RECENT POSTS
« Previous | Main | Next »
Blogging the West Virginia primary by The Note's Rick Klein
May 13, 2008 5:49 PM
9:29 pm ET: This is a slow-counting state -- so we'll see the numbers trickle in overnight. But this is everything she could have hoped this night would be.
That's it for tonight -- check back tomorrow, as always, for the latest in politics in The Note.
And I'll be guest-blogging through the rest of this week for Jake Tapper at "Political Punch" -- so stay tuned.
9:25 pm ET: Does it change any games? Well -- no. But the game is still being played -- which is really what Sen. Clinton can count on as a victory under the circumstances.
9:20 pm ET: This does not sound like a candidate who's looking at exit strategies -- it's a candidate who is still plotting a path to victory. Not surprising on one level. This struck me as a good, solid Clinton tone -- talking about her rationale, while not tearing Obama down.
This is her ticket to staying in the race as long as she wants -- or at least another three weeks.
9:17 pm ET: Here's a potentially stronger message to supers: "The question is, why do so many Democrats keep voting?"
9:15 pm ET: (Just noticed that the Clinton campaign has prominently placed one of the very few black West Virginians to support Hillary conveniently off Clinton's left shoulder, in camera range.)
9:14 pm ET: Your message to supers: "The White House is won in the swing states -- and I am winning the swing states."
9:11 pm ET: Now she's using 2,209 as the magic number in a victory speech! Rather remarkable -- and suggests that she's not just biding her time until she drops out.
9:09 pm ET: Took about two minutes to get to the Website shout-out. Money remains the single biggest reason that Hillary Clinton might get out of the race before June 3.
9:07 pm ET: Clinton's first words: "Like the song says, it's almost heaven."
"We know from the Bible that faith can move mountains." Yes -- but can it move superdelegates?
8:59 pm ET: Clinton's speech is -- finally -- imminent. They are milking this moment, as is their right.
8:27 pm ET: Every word from Sen. Clinton will matter here -- the way to push herself out of this race is to upset the supers. There are elements in her campaign that want her to get more aggressive, like she was a month or two ago -- but that may not be the right play any longer.
8:21 pm ET: From ABC's David Wright, traveling with the Obama campaign: Obama called Clinton to congratulate her from his campaign plane: "He didn't reach her. Left a message, we're told."
Think they have each other's direct-dial cell phone numbers? Do they text each other? "UR G8 IN WV HIL - BO."
8:16 pm ET: From ABC's Eloise Harper, who's with the Clinton campaign in Charleston tonight: "The crowd is chanting 'Its not over, Its not over!!' at the Charleston, WV Election night party. There are about 200 people here waiting for Clinton to speak. Loud cheers in the room when the TV screen announced Clinton the winner."
Her speech should start soon.
8:03 pm ET: A lot of folks chatting in the comments secion about racist voters -- surely there's some of that going on, like in those who say race is a major factor and they couldn't see themselves voting for Obama. But I'm not willing to accept that those voters are a large enough cohort to win this state for Clinton, certainly not to give her a landslide.
We have seen in state after state Obama's inability to connect with working-class Democrats who happen to be white -- that seems to be more of what's going on. West Virginia is a poor, heavily unionized state -- and remember that Al Gore and John Kerry failed to connect in the general election in the state. Nobody called that racist.
7:55 pm ET: Jason -- you make good points about what Obama can/should do next. This does transfer a piece of the psychological burden from Clinton to Obama -- the pressure shifts to him to answer this, in a broad sense. If he doesn't keep the super train running, the question will quickly become, why? That said, Clinton still has HUGELY more pressure to keep her momentum going, if this is still going to be a race.
7:48 pm ET: I'm flipping between the cable channels tonight and just struck by the tone of the coverage -- it tells you again that nothing creates the perception of momentum like a victory. One week ago, commentators all said it was over. Now, we're back to superdelegates and demographic challenges. What's changed, precisely?
7:37 pm ET: A thought on what Clinton could use right now: A handful of superdelegate endorsements to roll out -- to show, not say, that people are having second thoughts about Obama. She wouldn't need that many -- maybe three or four, with nice statements saying, we need the strongest Democrat possible to take on John McCain.
Without that, the argument remains, for now, just words.
7:32 pm ET: There you have it -- it's going to be a big win for Clinton. "She almost certainly stays in 'til Kentucky and Oregon next Tuesday," ABC's George Stephanopoulos says. I'd argue that this could keep her in longer than that -- right through June 3.
7:30 pm ET: ABC PROJECTS WEST VIRGINIA FOR CLINTON, right at poll closing time, "by a large margin," per our decision desk.
6:59 pm ET: One number to keep in the back of the mind tonight: 104,000. That's the popular-vote differential by which Obama is ahead of Clinton (including the disputed votes in Florida and Michigan). If West Virginia votes at similar rates to other states, we can expect about 270,000 ballots today. To get close to a 100,000-vote win, Clinton would have to win by better than 2-1 -- certainly possible. And if she comes close, that leaves her in striking distance for next week's contests, in Oregon (where Obama is favored), and Kentucky (where Clinton should win).
As we've said before in this space, counting Florida and Michigan (particularly Michigan) is problematic at best. But if Clinton has an argument left, if she's able to say, "more Democrats have voted for me," that's not nothing.
6:20 pm ET: Obama is facing a perfect (or perfectly terrible) demographic storm in West Virginia. A good measure of racially motivated voting, and then add this from the preliminary exit polls, per ABC's Gary Langer: "About half of voters said that at least to some extent he shares the views of his controversial former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright; fewer though, two in 10, thought he shares 'a lot' of views with Wright. About half also doubted Obama's honesty and trustworthiness, turning the tables on an attribute on which Clinton more often has come up short."
Will the Obama campaign be addressing this -- at all -- tonight? Probably not. But surely they know they have real problems, not just in West Virginia, either.6:16 pm ET: A rather prominent flag pin is on Obama's lapel, for the second straight day. Here's guessing he won't lose it until after the general election.
5:56 pm ET: Obama is spending primary night in Missouri. In the prepared text of his speech, set to begin shortly, the word "McCain" appears five times. The word "Clinton" is somehow absent.
5:52 pm ET: An interesting note, from ABC's Teddy Davis: "Early voting in West Virginia was three times higher than the last Democratic presidential primary. Today's voting, by contrast, was normal/average in most counties -- a possible sign that the coverage of the last week, which portrayed Obama as a lock on the nomination, dampened enthusiasm from the incredibly high level at which it was operating."
That would make a big Clinton win even more remarkable, no?
5:49 pm ET: Some early spin from the Obama campaign, on what could be an early night: "There is no question that Senator Clinton is going to win by huge margins in the upcoming primaries in West Virginia today and Kentucky next weeks. She has poured resources into both states and she, former President Clinton, and Chelsea Clinton have all campaigned extraordinarily hard there.
"The Clinton campaign has already been touting their margins in these states â In fact, Bill Clinton said that Hillary can win West Virginia with 80 percentâand the West Virginia Senate Majority Leader said Clinton needs to win by '80-20 or 90-10.' And in keeping large margins in perspective, it is worth noting that, while Senator Clinton will win big in West Virginia, Barack Obama won neighboring Virginia by 29 points.
"But with 49 contests behind us and only six to go -- including several states where we expect to do well -- Barack Obama leads in pledged delegates, contests won, and superdelegates. And for perspective, while 28 pledged delegates are up for grabs this evening, Obama has won the support of 27 superdelegates in the course of just the last week putting him less than 150 total delegates away from clinching the Democratic nomination."
My take -- aside from the fact that Clinton doesn't have to win by anywhere near those margins for this to be a good night for her -- that's all well and good, but none of this answers the demographic challenges that are showing themselves, again, in West Virginia. This may be as hostile an electorate as Obama will face, certainly this late in the primary season. But what makes this (expected) loss different from all others is that this is the first contest since the media has (and that's for a separate debate) delcared this race to be over. Someone forgot to tell Democratic voters in a swing state.
---------------------------
Rick Klein here from ABC's The Note. I'll be live-blogging tonight, with the latest from the exit polls, vote returns, and from our reporters in the field during the West Virginia primary.
A few thoughts -- first, as you know from reading the coverage coming into the day, this isn't about who wins, but about by how much. We can debate the margin Sen. Clinton needs to "win" by, but the very fact that she's going to win -- and probably win big -- says something important about the holes that remain in Sen. Obama's coalition. Tonight is unlikely to change the outcome of the nomination fight, but it's rather remarkable that Sen. Clinton is set to win big in a swing state despite the fact that most of the big-time media talking heads have spent the last six days declaring the race over.
Second -- an argument being advanced by the Clinton campaign regarding the importance of West Virginia. From a memo sent by the Clinton campaign today: "no Democrat has won the White House without winning West Virginia since 1916." Leaving aside the question of whether winning the primary has any relation to how you do in the general -- John Kerry did just fine in the 2004 West Virginia primary, but these weren't his peeps in the general -- this strikes me as a dangerous sort of comparison for Clinton to make.
The same comparison -- Democrats not winning without the states since 1916 -- could be said for Minnesota and Missouri as well. Your winner in both of those states? Obama.
May 13, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (418)
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/433071/29053966
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Blogging the West Virginia primary by The Note's Rick Klein:
rick, ah yes, but WV is very very different from Minnesota and Missouri, and Hillary only lost Missouri by a small margin. In the GE, Hillary will likely take Minn and MIssouri, however, Obama will NOT win WV or Kentucky. How big is that? that is HUGE. If you don't think so, let's see what you say if Obama loses the GE by 12 electoral votes. i bet he woudl thinkk WV and Kentucky are important then. Hillary will win Obama's states; Obama can NOT win Hillary's states. Plain and simple math. How bad do the Dems want the whitehouse?
Posted by: doublestandard | May 13, 2008 4:30:08 PM
The argument is full of crap. If a primary was held where there was a huge percentage of Blacks, Students, Independents, and higher income democrates then Obama would win by the same margin. The fact is they will not both be running in the general election thus to lose a primary does not mean you will lose in the general. Ask Bill Clinton!!!
Posted by: jim | May 13, 2008 4:32:53 PM
I am truly amazed by the small-mindedness of Americans and especially Democrats. Do you really think Clinton doesn't have a game plan here? Do you think she's just spending money on furthering this out of pride??
Of course not. The Clintons are politically very smart people. Hillary is hoping to squeeze out a popular vote lead against Obama. Sure, she'll try to consider MI in that, but if she manages to come close or virtually tie, let alone lead, Obama after factoring in all states but MI, she has a very good case.
Pundits and politicans are fickle. What could people say if the person who won the popular vote (even after subtracting MI) lost the nomination? There would simply be outrage, and dems would have hypocrisy on their hands.
This should be intersting. We'll see if she can catch up in popular votes.
Posted by: JA | May 13, 2008 4:39:54 PM
I was born and raised in Missouri and I can tell you a lot of Obama voters are very sorry they did not know everything that came out about Obama after that primary. Buyers remorse voters will put Missouri in the Republican Red column in November
Posted by: carlanbl | May 13, 2008 4:41:55 PM
If you really want an accurate estimate of the Obama McCain match-upin November, then you must poll the Obama win states now and check out the buyers remorse factor. Voters feel they were lied to by omission. Clinton just may have a chance to save those states for the blue column. But Obama will not get the sAME MARGIN NOW
Posted by: carlanbl | May 13, 2008 4:48:04 PM
ja - u are correct - i almost feel likethe pundits and the DNC are trying to push Obama down our throats... it should be interesting if she has the popular vote with and without MI
and what happens to all the pundits who hate the clintons but won't admit that the DNC's nominating process has most likely picked the weaker candidate... i do not think it is lost on the DNC that - if they used the repubican method - Hillary would have been the nominee a long time ago
Posted by: sokadija | May 13, 2008 4:48:13 PM
I beg the differ - I born and raised in Missouri and Obama is the choice. There is high energy for the democratic party across both lines.
Posted by: DWall | May 13, 2008 4:52:44 PM
I beg the differ - I was born and raised in Missouri and Obama is the choice. There is high energy for the democratic party across both lines.
Posted by: DWall | May 13, 2008 4:54:29 PM
The fact that the media continues to downplay every Clinton victory is very telling. When Obama wins there are banner headlines but when Clinton wins it's "so what."
Posted by: druggstohr | May 13, 2008 4:56:07 PM
Posted by: joll0586 | May 13, 2008 5:02:03 PM
Last time I checked Missouri was and is a Republican state. And the Blacks Obama needs to win in Missouri are not the majority
Posted by: carlanbl | May 13, 2008 5:03:19 PM
Hillary should win-its her demographic area-Older traditonal people. If she didn't have a landslide then I would quetion why not?
Obama is the candidate with realness-He doesn't sell his soul to politics-
GO OBAMA!
Posted by: Sophia Beck | May 13, 2008 5:05:32 PM
Hillary should win-its her demographic area-Older traditonal people. If she didn't have a landslide then I would quetion why not?
Obama is the candidate with realness-He doesn't sell his soul to politics-
GO OBAMA!
Posted by: Sophia Beck | May 13, 2008 5:05:38 PM
We need to stand up to the DNC I for one stopped sending them money... if they want to go that far left that is their problem... and its a big one... Hillary will remain dignified through the whole process and Obama and his amateur staff get all the praise for no good reason!
Posted by: NCDem | May 13, 2008 5:07:54 PM
Sophia
oh yes he did he sold his soul to poltics and rev write and the Chicago Machine and a little more than half of true democrats refuse to put up with it period!
Posted by: NCDem | May 13, 2008 5:09:29 PM
He threw his mother under the political bus. We all remember ( I could no sooner dis own Rev Wright than I could disown my White mother) HA HA HA He sold his white relatives to the devil for his political needs
Posted by: carlanbl | May 13, 2008 5:09:42 PM
Neil
you are right!
Posted by: NCDem | May 13, 2008 5:10:36 PM
Clinton supporters have to show the SD's that she is capable of raising the money for the GE in order to get them back. We need to help her retire the $20 million debt she now has and start raising GE money now. Just a few dollars at a time.
Posted by: Ron | May 13, 2008 5:10:36 PM
Carlanbl
true poliltical observers that actually know how the constitution and know political science now that that is true and much more... he is politically expedient while at the same time blaming Den CLinton for the same thing.. which is a farce... I wish people had stood up to this sooner!
Posted by: NCDem | May 13, 2008 5:13:16 PM
Ron
we will not go on to the GE till the primary process is over with Hillary will do as she wishes until then and you may not get money or support from CLinton people anyway ... the way the campaign has been run by Obamabots!
Posted by: NCDem | May 13, 2008 5:15:24 PM
Rick Klein: why don't you spare us your comments? We KNOW you are in love with OBAMA! No go read this article to find out WHY Obama will NEVER win in the GE!!
http://www.savagepolitics.com/?p=387
If you don't have time to read the whole commentary, just skip to the final paragraph:
"This season’s discussion will not be about whether racism is “right” or “wrong”, since this should be quite easy to determine, but about REALITY. It is simply naive to believe that a few Liberals will be able to change World History in a single sweep, all with the single candidacy of an unknown political candidate who so happens to be a minority. This simple reality will hand them their defeat in November, and in the process will drive a bigger racial wedge into this Nation, all of it to make these individuals feel ‘good about themselves’ and their efforts to give the Presidency to ANY non-White candidate that the Democratic Party threw their way"
So let's GET REAL!
Posted by: DMK | May 13, 2008 5:15:54 PM
Neil1785
I did the same thin in the last 24 hrs and sent out a fundraisign letter to friends... she has won the states in the electoral college that will win in Nov ... the DNC is just way too far left to even care I think
Posted by: NCDem | May 13, 2008 5:16:51 PM
If Obama was a done deal all of the superdelegates would have pledged. The fact they haven't is the most telling sign. Once Hillary has the popular vote then what? Obama Pelosi Kennedy and the rest of the gang always said you can't over turn the will of the people. Is that delegate count or voters? If they want to go with states won and delegate count then the super delegates should have to pledge to their state winner. That should go over well with Kennedy Kerry and Richardson and Pelosi too.
Posted by: maryintampa | May 13, 2008 5:17:39 PM
Obama won in Minnesota in part because it was a caucus state, and he has done well in caucuses. He has done less well in primaries and eked out a one point victory in Missouri, thanks to the fact that while blacks there voted in a bloc, whites did not.
Had the DNC not 'punished' Michigan and Florida, Clinton would have won both handily (check the polls going into the primaries there and remember Clinton wins big state primaries, Obama wins small state and black-majority state primaries), giving her four victories in January to Obama's two. With her Super Tuesday victories, she would have been well ahead.
Flip the order of the states -- put the Appalachian primaries (W. Va. and Ky.) where the Potomoc primaries were scheduled, and Clinton would be well ahead at this point.
It is almost tempting to see something like stacking the electoral deck by the DNC to assure a 'black' candidate. . . . but Dean and the DNC would never do anything like that, would they? Nor disqualify two major states out of spite?
Posted by: Jim | May 13, 2008 5:21:54 PM
Maryintampa
the thing is Pelosi,Dean et all know that full well but dotn want to alienate this "vast new electorate" that BO has... I think its a myth like the vast right wing conspiracy! I am a moderate Dem and it is true that Bill Clinton had an even tougher road than Hillary and he didnt have the nomination till June 2nd
Posted by: NCDem | May 13, 2008 5:22:25 PM
ELECTABILITY IS THE ISSUE.
==========================
OBAMA IS UNELECTABLE IN G.E.
FOR SEVERAL REASONS.
1.HE LOST ALL BIG STATES.
2.RACE.
3. TIES TO ANTI-AMERICAN PEOPLE.
4.NO EXPERIENCE.
5.THE LIST GOES ON AND ON.....
Posted by: Nicholas | May 13, 2008 5:23:12 PM
We can not be the policeman and FEMA for the world. I will vote Dem.,just to stop the war. But who's to say that Hillary or Obama won't look into the camera and say " So ", just like Pinky and the Brain ( Bush-Cheney).
Posted by: tomjoad1776 | May 13, 2008 5:23:46 PM
Jim
THe Overblown Obamabots are saying that we are being racially charged when it is reverse racism in the order thaey contrived the primary/caucuses to be... the process should go forward and we will say I told you so if they continue on the current course because it is dead wrong and will be crushed in Nov!
Posted by: NCDem | May 13, 2008 5:25:17 PM
Nicholas
the bottom line is they will not send up the nomination of a candidate that has lost al those states I think Hillary said that the last time someone had won without WV was 1912?
Posted by: NCDem | May 13, 2008 5:26:48 PM
Hillary didn't lose Minnesota or Missouri by 45%. There's a big difference.
Posted by: s.b. | May 13, 2008 5:27:54 PM
sb
and winning by a large margin in WV will make a difference ... they crowed about the SDs and the opoular vote earlier in the week to counter the let down of today... people are trying to hijack our party and we should not let them!
Posted by: NCDem | May 13, 2008 5:29:40 PM
Anyway Obama is leading for the moment. let Hillary catch him before we talk about all these expectations. Dems can't build their decision on expectations when there is reality. But try all to be democratic an accept the democratic and logic result . You don't have to be afraid whenever you are not out of law. But forcing everything according to your feeling wont help in anything but division. thans
Posted by: Ade1er | May 13, 2008 5:33:54 PM
**************************************
**************************************
**************************************
Go to:
http://www.floridademandsrepresentation.org/
Download, print, sign, and mail the petition! Spread the word!
Posted by: DMK | May 13, 2008 5:34:38 PM
NCDem.
I heard that and i hope you're right.
Obama is the worst candidate in history.
Obama is fake.
Obama is the biggest joke of the
century.
Obama is an opportunist and he wants
to seize the power in U.S and impose
the black agenda.
Posted by: Nicholas | May 13, 2008 5:37:50 PM
The Dnc is dead wrong if they actually think we are only voting for Clinton out of some kind of allegiance to the Clinton's. We are behind her because she stands for the average working white majority. If she doesn"t get the nomination Not THE DNC OR THE OBAMABOTS OR EVEN CLINTON herself can make us believe Obama is electable. McCain is more exeperienced than Obama.
Posted by: carlanbl | May 13, 2008 5:39:59 PM
You are so right Neil 1785 about the biased media....
Right in the middle of today's Internet news media articles regarding Hillary's anticipated blowout in West Virginia (one of the most beautiful states I have ever visited I might add....GO MOUNTAINEERS!!!), there was a big article posted from an Oregon newspaper bragging about how Obama leads Hillary there by 20 points in the polls and what a victory he'll have next week. Like the media can't even allow Hillary ONE day in the sun without posting some wonderful story about their golden boy.
Like you said: biased media.
The only reason so many superdelagates have gone into Obama's column during the last week is because the MEDIA (starting with Mr. Russert) began proclaiming Obama was already the Democratic nominee....simply because he won North Carolina by 14 points (earlier polls had him at 20++), which he was expected to do, and Hillary won Indiana, which she was NOT expected to do (late Zogby polls there had OBAMA ahead by 2 or more points....)
The media deck has been stacked against Hillary from day one and continues to do so........
Posted by: SandyB | May 13, 2008 5:45:46 PM
OBAMA SAYS THAT HE'S GONNA CLEAN UP/TRASH OLD TRADITIONAL POLITICS FROM WASHINGTON/WHITE HOUSE. DON'T MAJORITY OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY MEMBERS LIKE PELOSI, KENNEDY, KERRY, RICHARDSON, MCGOVERN REALIZE THAT THEY ARE ALSO PART OF TRADITIONAL POLITICS HE'S TALKING. BE VERY AFRAID OF THIS MAN. HE CAN DO THINGS WE CAN'T IMAGINE IF HE'S IN FULL POWER.
Posted by: joll0586 | May 13, 2008 5:50:31 PM
Hillary will only stand down, when the Super Delegates stand up.
West Virgina - we'd love to have you vote for Obama in the General Election. But really, it's only 5 electoral votes. Could it make a difference, of course.
So vote for Obama in the General.
Posted by: steven f | May 13, 2008 5:52:27 PM
ruseert, olberman and et al... are all u know what....
Posted by: sokadija | May 13, 2008 5:52:41 PM
The fact that a coup d'etat, took 2 elections by fraud(2000 FL,2004 OH etal), and hammered a doting MAINSCREAM media into the corner to whimper their talking points for them, means comparing history to anything from here on out, is meaningless drivel. I find the Clinton supporters fascinating, and their blog anger, quite revealing. Florida and Michigan missed out on a super primary season, that many states have enjoyed being a part of, and counting, in a big way. West Virginia, can make a statement about their state, which we will total up in a few hours. The best part of this election will be that the MAINSCREAM media hates a landslide and will do all they can to prop up McCain and avoid one. Just watch each day at how they do this and feign surprise when you call them out on the carpet, for their drooling explanations. Trust me on this prediction, folks...CASE CLOSED...NEXT!!!!!
Posted by: daddyblue | May 13, 2008 5:53:11 PM
Nicholas
Obama makes a mistake every week that shows hes an amateur like he said he had been in 57 states yesterday! When Hillary misstates something its magnified 500 percent.
Posted by: NCDem | May 13, 2008 5:54:15 PM
steven f
Im sure glad you got that off base comment in there its not true and no Clinton people are likely to vote for BO but at least as an Obamabot you said something coherent!
Posted by: NCDem | May 13, 2008 5:56:26 PM
daddyblue
lookw like you are delusional too
Posted by: NCDem | May 13, 2008 5:58:57 PM
ABC, I AM SICK OF YOU! What's that "Money for Nothing?" article on the opening page... Oh, and THAT's a TOP story!!! The day Hillary's expected to win a state, you talk about money being wasted. Shame on you!
Posted by: DMK | May 13, 2008 6:16:03 PM
NCDEM, no, not delusional but now I am totally excited that I am a DEM from NC...but how about you?????? I am from the western mountains of NC, in a county that went for OBAMA. You would be an eastern coastal variety that fawns upon jesse helms legacy, I imagine???????
Posted by: daddyblue | May 13, 2008 6:16:22 PM
Just heard on CNN that obamas campaign is saying HIllary is winning in WV because he didnt campaign there.
Talk about spin.
Wow ,when he loses General Election , I guess that will be becsuse we are all racists
Posted by: Cathy in Indiana | May 13, 2008 6:16:34 PM
Oh no people didn't forget to tell Democratic voters in a swing state, they just feel that Hillary should be and still can be the nominee.
You see its not over until August and delegates, especially super delegates can vote for who they want, no mattter what they have said in public.
Take it to the floor Hill! He's unelectable.
Posted by: s.b. | May 13, 2008 6:23:41 PM
Boy its hard to get any news on TV anymore. ALL channels are working so hard to try and spin obamas loss in WV and all we see is him on TV spouting his same old losing speech.
Need to tell Matthews that this is good time to get obama to scratch his tingle in his leg in some mens bathroom stall ,as hes not doing anything else today
Posted by: Cathy in Indiana | May 13, 2008 6:28:18 PM
I sure hope her 800.000 a day pays off for her,her 100.000 platters to impress whom ever.Elite b----.
Posted by: older white person | May 13, 2008 6:33:46 PM
WAKE UP AMERICA! What is this kindergarden stuff!? Hillary people complaining about Obama and Obama people about Hillary. And then saying if my candidate doesnt win, I will vote for Mccain. Obama and Hillary
policies are almoust the same. They are both wonderful candidates. I will be happy to vote any democrat candidate, no matter who wins...These conversations I have been following reminds me little a bit situation 2000 years go, when people wanted good man to day, and let the not-so-good-guy go.
VOTE FOR DEMOCRAT!!!
Posted by: ? | May 13, 2008 6:38:11 PM
The Democrats have the wrong nominee, plain and simple! What good is it to have a nominee that can't win any of the states that matter?! By showing that Clinton has won all of the swing states needed for a Democratic victory, it only proves that point. With all of the hostility and unfairness (not Clinton's fault by the way), it is just going to go for McCain, meaning it will only help his victory. If Obama can't win the swing states in the primary against a person he has outspent in large margins, then how can he possibly hope to win it in the fall?!!!
Posted by: A | May 13, 2008 6:39:42 PM
I cannot believe that the media is making such a huge deal about a tiny Republican state.....
Posted by: bob | May 13, 2008 6:40:23 PM
A: WV and KY do not matter for the Dems because they will still lose them. OR, where Obama is ahead by a lot, is a state that the Dems NEED to win.
Posted by: bob | May 13, 2008 6:41:45 PM
I read that the Republicans have a 1,000 page dossier on Obama. And they have had investigators in Chicago researching how Obama made his rise through politics. Would be an interesting read but I'm sure they're waiting to release information until after Obama formally gets the nomination in August. That's also why the Republicans have had a strategy to cross over and vote for Obama. http://www.thecityedition.com/Pages/Archive/Winter08/2008Election
Hillary is #1
McCain is #2
Obama is zero
Posted by: CollegeEducatedLatteDrinker | May 13, 2008 6:51:04 PM
Yeah sorry, a whole 7 points for Oregon isn't really needed to win! Try Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, Texas, something with a little more point value! Oh yeah and who won those states- that's right Clinton! As for Kentucky and WV, it will certainly be a lot closer than what the Democratic primary results will be and those 2 are only 13 points! You need 270 points, which require a lot bigger states. Besides, what about the fact that Obama had large support in the South and those are all Republican states?!
Posted by: A | May 13, 2008 6:53:05 PM
A: Texas will go Republican in the fall....as for the southern states, Obama actually has a good chance of winning Louisiana and a STRONG chance of winning Virginia and Georgia.
Posted by: bob | May 13, 2008 7:02:09 PM
Bob, go take you medication
Posted by: DMK | May 13, 2008 7:10:20 PM
Bob, go take your medication
Posted by: DMK | May 13, 2008 7:10:24 PM
DMK: Who are you to tell me what to do?
Posted by: bob | May 13, 2008 7:13:04 PM
I've read that Obama's campaign refuses to release a copy of Obama's birth certificate. If true that's curious indeed...
Posted by: ObamaNOT | May 13, 2008 7:13:27 PM
A - you just said it all. How can the DNC justify nominating Obama when he clearly cannot appeal to the MAJORITY of their own party? Not to mention the independent and swing voters. Why can't the DNC understand that a moderate candidate is the way to go for this year? Many voters have expressed buyers remorse due to the inadequate coverage from the MSM of the MANY character issues that Obama will have to overcome in the general election. Obama's lack of experience and sparse voting record will be embarrassing in the general election debates against war hero McCain. Seems like the Rushette's "Operation Chaos" is working perfectly. WAKE UP DNC AND SUPERDELS AND GET US AN ELECTABLE NOMINEE!!
Posted by: fairsuperdelegates08 | May 13, 2008 7:13:44 PM
ObamaNot: Is this the part where someone plays the X-Files theme music?
Posted by: bob | May 13, 2008 7:14:56 PM
Let's face it.
BO flashes the race card so often that it reaches a time the it backfires. From now on, there is no free ride.
For every vote, you have to earn it.
BO stays behind the podium preaching and slacking, taking off only his jacket in the last two primaries just not enough to tell people of your true self.
Congratulation, there are people who is not fooled by academic snobs.
Talking about education, I have more college degrees than two third of the OBAMA supporters. Their labeling, smearing and stereotypes are disgusting enough to turn sensible beings off.
People from West Virgin, you all may be remembered for bursting the bubble of the empty suit that claims to change the world. In fact, he changes nothing because he has ONLY been 'PRESENCE'.
Posted by: John_Lai | May 13, 2008 7:16:57 PM
The best way to shoot your own foot, every election year, well, almost, is to select a phony hypocrite as your nominee. He will then make certain the typical dems presidential nominee club growing.
Posted by: Olbermann3 | May 13, 2008 7:21:51 PM
Really?!! When was the last time a Democrat won Georgia and Virginia?!! Georgia- 1992- Clinton, before then Jimmy Carter (from Georgia), Virginia-1964. Great argument! Louisiana- last time was 1996- oh yeah again Clinton!
Posted by: A | May 13, 2008 7:22:07 PM
Please for the love of God Mr. Klein, stop with the popular vote argument including MI and FL. Must we constantly remind people that the ONLY way Hillary wins the popular vote is if she gives Obama zero, nil, nada, votes in Michigan because he was not on the ballot.
It is over..O.V.E.R! Please stop acting like she has a chance.
Posted by: Jason | May 13, 2008 7:24:02 PM
There has been only one dem presidential candidate who know about winning in general election since FDR, someone happened also named Clinton. Incidentally, didn't the name Roosevelt also got elected twice twice?
Posted by: Olbermann3 | May 13, 2008 7:26:00 PM
A: Compare the amount of votes that Obama got in the primary to the amount of votes that Mccain got in the primary....THAN YOU'LL SEE REALITY!!
Posted by: bob | May 13, 2008 7:26:03 PM
Ask Gore about counting popular votes and Florida.
Posted by: a new name | May 13, 2008 7:27:33 PM
Whatever, factor in the fact that if Obama is the nominee that many of the Democrats will vote for McCain, but thanks for trying!
Posted by: A | May 13, 2008 7:28:41 PM
Obama, the hypocrite, did not have his name on the ballot in MI because he was pandering voters in Iowa. It was his political calculation, now that he is the cry baby - mommy, my name was not on the ballot.
Posted by: a new name | May 13, 2008 7:29:54 PM
A:...in other words you lost the argument.
Posted by: bob | May 13, 2008 7:29:57 PM
Ask Gore how important winning, or in his case, losing West Virginia is. If he had held on to WV he would of won with zero votes in FL
Posted by: geevill | May 13, 2008 7:31:22 PM
HUSSEIN OBAMA HAS ZERO ELECTABILITY
IN NOVEMBER.
I'M WHITE MIDDLE CLASS EDUCATED AND
I WILL NEVER VOTE FOR OBAMA.
Posted by: Nicholas | May 13, 2008 7:32:03 PM
The racist voters of WV have spoken.
Posted by: bob | May 13, 2008 7:32:45 PM
A new name,
Actually he and John Edwards took thier names off the ballot because it was understood that the primary would not count. Only after Hillary lost her footing in the race did she try and change the rules. Fortunately, the DNC still plays by the rules.
Even if Hillary does not believe in math, it believes in her. IT'S OVER!
Posted by: Jason | May 13, 2008 7:33:03 PM
I lost the argument, how? You said compare the results that Obama won and the amount McCain won. Add McCain's numbers to Clinton's number (the people who will vote for him instead of Obama) and I doubt that is less than Obama!
Posted by: A | May 13, 2008 7:34:24 PM
How about if we stop complaiting and put our time energy to unifying the party, no matter who is the nominee. So what say you, gona keep complaiting or doing something wise? VOTE FOR DEMOCRAT!
Posted by: ? | May 13, 2008 7:34:38 PM
A: Do you honestly think EVERY SINGLE person who voted for Clinton will go to Mccain? At most 5-10%.....Clinton's supporters are mad right now, but in six months calmer heads will prevail.
Posted by: bob | May 13, 2008 7:36:17 PM
I am watching Richardson. He thinks Obama is a strong nominee??....lol
Posted by: J | May 13, 2008 7:37:39 PM
I bet had the hypocrite had his name on MI ballot and had he had the luck getting more votes, he'd be saying "ok, count em".
BO was pandering Iowa and NH voters that he would keep them voting, excuse me, caucusing, early.
HRC lost IOWA because they in Iowa believe she did not take her name off MI and she owed them something.
Posted by: a new name | May 13, 2008 7:38:12 PM
They were just saying that 75% of Hillary supporters will not be happy if Obama is the nominee. How many of that 75% do you think we will lose to the Republicans. I would venture to say quite a bit.
Posted by: J | May 13, 2008 7:40:18 PM
WOW
What a surprise!. ABC News, MSNBC, FOXNEWS and CNN pundits should be dancing in the streets.
HIllary's gleeful hate loaded race baiting campaign starting with the USA Today article WORKED. She is the white supremists darling girl. She will be held up as a hero to all the KLAN leaning racist, hate mongering bigots this side of the confederate flag. IT was easy for her. No ONE in the media called it for what it IS.
How Proud West Virginia should be!!!
Hillary's TRUE electorate!
Posted by: Cheerleader | May 13, 2008 7:41:03 PM
10% of HRC voters translate to 5% general election votes. If you give up 5% primary votes to the other party's candidate, you are doomed. There is a new typical dem Pres nominee in the making here. As a typical dem pres nominee, he loses general election big time, or by a hair margin - the amount of WV electoral votes.
Posted by: bony | May 13, 2008 7:41:42 PM
bob.
For your information 75% of Hillary's
supporters will vote McCain.
They don't tell you...i just did.
Obama is a toast!!!!!
Posted by: Nicholas | May 13, 2008 7:43:11 PM
The hillbillies have spoken.
Posted by: bob | May 13, 2008 7:44:20 PM
New Name,
Only ONE candidate has argued to count the votes in MI and FL and only then it was after she needed them because of her election plan was god awful. That's Hillary for you.
Who is the hypocrite here?