true colors for sure. I'll be interested to see what those colors are.

Just for the record, if the Dems had "winner-take-all" rules like the GOP's Hillary would now be leading the delegate count 1,737 with 1,537 for Obama. (you can check my math below. I did this quickly).

Point being, the byzantine rules of the Dem process have clearly favored Obama up to this point. Second point being, it seems a bit rich for Obama supporters to want to change the rules or impose false rules when it comes down to superdelegates in the name of "common sense" or "fairness." I say...let the Byzantine rules all play out in their full glory!

CLINTON STATES AND DELEGATES
30 NH
0 MICH
33 NEV
0 FLA
67 ARIZONA
47 ARK
441 CAL
121 MASS
127 NEW JERSEY
38 NEW MEX
280 NEW YORK
47 OKLAHOMA
85 TENN
32 R.I.
228 TEX
161 OHIO

OBAMA STATES AND DELEGATES
57 IOWA
54 SC
23 DEL
103 GA
23 IDAHO
40 KANSAS
60 ALABAMA
18 ALASKA
60 CONN
88 MINN
88 MISSOURI
21 N. DAK
29 UTAH
71 COLO
185 ILL
97 WASHINGTON
67 LA
31 NEB
38 MAINE
99 MD
103 VA
38 DC
29 HAWAII
92 WISC
23 VERMONT

pogo,

"Obama lied to the dem voters in FL when he said if he were the nominee, FL would be seated, until he realized that if FL were seated he would not be the nominee."

I forget just who said this morning, maybe it was Craig on Imus, but HRC would be wise to call for a new primary election in both FL & MI, as she will win FL and have a very good chance of winning MI. If that would happen and BHO oppose it, BHO would be toast.

BTW...didn't she tie him with Independents last night?

Maybe somebody wrote that...

So...she gets Indies too...no more an argument for Obama.

She gets the Dem base and Indies - her argument is as good in that category if not better than his.

Craig...isn't it, well, not just embarrassing being on the air on WABC-AM, much less with Imus, but aren't you worried he'll up and ask about something like the "nappy-headed vote" in Mississippi? There's a picture of him (hatless) under "loose cannon" in my dictionary...

I wouldn't want to be in a car with him driving.

"HRC would never accept VP. Just ain't in her DNA. --Posted by: FryDaddy"

fry, what if she got the cheney deal? barack does the photo-ops while she runs the shop.

"fry, what if she got the cheney deal? barack does the photo-ops while she runs the shop."cc

I don't think Michelle would allow that.

joe, don't think you've been listening much -- the new imus show has featured some of the most thoughtful discussion and guests about race issues anywhere on the airwaves

Patsi...

First of all Zell Miller is a piece of garbage and a scum bag who should crawl back into the hole he crawled out of.

Judas Iscariot Lieberman is a Nazi Collaborator who sold his soul, Constitution and Country for a Hell of a lot more than than thirty pieces of Silver like his name sake Judas did.

Prescott Bush made his fortune financing Hitlers Nazi Military and was censored by the Senate for it.

And I'm fully aware of Naomi Wolf's thoughts on America's Fascist Coup. And if you and many others do not see that what happened in Germany during the Rise of Hitler then your blind, because it is happening here.

As to Obama and the Rezko inuendo's least we forget the missing billing records from the Rose Law firm that appeared in the White House, Walmart, Tyson Chicken and Vince Foster.

And I'm sure that there are many more questions that have not been answered by Hillary about many other things known about her.

All that will be brought back up by the Republican Fascist Nazi Party if she is the nominee, have no doubt about it.

You want Hillary for the nominee and that's fine, but there is no way she will beat John McCain and she will split the Democratic Party. A split that will last for a long, long time.

So good luck as its said that we get the Government we deserve and so we shall if Hillary is the nominee.

God Bless.

well if she does consider the Cheney role she looks good in the outfit

http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/images/blpic-hillarydarthvader.htm

Clinton hints at shared ticket

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/campaign_rdp

by the way for I-Fans in DC, he starts tomorrow on WJZW-105.9 FM: http://washingtontimes.com/article/20080304/BUSINESS/243389132/1006

whatever happens, the Veep nominee has to bring his/her constituency with him/her. So if HRC is the nominee, Barack has to go out and make those speeches and bring the kids to the polls (history says kids dont vote, so it really would be a huge plus if Obama actually brought 'em in). If Barack is the nominee, Hillary can certainly bring her base, but she can also seem to be the one who's answering the phone at 3 a.m. (a la cheney).

someone (who? dean?) has got to have one of those middle of the night meetings with both candidates, cigars and brandy included, and work this out. Not yet tho. I think voters in half the country are tired of being told their primaries/cauci dont count because the nominee has been decided months before.

This really is an exercise in democracy and democracy hurts. It's exciting to be sure, but can be very painful too.

It appears that my guy, incumbent Eugene Miller has won his primary for the Cleveland 10th District House Of Representative seat. You may remember that he used to work for Stephanie Tubbs-Jones (my hero!) and was being threatened by Obama supporters for his refusal to withdraw his support for Hillary.

(Eugene is the guy I posted about who got his GED, then worked his way through college...is the custodial single father of his daughter.)

Hillary owes a BUNCH to Stephanie Tubbs-Jones for the way Ohio turned out. There's been a lot made of Hillary the workhorse and Barack the showhorse....well, Stephanie Tubbs-Jone is a warhorse. God love her!

"what if she got the cheney deal? barack does the photo-ops while she runs the shop. "

LOL

Craig

Obama may be a lot of things but he is no George w Bush.
Obama is nobodys puppet on a string.
Which I think is going to piss off the Kennedy wing of the party a lot if he wins the election.

Jack

Wendy,

A candidate always has stress when they lose. LOL Hillary probably aged a decade when Obama was winning election after election.

One argument against the whole Obama wait your turn strategy is that if Obama were to lead in delegates, total vote, etc. and then he were not given the nomination, African Americans would not only cry foul, they'd not vote. I'm not talking about voting for Republicans, I'm talking about actively encouraging each other to not vote. And the Democrats will lose the GE. And ask the Democratic leadership which is there greatest nightmare, and it's having their most reliable base which always provides the winning margins in Democratic victories, stay home. You can always find more white women. You can always find more white men. They ain't making any more 9 out of 10 voting African American blocks. So that whole step aside for VP is not going to happen, just like Clinton bowing out for the good of the party.

Oops, sorry for grammatical errors. It's 6am out here.

Fry, I think that even though we'll be voting for different candidates in Nov., we both think the same about Hillary as VP and about Hillary pushing for primaries in FL & MI. If she doesn't ge tthe nomination, I don't see her taking the VP slot - IMO it's not in her best interest politically, and if there is one thing she is, it's political.

and for the skinny Dennis fans here...he handily won his primary.

For all this talk of hillary winning the "important" big states let's look at facts.

Hillary has won only a few actual big swing states that DEMS need to pick up:

Ohio. Florida is was not a contested win that is a fact.

Hilary has won one smaller swing state DEMS would like to pick up: New Mexico.

Obama has won a number of big swing states that DEMS will need to pick off the win:

Missouri, Colorado, Virginia and Iowa

Obama has also won nominal DEM swing states:

Washington (both caucus and primary), Minnesota, and Wisconsin

So the fact don't support the wild and erroneous claims by Hilary and her supprters that she is winning the important states. Lets' get real...any DEM will win California, Massachusetts and New York.

Obama appears to be able to expand the map for DEMS while Hilary has shown no such ability.

Alpha, glad to see race isn't an issue any more.

" You can always find more white women."

Jeezus, Alf.

Oregon for Hillary...

Hillary leads in two most recent polls taken within the state.
Only Democrats vote in Democratic primary..
Large Latino Vote..
Very Small African-American Vote

Competitive, but she should win here. Chuck Todd of NBC said last night that of course Obama should win Oregon..Just shows how much these experts know.

Patsi - I've been starting to research Tubbs-Jones...she has really impressed me with her support for Hillary - she seems very strong. I'm a new fan of Tubbs-Jones for sure.

Obama appears to be able to expand the map for DEMS while Hilary has shown no such ability.

Posted by: Cederico

I call baloney on this statement. There is no evidence he can expand anything more evidence that he cannot hold on to the states Kerry won.

Ohio Ohio Ohio...Remember why the Democrats lost time..

Hillary will bring home, Arkansas, Tennessee, Ohio, New Mexico and, write down this prediction...Florida..

Alpha wrote: "LOL Hillary probably aged a decade when Obama was winning election after election."

I'm not going to disagree with you there. I think I did too.

You make a sound argument about African Americans - but if it's close...the Democratic party has to look at the whole picture and not just one population. I know you hate the phrase "wait his turn" and a strategy setting the Dems up for 16 years in the White House sounds very much like that. I know. But I don't see O' handing the baton to Clinton to take it for the next 8 years. All the questions about him...questions about his experience...get erased with 8 years as VP and then he's unbeatable in 2016.

But I see your point...the African American community will probably be very angry...it will take a lot of work on the part of Obama to pull them in before November. I would think he'd be willing to do that.

Still 12 more states and PR to vote...so it's really a wait and see.

i think craig,s trying to stir things up with this vp idea'' can't have two captains on the same ship. it does'nt work

wow.... so much rancor last night....
life is too short and for me too good to read it anymore.... stickin' with the day stuff...

Bear... I wish you the best.... try to stay positive and fight for your life....

really nasty weather up here ..... for the first time in 10 yrs of owning this timeshare, Loon Mt. is closed today... they removed all the gondolas from the lift last night.... gonna be a miserable walk over to the hot tubs... but hey.... someone has to do it ... Rick and I will bravely volunteer later this afternoon...

and since I did vote for Hillary....... YEEEEEEHAAAAAW!

Cederico, the last time CO voted dem was in Bill Clinton's initial run in 92, Iowa and Missouri, like Florida and Ohio also voted for Clinton. Missouri was an extremely close contest in this year's primaries and Iowa was a caucus, which has virtually no predictive value. CO & VA may go dem, but if so, it will be the first time in 4 or more election cycles. FL & OH are much better bets, having been dead heats in the past two elections and having both gone for Clinton in '96, with OH having gone there in '92 as well. WA, MN & WI have been solidly blue for the past 20 years at least, and calling them dem swing states is ridiculous. You are right about one thing - FL was uncontested for BOTH candidates - which arguably recommends its results as reflective of the voters' real inclinations, as opposed to reaction to campaign rhetoric.

Cederico, the last time CO voted dem was in Bill Clinton's initial run in 92, Iowa and Missouri, like Florida and Ohio also voted for Clinton. Missouri was an extremely close contest in this year's primaries and Iowa was a caucus, which has virtually no predictive value. CO & VA may go dem, but if so, it will be the first time in 4 or more election cycles. FL & OH are much better bets, having been dead heats in the past two elections and having both gone for Clinton in '96, with OH having gone there in '92 as well. WA, MN & WI have been solidly blue for the past 20 years at least, and calling them dem swing states is ridiculous. You are right about one thing - FL was uncontested for BOTH candidates - which arguably recommends its results as reflective of the voters' real inclinations, as opposed to reaction to campaign rhetoric.

sorry about the dup posts - got server errors the first time.

Yes, the time has come to embrace a ticket with the potential for 16 years of strong Democratic leadership in the white house. Visit http://www.16yearplan.com and sign the petition to Howard Dean and the DNC.

Craig,

Thanks for posting the Washington station ID. I'll see if I can get a streaming broadcast of Imus from them. From what I saw on their Web site, it looks like they're in the process of making a change from jazz to oldies, but I didn't pay attention to dates, so that may have been done months ago.

BREAKING NEWS : OBAMA FIRES TIM RUSSERT AND JOE SCARBOUROUGH

HE KEEPS CHRIS MATTHEWS AND KEITH OBERMAN(hints they may be gone after pennsylvania)

jack cafferty may be in the running to replace them

BREAKING NEWS : OBAMA FIRES TIM RUSSERT AND JOE SCARBOUROUGH

HE KEEPS CHRIS MATTHEWS AND KEITH OBERMAN(hints they may be gone after pennsylvania)

jack cafferty may be in the running to replace them

BREAKING NEWS : OBAMA FIRES TIM RUSSERT AND JOE SCARBOUROUGH

HE KEEPS CHRIS MATTHEWS AND KEITH OBERMAN(hints they may be gone after pennsylvania)

jack cafferty may be in the running to replace them

Wendy

"Hopefully Obama will see that and do what's best for the party and not for himself."

He would be doing himself a favor as well. The four to eight years she would be in office (there could be an age factor here), would give him time to build an international reputation. In addition, she would need an activist VP to act as liaison with the legislative branch to get important health and tax programs they have already promised.

She steps down, he steps in ... Voila, perfect time with a solid, undivided party behind him.

BREAKING NEWS : OBAMA FIRES TIM RUSSERT AND JOE SCARBOUROUGH

HE KEEPS CHRIS MATTHEWS AND KEITH OBERMAN(hints they may be gone after pennsylvania)

jack cafferty may be in the running to replace them

McCain is going to the whitehouse today to be embraced by Shrub. Wonder if Shrub will start off by apologizing for all the lies he told about McCain in 2000.

sorry about the repeats something happened and my computer froze for about 5 mins and repeated the posts

B*tch is the new black. Stick and stones....yadda yadda yadda

Way to go Hillary!!!!! Her speech was very good last night, fun to watch!

BHO 's speech sounded a bit stale. My husband compared it to someone skipping a stone on top of water, repeatative and lacking any depth of thought or substance.

Rumours of Hillary Clinton's Presidential campaign imploding were greatly exaggerated.

Craig,

For once, I think you're right. With Clinton keeping up the charade that she can win, it only entrenches her supporters. My bet: the superdelegates will give Clinton a week to gracefully step out. If not, then they'll coordinate a slow bleed where they slowly build Obama's delegate/superdelegate lead so that Obama will be in a position to go over the top prior to Denver. That will force Clinton's hand and allow her supporters to understand the inevitability of the Obama nomination. And by the way, the more negative Clinton goes, the faster that process will happen.

Posted by: alpha1906 | March 5, 2008 7:15 AM

SAME DANCE, DIFFERENT HALL

euro tom
what planet do you live on ????? the dem elders will crawl in a hole and hide ....thr rules are 2025 delagates and he cant get them either

A big shout out for Ace Smith, the Californian who went to Texas to run the Clinton campaign...
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/03/01/MNG3VBN6J.DTL&hw=Ace+Smith&sn=002&sc=412

Craig, your VP story is now growing. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

the dems created this mess with their stupid primary system now they have to live with .....maybe they will wake up and change that system

That is if we have elections in the fall.

God Bless.

Posted by: anon-paranoid | March 5, 2008 8:23 AM

what a strange comment. You think we will be destroyed by then?

No matter who you are for, look how many dems voted yesterday.

That is if we have elections in the fall.

God Bless.

Posted by: anon-paranoid | March 5, 2008 8:23 AM

what a strange comment. You think we will be destroyed by then?

Hopefully the voter count will be bigger in November.

Hillary Clinton as a presidential nominee is unacceptable to me. I will only vote for Obama or McCain.

Also for the state of Ohio
Robby Mook for Clinton (was a Strictland staffer)

How can this be bad for the party. It keeps the dems on the front page for awhile. The Reps are all loaded up and ready to unload on BHO no matter what Hillary says about him. What she has thrown at him is nothing compared to what is down the road.

Andre

Glad you can stomach McCain, because that is probably who your getting.

Hey , how about Mcgovern in 2008, he is still alive right?

Jack

ET, AP has contended for about a year now (maybe more, I lose count) that Shrub will seize power and there will be no elections.

Andre - which state?

zumper - ET was just reposting Alpha's prediction about the superdelegates, and making fun of it.

vadaryl, thank you. Exactly. I heard the comment of one pundit, who I thought made a good point, that the primary process is bringing more new dem voters to the process than any other effort the party or the nominee's campaign could possibly do in Nov. I thought it was a good point.

I thought that Obama speech seemed familiar. It seems the Senator's writers were channeling the last season of West Wing and Max Santos.

BHO was media's flavor of the month for awhile now who is there flavor of the month?

"Obama lied to the dem voters in FL when he said if he were the nominee, FL would be seated, until he realized that if FL were seated he would not be the nominee."

I'm not sure who first stated this (Pogo??), but it's difficult to follow. i know i'm getting old.

The FL vote with it's flawed campaign was roughly 50/33/14. Unless it's winner take all, HRC would not stand to gain much if proportioned out in some % fashion. JE 's contingency comes unto play too.
Same with MI, and much more difficult for HRC to argue for a % split due to the ballot.

So, net gain for HRC is 50 dels at most. not enough to overcome BO lead.

Barack Obama as a presidential nominee is unacceptable to me. I will only vote for Hillary or Nader.

What's good for the goose, is good for the gander ;-)

I wrote earlier this morning that I don't think Hillary would take the #2 spot. I should also add that I don't see Senator Obama being pushed to the VP slot if he's ahead in delegates.

It may fall to those super delegates, who have not declared for either candidate, to gather in one of Vice President Cheney's undisclosed locations and decide the fate of their party. After all, the super delegates are supposed to be sitting at the adult table, and vote for the good of the party. That doesn't mean they should vote the way their district or state voted. Their focus should be on Democratic "success", whatever that means.

Clinton/Obama or Obama/Clinton may sound like a dream ticket to ardent supporters on Crawford's List, but some strong adults among the super delegates are going to have to decide which name goes first, and then convince the other person, why he or she should take the number two spot.

It's unfortunate that the remaining primaries and caucuses won't produce a clear winner, but at least this time every caucus and primary is important. Let the voters vote, and then let the super delegates do their job and finish the process.

John McCain and Ralph Nader as presidential candidates are unacceptable to me. I will only vote for Hillary or Obama.

I can't cut off my nose to spite my face :-)

Rez, it was me that started that - it is what he said before Hillary won Florida in the uncontested primary there - and it is hard to follow in the current delegate context because it was said when the delegate counts were virtually tied before the last run of victories that gave Obama his delegate cushion and changed his position. It was an example of his duplicitousness, not a demonstration of how Hillary could overcome his delegate lead.

Decisions hanging out there to be made:

Florida Delegates

Michigan Delegates

Edwards Endorsement - 61 delegates if Florida and Michigan are counted.

Super Delegates

Still tickled about how Obama learned to say Si Se Puede from a fictional character. Shades of Murphy Brown and Dan Quayle

Obama appears to be able to expand the map for DEMS while Hilary has shown no such ability.- Cederico

I call baloney on this statement. There is no evidence he can expand anything
more evidence that he cannot hold on to the states Kerry won- KGC

You suggesting McCain wins CA, NY, PA in a BO-JM contest.

How old are you Rez? Btw, which Sarah said hi to me?

Rez, the states at issue in that exchange were FL, OH, CO, IA, MO & VA. Cederico apparently believes Obama can bring the latter 4 to the Dem copumn in Nov. and that FL & OH don't matter.

uhhh, that would be coLumn.

"Hillary will bring home, Arkansas, Tennessee, Ohio, New Mexico and, write down this prediction...Florida.."

I think she can handily win here in Tennessee.

But pogo why would any candidate not be willing to seat the FL/MI delegation if they are the presumptive nominee(had 2025 dels without them)? i'm still confused lol

" You can always find more white women."

Thank God for the White Women????

It's a weird comment Alpha...

Alf -- You keep waving the black vote around like a giant threat. Well, here's something that you know and I know: in twenty years that vote is marginalized. And the lily white crowd ain't gonna be quite as powerful, either. This country is going to be VERY Hispanic. They have more kids, they are coming in droves and a lot will be staying -- I don't care how many fences are built.

I live in what is known as the Latino Corridor in Nashville. And I also have a fair number of Hispanics in my family. The tapestry of America is changing rapidly. I know whereof I speak.

Cederico apparently believes Obama can bring the latter 4 to the Dem column in Nov. and that FL & OH don't matter.

CO, IA, MO, VA are possible flips.. We've been through this exercise here a few week back

ET, AP has contended for about a year now (maybe more, I lose count) that Shrub will seize power and there will be no elections.

Posted by Pogo

A bit absurd wouldn't you agree?

You suggesting McCain wins CA, NY, PA in a BO-JM contest.

I did not say that in fact said any dem will carry those states...

There is no evidence he can expand anything
more evidence that he cannot hold on to the states Kerry won-KGC

which states then?

Patsi,

The Latino vote is historically low compared to their numbers. The black voting bloc is crucial in every blue state with an urban area. Ask John Kerry what would have happened in Ohio if some of the black vote hadn't voted for Bush because of the wedge gay marriage issue. Now, take away the black vote from those blue states and you have states that suddenly are competitive for Republicans.

And I'm not trying to use the black vote as a threat. I'm saying that it's a fact that black voters will NOT come out for Clinton if they feel that Barack was screwed out of the nom after winning the most delegates and votes.

This is something I was trying to post a little earlier but server was crashing. Craig's becoming a HUGE celebrity it seems. I think it's still somewhat relevant...at the very least it's relevant to Craig's topic.

What is interesting is to look at the two arguments being framed here today by Obama and Clinton supporters – both claim to have the “good of the party at heart”. But which argument does?

Obama supporters believe Hillary should drop out of the race posthaste prior to 12 states including PR having their say. This would be, they say, for the good of the party.

Hillary supporters believe she has a good case for why she should be the nominee as laid out above and in other posts prior, Obama should be the VP, and thus the democratic party would be set up for a 16 year run at the White House. We believe this would be for the good of the party.

Alpha does have a point that African American voters won’t like the Clinton supporters argument. Obama as VP would have to do a lot of work to convince them that this would give the Democratic Party the White House for 16 years and we’re all a team and all that…but it may not be enough to convince everyone…there may be hurt feelings in the AA community.

If we go with the Obama supporters argument then this is 1) contrary to the 60% of Democratic voters that think Hillary should stay in and let all the states vote. 2) It disenfranchises the states that have yet to vote 12 including PR and 3) There is still the question of the disenfranchised voters in FL and MI and who knows how that will get resolved...but Obama's rhetoric towards the states probably doesn't help his case very much going into a Fall election. A deal between the candidates gets them seated.

So if we’re doing what is “good for the party” there is definitely a possibility that there will be some hurt feelings somewhere. But if we let all the states vote and have them both on the ticket…in my view with an eye towards the 16 year plan…we will more than likely be able to pull everyone together…even the AA community.

Rez, you are right that a nominee with 2025 delegates in hand has nothing to lose by seating FL & MI, but neither candidate will likely have that at convention time - still, if he thinks he has enough delegates to to get the nomination with or without FL & MI, I suspect that if he thinks it no longer hurts him we'll see his position on those delegates change yet again.

And as I noted, while some of those states may be possible flips, they certainly aren't locks, and the last 2 elections were decided in OH & FL.

ET, I think it just may be, but AP is certainly entitled to his opinion.

More evidence he (BO) cannot hold on to the States(??) Kerry won.

Sorry,...Just trying to understand your point KGC.
It very confusing with several ongoing similar conversation.

rez
I think he would not get Michigan of the Kerry states

Alpha:

This is something else about the Ohio vote you should consider before deciding if Obama could wrap that state up:

"Obama has a huge electability problem in the state. He took a total of 5 counties, and lost in 82 counties. Even though he's able to rack up a large number of urban black voters he did terrible among white voters, winning just 34 percent...You don't win a general election in Ohio if you can only win in 5 counties."

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/3/5/71932/67043

Just something else to consider in the Ohio factor.

I do, however, think you make good points about the AA vote. I'm not one of those that is naive enough to think that...oh...they'll come around. It will be a hard group to win back if they're angry. Obama on the ticket as VP, as I said before, may not even be enough. It is a question mark. But there are a lot of factors here of which the AA vote is just one.

Aside from the arrogance of suggesting that the vote and delegate leader should step aside so that he can take the VP slot next to "Ms. Inevitable," why in the world would he ever do that? Why taint himself with the Clinton brand for 4 or 8 years? So he can end up like Al Gore and run when real Clinton fatigue has set in (again)? So that she can make him ride in the back of the bus in her adminitsration? Think she would listen to him about anything? He has no experience, right? She, on the other hand, has loads of experience like screwing up her health care proposal, living through impeachment proceedings and voting for the biggest foreign policy debacle in the country's history so she could appear "centrist" and "tough". What a joke. If she insists on tearing him down and stealing this thing and wins it--she owns it and when she can't break 45% in the polls you all will wonder what the hell happened to your ticket. If the same people who think she is so hyper-qualified want to force her on us, I'll take my senator back and have him work for us here in Illinois rather than be part of another corrupt Clinton train wreck of an administration. Her legacy and Bill's will be that she destroyed the first viable African American candidate to run for President and then couldn't close the deal in November. Can't wait.

BTW - if you gave all the uncommitted to Obama in MI they are now only about 200K apart in the popular vote. Very very close. And with 12 (including PR) to vote...it's at least worth seeing how the pop vote plays out.

What if you have a scenario where Obama has more "pledged" delegates but Clinton wins the popular vote?

They go to the convention and Clinton makes a strong case to superDs based on popular vote and the key states she won that she should be the nominee and the superDs go along - giving her enough delegates to win.

Do we still have the same problem?

Out to breakfast this morning and three older gentlemen were talking about Hillary who was on the tv screen. One said, "A year ago I wouldn't believe it, but I think I'm voting for her...I think she is tough and will fight"...The other two, one, an avowed Bush voter ,
agreed..What an interesting year..

Perhaps I shouldn't have been eavsdropping..

I have Daddy Warbucks fatigue..

Wendy and Alpha: I agree that the AA vote is up for debate if Clinton gets the nomination but at the SOTBU event there were quite a few AA women applauding for HIllary throughout the entire speech and during the Q & A. It was the (mostly young) men who sat with their hands at their sides. I think AA women will come out for her. I really do.

People generally do not talk politics much at my workplace. This morning three women have commented to me about how great it was to have Hillary win last night. They were all smiles. They really aren't anti Obama, but they are for Hillary all the way. They don't want her to quit, they want her to fight and win. By the way this is in Mass. (Teddy Kennedy country)

I think we are seeing the same bitterness from the AA Obama supporter's that we have seem from some Women Hillary supporters. These are two strong groups and both want their own candidate to win.

It is a mess, and until the DNC shows some leadership , this will continue to the bitter end. The sooner they make some sort of decision ( re: fla & mi & SD) the better it will be for the remaining contests!

This is like watching a bad poli-sci-fi movie, with no director. It doesn't get anymore screwed up then this!

McC just fixed himself a large bag of butter popcorn and an ice-cold coke.

As RR would say

Go Democrats...
polling outside of people who comment on blogs
still shows a high degree of satisfaction with either Democratic candidates.

"What if you have a scenario where Obama has more pledged delegates but Clinton wins the popular vote?"

Do we still have the same problem?"

Wendy,
With caucus voting there is not any good means of measuring pop vote for either candidate. But to suggest an answer to you question. if there is a split in pop/del counts( which is likely) the SDs are set to break it and as Daddy says let the chips fall where they may.

zumper - Hillllaarrious! Including the over-use of "breaking news." (Intentional or not...this place has the hiccoughs today.)

Craig - If Hil'ry isn't at the top of the ticket, I like Ping's idea for McCain/Romney. No way is she gonna let a man take credit for her work if she's running the show, anyway. She's done that her entire life. It's her turn to shine now.

" I'm saying that it's a fact that black voters will NOT come out for Clinton if they feel that Barack was screwed out of the nom after winning the most delegates and votes. "

I'll buy that. I want to see who actually has the most delegates when everyone has voted and that includes MI and FL in do-overs.

I despise this superdelegate concept.

As far as low Hispanic turnout -- that's been true....but I doubt it will be for long. The ones in my family are pretty damned political. And the Democrats AND Repubs will be going after that constituency.

And I sort of understand their belief that the black community is hostile to them. My son's football team, the one that camped out at my house for four years, was rabidly anti-Asian and "Mez'can" immigrants. Of course, they also had started listening to a lot of rap and were getting pretty sexist, too...especially, I am sorry to say, about black girls. (I had to have some serious conversations with them on that....)

And by the way, those inner city boys (now a good bunch of young men) are the reason I seldom use the term African American. They wanted to be called black. Disliked the AA term.

I hear you Rezdog...

I agree the caucus' are a poor measure - we have a bit of a hint though with Washington state. Obama kicked Hills butt in the caucus but she only lost by 2% in the primary - this indicates that in a general election she would fair much better.

Given that there are no caucuses in the general election.

If they work out a Hill/O' ticket

I'm just wondering if we have the same anger? I guess I'm throwing this question to Alpha - could a scenario like this - with Obama on the ticket convince the AA community to sign on.

And I also saw a lot of support for Hillary at the SOTBU - but what I noticed is that it was young people in general (men and women) that were less enthusiastic. So I'm not sure how that gets repaired.

And to Daddy War...if you look at it from a woman's perspective rather than just the AA perspective...sitting and listening to a bunch of old white guys (and hispanic) over the weekend suggest Hillary should just drop out of the race brings up a lot of angry feelings as well...so it cuts both ways.

I think she should have some fun with the 3:00 AM commercial. Set it just three hours later:

6:00 AM - U. S. President in DC

10 AM - London secenery - Prime Minister on telephone

Dito for the following
1:00 PM - Russian & Iraqi Presidents
4:00 PM - Japanese Prime Minister
6:00 PM - Chinese President

"Good Morning Gentlemen"

"Good Morning Madam President"

Fade as everyone starts talking.

David Corn at CQ: "At long last, Clinton and her strategists seemed to have gained traction with their attacks on the candidate of hope."

Oh, SPARE me.

It is truly amazing how MSM goes wall-to-wall on all this... while we've been sitting here going back and forth about HRC, BO, JM et al, the middle east is blowing up again... iraq just hosted iran's president (red carpet and a band!), and afghanistan is imploding on soldiers that are, for the most part, ignored. I hope some serious questions get asked soon... like ..Senator McCain..how would your administration handle Israel/Gaza? More of the same? Do you have a plan? That 'roadmap to peace' worked so well, do you intend to draw a new map?

BOO! (Now maybe this thing will post right.)

That's actually pretty standard; women do the work, men take the credit, women get the blame.
I don't see the shame in it to which he was inferring, sometimes you work hard before there's any glory. However, I think Obama would rather skip the work part & go straight for the glory.

jamie - I think you should contact the Clinton campaign. I like that one.

David Corn at CQ: "At long last, Clinton and her strategists seemed to have gained traction with their attacks on the candidate of hope."

Oh, SPARE me.

zumper, great stuff.
I still do not know why McCain's wife has to be RIGHT at his side all the time. Almost like he cannot do anything without her. Interesting. She always looks out of place.
I do think the Democratic party does have a problem that they need to solve sooner than later. Bush is speaking and Cindy is not around. haha Someone told her not to be right there. haha

I see that - there's lots of that going around, Carol. It took me 3 tries to refresh the page. Patience is one of my lost virtues.

I don't see how one could expect Barack to accept the second slot when he has won the most delegates, but I don't see Hillary wanting to be VP. If she's willing to accept VP, that would work, but I don't see it working the other way around when he has a virtually insurmountable lead in pledged delegates.

OOOOOPS LOL
Now I am not being nasty, but is there something wrong with McCain? Emotionally? Being a psychologist , he just seems off center. I know about his history, but are those terrible times really having an effect on him? Watching him I almost feel bad for him. Hope I dont get 4 of this comment. haha

Carol, me too, me too, me too, me too.

And I assume your McCain question was rhetorical?

" Now I am not being nasty, but is there something wrong with McCain? Emotionally? Being a psychologist , he just seems off center. I know about his history, but are those terrible times really having an effect on him? Watching him I almost feel bad for him. "

I'm with you, Carol. McCain has seemed downright senile on the trail lately.

It is truly amazing how MSM goes wall-to-wall on all this... while we've been sitting here going back and forth about HRC, BO, JM et al, the middle east is blowing up again... iraq just hosted iran's president (red carpet and a band!), and afghanistan is imploding on soldiers that are, for the most part, ignored. I hope some serious questions get asked soon... like ..Senator McCain..how would your administration handle Israel/Gaza? More of the same? Do you have a plan? That 'roadmap to peace' worked so well, do you intend to draw a new map?

i swear to god i didnt do that.. lol

Last night they said that Bill would be meeting Hillary in New York and then on to Wyo..

Tim Russert's trophy wife and tweety express their mancrushes on McBush

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2008/03/warrior-king-by-digby-bush-just.html

How old are you Rez? -
EuroTom 11:42 AM

Old enuf to know better..??

Does anybody know what the popular vote was going into last nights primary. Don't include Fl or MI.

2 issues.....it seems that the demos really do know what they are doing regarding "super" delegates....case in point, Michigan and Florida.....Hillary won Florida no matter how you cut it and the 40 or so delegates.......she also would win Michigan and pick up probably 20 or so delegates....if she has those 60 or so plus the for or so "super" that she still has.....what does that make the score.....like even?.......2nd issue......please tell me where my thinking is wrong regarding Hillary's problem answering the "war" authorization vote.......here is how I answer the question for her.......if.......the President, Vice-President, Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, Colin Powell, all military leaders, CIA, FBI, all intel and all foreign intel says that Iraq has "nukes" then WHO would not give the President the authorization to go to war? How is that not the answer?

the last primary poll in OR was Jan. And it included Edwards. The Feb general heats from Rass. show Obama handling McCain right at the edge of the Moe, while McCain "leads" Hillary by three.

I see no evidence Hillary would take OR. Obama favored.

Wendy,

The hard feelings will come about by the way in which the campaigns conduct themselves. AA voters will resent the way that Clinton will try to bring down Obama by asserting he's not ready (even though he has more foreign policy experience than Bill did at thispoint in his career) or that he is tainted by scandal (even though her track record of sleaze is much more extensive and where are those tax returns, anyway?). He simply out-hustled her in Iowa and won without tearing her apart on a personal level. She cried in NH and won and then attacked him in SC with the result that she and Bill pissed off the AA community big time and she had her clocked cleaned. She expected to win Super Tuesday by a landslide through an aloof and arrogant campaign and could only manage a tie and then lost 12 in a row. She won last night by going negative which is something Obama has tried to avoid. If you can only win by tearing the other side down then you will piss off that half off the party. Now that seems inevitable. Oh well.

Aside from her position on the war which is unforgiveable, (c'mon if she is really all that bright and experienced and progressive, why couldn't she stand up to Bush like Durbin, Feingold and others did?) the issue for me is that she has no interest in building the party and a real movement like Dean has been doing and the way Obama has. Stop and think about why her campaign floundered. She ran on the old method of top down rather than grassroots up. Her base is older voters, not new ones. She thinks it only matters to win a handful of states when we should be contesting everywhere to build a majority all around. Heck, we could even knock Ted Stevens this year and that doesn't happen by ignoring Red States and denying resources and infrastructure to the Dems that live there. Vote for Hillary and Dean is out at the DNC and McAulife and his incompetent ways are back in. Real progress.

Would love to see a woman President. Just not one who does it this way.

And for all the people here who claim that Obama didn't need to vote on the war, you need to really think about how demonized anyone who opposed the war was. Even in Chicago, Durbin was derided for his vote. It was not easy being against the war back then, but of course Hillary didn't need to face that "test" because she decided it was better to give the war a green light when anybody with any understanding of history or the region would have understood what a dubious proposition it was. Obama did and he called it correctly. That's what I want in the next Presdient. Because there will be other threats down the line "at 3:00 a.m." and the Right was scream for blood and the Dems had better be prepared to put the brakes on when that is the right thing to do.

"Would love to see a woman President. "

I'm SO sure, War Dad.

PS -- As far as putting on the brakes --- I thought Obama was into pacifying Repubs.

vadaryl

you can do the math - this does not include caucus states.

http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/2008/clinton-obama-popular-vote.html

Daddy, Obama has morphed his position on the war back to 2002, bypassing his comments that he didn't have access to the intel when he made that speech and that the intel may very well have changed his position - he didn't know - and his later remarks after he got to the senate that his position on the war wasn't far from Dumya's. He was against it before and after he was for it.

vadaryl: here's a partial tally of popular vote; major caveat: several states are not included.

(*Obama Not on Michigan Ballot; Iowa, Nevada, Washington & Maine Have Not Released Popular Vote Totals)

But maybe between this and link pogo put up....

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html

NEW THREAD

It seems to me that Hillary is alot stronger and smarter than people give her credit for. What she is effectively doing right now is framing the whole race.

She was suppose to be the candidate in the drivers seat right now, but Obama turned out to be more of a challenge than she planned for. And a large group of Party elite decided they could back Obama, therefore derailing her as nominee because they are afraid she would not be able to win in the general election. With this scenario they would have a new upstart who would need alot of help and support to complete his agenda therefore putting them in power positions behind the scenes.

So there you go, she is running against someone who is protected by so many layers of bubble wrap that she can't effectively lay a hand on him without voices from far and near crying foul. Even when no foul was intended. And good old fashion political positioning (and strong-arming) behind the scenes slowly chip away at her support even causing loyalties and friendships to be thrown under the bus.

The mistake they made was not framing their own candidate as one of substance. They decided to run on hope, and faith, and the promise of a new day in the sunshine where everyone is happy and life is perfect. They forgot that as a congresswoman from Calif. put it (loosely quoting here) " The people in my district already have hope. What they need is help." So the balloon flew to close to the sun because it didn't have enough substance to weight it down. Then everyone could see through it.

Having been thrown under the bus by the dems, Hillary has taken control of the situation. She is framing Obama. She is defining him by pointing out what the light has revealed when it was put on Obama. All lofty talk and high ideals with no structure behind it. He is not even showing that he can handle tough questions about himself well. By not putting the beef inside the bull Obama's mentors ( as well as the MSM) have let him down and allowed Hillary to be the one to expose him. She was left no choice.

I think that by the time Hillary gets done with him it would be in his and the party's best interest for Obama to run as VP. That is of course that there are no "major" problems that pop up which taint him too badly.

IMHO,

Pogo,

It may all be politically calculated, but I give Senator Obama credit for answering that he may have voted in favor of the war vote, if he had been in the Senate and had the "advantage" of receiving classified data. That acknowledgement that the Senators, who voted, had different information, seems a more honest answer than just saying, " I was against the war from the beginning, and I would have voted accordingly."

As for Senator Clinton's vote "authorizing" the President to go to war, I've long ago forgiven her for that one. It's not that I liked the vote, but as a female Democratic Senator with aspirations for the White House, she couldn't afford to vote No. I'm not saying I'm forgiving her for all those dead American soldiers and countless civilian deaths, but they lay at Bush/Cheney's doorstep, not any Senator's, Democrat or Republican.

From Carol first post:

“HOWEVER, I could not help myself to say I TOLD YOU SO.!!!!!! We delievered Ohio to Hillary.”

As they say, “Don’t count your chicken's until they are hatched”. Chuck Todd just said it is almost impossible for Clinton to get the delegates.

It would be interesting to know where you are in Ohio. I’m in Central NE Columbus suburb. But, from what I have been hearing, and it came out over the weekend straight from some of the horses mouths, is that churches in eastern and southeastern Ohio were delivering for Thunderthighs as well. They were religiously spreading that “honest to the gospel word” that Obama is Muslim. I have nothing to do but ask my family members who will swear to you that Obama is a Muslim. I intend to find the name of every single church I can that has done this and turn them into the Internal Revenue Service so they will lose their tax-free status. It is ironic that Obama was asked in Nelsonville on Sunday by a pastor if he is a Muslim. BTW, isn’t it nNxionian how Clinton answered the questions about whether she thought Obama is a Christian when here the bitch herself attends breakfast prayer sessions with Obama. That’s a true Christian hypocrite!!

This same thing happened in Ohio in ’04 when churches asked conservative speakers to come in to “address” the congregations, and there are many, many mega churches here. Isn’t that against tax laws? Paisley has some…you know the one who flies all over the country in his private jets to “spread the word”. My late husband told me and our children this happened in '04; unfortunately, he is not here to tell anyone now, but our children are and they heard it from him as well. He got up and walked out of one service because of the person who was to speak one Sunday.

Also, wonder how many of the Clinton votes were the Republican votes that Rush Limbaugh asked them on the radio to go out and vote in Ohio and Texas for Hilliary then they could beat her in the fall.

The Messiah can only win RED STATES. The race is a racist race. 90% of the black vote goes to him. Why? The Messiah keeps talking about a different kind of politics and doesn't want this to be about race then why did he play the race card after his loss in NH? Why is he pressuring BLACK super delegates like Lewis? The question is this ,would he even be in this race if he were not black or if the black population voted for issues and character rather then the color of their skin? Women and most all the rest of the population are basically split. Not the black population 90 to 10. If they were not voting on the color of their skin what does one block of people see so differently then the rest of the world? He wants to have his cake and eat it too. Keep Hillary from pointing out race or gender as long as 90% of the blacks vote for him. She would have killed him in Ohio and Texas if not for such a racial divide. He is shameless in this matter never acknowledging he played the race card. Trying to paint her as a racist. How do you think he organized the racially charged South Side of Chicago? Purely unifying the black vote against the white vote. The Messiah the Uniter I think Not!!!