Political Punch

Taylor, First of all, a media study done in February showed exactly the opposite (76% of coverage was negative toward Obama). I'm sorry - I can't cite the source. But I can support this: there are two main media watchdogs - one is Media Matters and the other is the Center for American Progress. In August, 2007, Hillary claimed at Yearly Kos that she had helped start those organizations. To quote: "institutions that I helped to start and support like Media Matters and Center for American Progress." So the watchdogs are hardly watchdogs. Media Matters is so outrageously biased that they don't even pretend - they do not cover stories where the press reports Hillary's distortions, ever, and they have an entire page devoted to the destruction of an American journalist. They are essentially a PAC, operating as a 501 (c). Their harassment of media figures who they don't like is Fox-like, and borders on violation of free speech.

I will never ever vote for Barack Obama the racist.

McCain gets my vote as well as my whole family's vote.

Hillary can run again in 4 years if she does not get the nomination & McCain wins.

Mike Kraft: this year I might actually consider casting my vote for a third-party candidate.

Navarro: Exactly So. I was for Edwards, but given Clinton or Obama, it's an easy choice. Clinton and the DLC are responsible for the disaster of 2004 and the major letdown after 2006. Whether by design or delusion, they're destroying the party.

And the way this poll is constructed overlooks the fact that many Obama supporters are people who have voted for the Greens and the Libertarians in the past.

If Obama doesn't get the nomination, it is very unlikely that I would vote for John McCain... but Mike Gravel if he becomes the Libertarian candidate? Yes. He would be a better president than Hillary Clinton.

Obama needs to exit gracefully

lulu, I understand what you're saying saying, and maybe you are referring more to one group than another, but at least speaking for myself and some people I know... the very reason we can't stomach Clinton is that we want to vote for a Democrat! We very much doubt she will move to end the war or take any of the many bold steps necessary to get us out of the mess we're all in. To give her the reins (even begrudgingly) and then watch her change nothing would be even more sickening than seeing McCain, who at least isn't pretending to be a Democrat, become president.

IMO the main reason 29% of Clinton supporters would vote for McCain over Obama is precisely because Clinton has told her supporters McCain was preferable to Obama. And the Obama 19% is probably also because Clinton has told her supporters McCain was preferable to Obama.

Kerry wasn't my choice at all, but I sucked it up and voted for him. Then again I did not think he was actually a cancer on the Democratic party. This is different.

I can’t believe you ignorant and selfish people who won’t vote democratic because your candidate is not the nominee. How could you do that to all the mothers, fathers, sons , daughters, etc. who have been killed in Iraq. How could you not want our troops home. How many more need to die by your hands if you vote for McCain. So when someone you know loses a loved one in this war they have you to thank, unbelievable.

At least half of the Obama supporters I personall know--including myself--cannot stomach the idea of voting for Clinton, and will probably stay home if that's the choice. The questions should perhaps indicate that subtlety.

Some serious damage control is going to be necessary whoever wins. I give Obama a better shot at that than Clinton, simply because he already bothers to speak to a broader spectrum of people. Clinton does not care about the Democrats who aren't in her corner and never has--I doubt she will reach out after getting the nomination and if she did it would be both transparent and awkward.

Is this Obama/Wright deal, and the overlapping Caribbean vacations, putting anyone ELSE in mind of the Bimini adventures of "post-partisan" (he supported Eisenhower in 1956) Rep. Adam Clayton Powell, Jr?

The NYPost reports that Rev. Wright (who today cancelled appearances in Florida and Texas) spent Easter in Puerto Rico, at the Ritz-Carlton -- and that, meanwhile, "Rev. Otis Moss III, used Sunday's Easter sermons to compare media focus on Wright to the Romans' persecution and crucifixion of Jesus Christ. Moss said the church will not distance itself from Wright, and that they keep an empty chair in the pulpit in his honor."

Yep. It is grim. The Political Punch blog about My Lai (later corrected) stated it pretty clearly as did the the New Yorker (3/17). ""it is tempting to say that the Clinton's campaign plan is to burn the village in order to save it."

Yes We Can - You're not reading the numbers - more Obama supporters would support Hillary, probably because of pro-choice - but that still doesn't get her the nomination and it does not put her within range of winning the national election. It's McCain -and everlasting wars.

If the DNC just seats those delegates from MI and FL or just holds revokes in those states, then there will be less need for superdelegates to decide the nominee. However, the DNC is more concerned with trying to crown The Precious and stacking the deck against Clinton than winning the elections. They and Obama supporters just refuse to understand that Wright's unpatriotic comments and Obama's refusal to renounce Wright is a deal breaker for traditional Democrats who have supported the party for decades.

Well, so saddened (and you will be, soon), perhaps I was being too simplistic for you, then. 29% of 100% of Hillary voters, leaves 71%. that simple.

Most Clinton voters, once she fails at stealing the nomination, will be smart enough to elect a President who can make a real difference over the next four years. That certainly isn't John McCain.

Obama 2008 -- Yes, WE CAN!!!

Hillary simply cannot tell the truth. Here’s her scorecard:

Admitted Lies

• Chelsea was jogging around the Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001. (She was in bed watching it on TV.)
• Hillary was named after Sir Edmund Hillary. (She admitted she was wrong. He climbed Mt. Everest five years after her birth.)
• She was under sniper fire in Bosnia. (A girl presented her with flowers at the foot of the ramp.)
• She learned in The Wall Street Journal how to make a killing in the futures market. (It didn’t cover the market back then.)

Whoppers She Won’t Confess To

• She didn’t know about the FALN pardons.
• She didn’t know that her brothers were being paid to get pardons that Clinton granted.
• Taking the White House gifts was a clerical error.
• She didn’t know that her staff would fire the travel office staff after she told them to do so.
• She didn’t know that the Peter Paul fundraiser in Hollywood in 2000 cost $700,000 more than she reported it had.
• She opposed NAFTA at the time.
• She was instrumental in the Irish peace process.
• She urged Bill to intervene in Rwanda.
• She played a role in the ’90s economic recovery.
• The billing records showed up on their own.
• She thought Bill was innocent when the Monica scandal broke.
• She was always a Yankees fan.
• She had nothing to do with the New Square Hasidic pardons (after they voted for her 1,400-12 and she attended a meeting at the White House about the pardons).
• She negotiated for the release of refugees in Macedonia (who were released the day before she got there).

With a record like that, is it any wonder that we suspect her of being less than honest and straightforward?


In a USA Today/Gallup survey when people were asked whether the canditates were “honest and trustworthy”, Senator John McCain came in first with 67percent, Senator Barrack Obama second with 63 percent and Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton came in last with 44 percent.

Don't look NOW, kids, but Mike Gravel has left the Democrats for the Libertarian Party.

ah, but how many clinton supporters will vote for gramps over CLINTON? and how many obama supporters over OBAMA?

that's the real story, especially in light of all the gop crossover going on in PA.

jackt51, i thought obama supporters were - allegedly - educated. you say 29% of hillary voters will vote mccain and that leaves 71% for your guy. very bad math.

in round numbers, half the country is dem and half of those are for hillary and half for obama that's 25% of the country for hillary and 25% for obama.

29% of hillary's 25% is about 7%. 50% plus 7% is 57% mccain, leaving 43% for obama. in electoral terms, that means a landslide of pretty much historic proportions - for mccain.

i realize i have greatly oversimplified, but sometimes one must do so to ensure that some folks can understand.

Hillary's just pushing this as her last-ditch effort to prove she's more 'electable'. By the time November arrives, no Democrat is going to vote for McCain. Independents are the question mark, and they've been supporting Obama.

As always, Hillary's math, logic and polls are...questionable.

So the Clintonista talking point of the day seems to be that Obama is UnAmerican or Anti-American and that a clinton loss will drive Clinton supporter (all 29% of them) to McCain. Well, 71% is still a majority in my math class!!!

Seems to tell me that Obama has the support of more democrats than Hillabeans does. At least more THINKING Democrats!

Obama 2008 -- Yes, WE CAN!!!

not only did that arrogant jerk say that he was not sure his voters would vote for hillary, he also said that he was sure hillary's voters would vote for him. wrong, wrong, wrong. and highly indicative of the arrogance/cockiness of this not-ready-for-prime-time player. and i emphasize "player" for he's really playing us.

the 28% is an understatement.

If the Democratic primaries were re-run today -- now that people know more about Hillobama -- Edwards would win.

Network teevee this morning is pushing Al Gore -- whom we can thank for eight years of the neo-con coup -- as a "compromise" candidate.

Democrats -- and other non-right elements -- should INSIST that the Democratic convention nominate John Edwards (who, had he not been deliberately derailed by the media, already would be the nominee).