Political Punch

crisis08, You are the one making the claim that Hillary is such a fighter...if she is such a fighter she must have accomplished so much for her supporters....I have seen no results...As for Obama's accomplishments I will leave that to the more ardent Obama supporters, a group I am not one of. I am just tired of the Clintons and their arrogance and hypocrisy..

Racism is alive and well in America. There are many good white people who are not racist. However there are still a boatload of old style wanna keep the black man down style whites in America. Disgusting. Just reading this message board qualifies it. Obama is being raked over the coals as expected, but guess what he will still win the nimination. So for those of you that just can't swallow it, thake the words of advisement. Open wild, hold your nose and take it like an adult. Obama is like medicine, Hes good for You. Our only chance for a change in America !!!!

After seeing Obama give Hillary "the finger" on You Tube, I won't vote for him if he is the nominee. He has no class. He is arrogant, cocky, and immature. I'll be writing in Hillary's name in November because I believe she's the best person for the job. She has a lot of flaws, but I trust her on the economy, healthcare, and national security. Obama has nothing in his background that backs up his claim that he will provide "change".

They need to investigate if the money spent to build Mr. Wright's house came from Obama's campaign fund in return to his silence. Who knows maybe Obama built the house for his "UNCLE". Either way, I hope the superdelegates are listening and taking notice that if Obama is the nominee, DEMOCRAT will lose in general election. America would rather vote for another 4 years of Bush administration than being governed by EXTREMIST administration.
Afterall, When I am not bitter, I don't cling into GUNS, RELIGION or ANTIPATHY.
I work hard and that's why I survived all these years. SHAME ON YOU OBAMA!

if i'm not mistaken, i believe that PA is as of yet the only primary to happen after all of Obama's controversies and negatives poured out.

my question is, if we were to question Obama's supporters of past contests, ask them to vote again, would we see a decline for Obama even amongst his supporters?

i think "buyers remorse" is a real phenomenon after all these controversies. and that doesn't bode well for the fall... at all.

So what part of having a job and the economy doing well under Clinton difficult to understand? Does anyone not understand that First Lady Clinton was not President and is and was not responsible for her husbands mistakes or actions. What a bunch of Obama type and cable news type non-sense. Are many of you members of the Obama mafia?

Sen. Barak Obama and the news media want Americans to believe that his 24/7 ads on all networks, newspapers, and all black stations, posted ads 3 to 1 over Sen. Hillary Clinton.

The math does not match what Obama and the news media wants Americans to believe. Just look at one of Obama flyers mailed to potential voters. Then try to convince anyone that anyone other than Obama is truly negative.

@ Rick

I don't see how you got that I am a racist from what I posted. I support Obama. In any case, negatives are negatives whether they apply to an opinion poll about Clinton or Bush. High negatives will hurt her in the general election coming up against a war hero. IMHO she is not electable for this reason and has not run a respectable campaign as McCain has promised to do. He spoke out against the North Carolina ad. She has not.

Polls for PA indicated a 5 to 6 point advantage for Clinton. It was not a tie. Her own campaign figured she'd be ahead by 11 points.

You can read the complete poll in pdf format online. Links don't come up in this blog. Just google 'abc/post' 'poll' '54%' 'pdf'. It will be the second link that comes up on the page.

Indy_voter,

Could you mention of Obama's accomplishment?
CBS news once reported both of their acomplishment.
Obama could not press any button, he failed most of them.

Rick, I guess I am racist or woman hater or whatever since I am one of the 54% who have an unfavorable opinion of Hillary. Or maybe I am just an "average white guy" living in the South who is tired of Clinton versions of truth.

crisis08, I am tired of folks calling Hillary a "fighter". The only thing she is fighting for is her own political future. When has she ever fought for something that has not benefitted her politically? When has she ever won one of those "fights". Fighting does not equal accomplishment.

crisis08, I am tired of folks calling Hillary a "fighter". The only thing she is fighting for is her own political future. When has she ever fought for something that has not benefitted her politically? When has she ever won one of those "fights". Fighting does not equal accomplishment.

An ABC/Post poll from 4-16-08 showed that 54% of voters had an unfavorable view of Clinton, up from 40% in January. "No presidential candidate with negatives in the high 40s, let alone in the mid 50s, is going anywhere after an election but home."

BB,

She will do anything to win.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

She will work harder and harder even she ran out of money she still won in PA. That's how we see a fighter.
She will fight for working class people and poor people if she becomes
president.

Senator Clinton will do anything to win and she can not be TRUSTED!!!!!!!!!!!!

pp,Calli girl,

well said.

I do genuinely believe that recent history tells is that experienced candidates are just as likely to get shot down as fresh ones (if not more so!) by the GOP attack dogs. Both Gore and Kerry had a long list of positive achievements behind them, far longer many would say than Hillary Clinton's, and both got harsh treatment. Actually I think the best candidates to run against the attack machine are fairly less well known candidates (Bill Clinton in 1992 didn't get nearly as much venom, all things taken into account, as the last 2 democratic party candidates.) (Mathew Dowd wrote about this in some detail on this very website.) And why do you suppose the right wing media, and the GOP attack machine, aren't keeping there powder dry on Obama? Maybe they want Obama out of the picture so they can shoot at Clinton? Surely if he was such a flawed candidate they would be happy to face him and happy to lay off the attacks till he has the nomination.

I feel the comparrison to McGovern, or Dukakis for that matter is a bit harsh in general. Both McGivern and Dukakis were running fairly well at various points in the campaign. McGovern's campaign fell apart with a terrible VP pick, Dukakis led by 18 points coming out of the DNC, I don't think its fair right now to be looking at voting patterns and assuming they are set until november. McCain is getting a free ride right now, what happens when the Democratic attack machine starts really firing at him? What happens if the RNC isn't as united as it might be behind McCain?

East Coast,

Do you know he just refused to have another debate in Oregon?
Proven that he can not delivered many issues including economy problem on the debate.
So,,it's not ABC's fault.
That's his problem himself, he only agrees to take a debate with his darling media.

Etch,

I don't watch FoxNews, but I do read many sources. Both left, right, and alternative.

However, most of the info about Obama can be found in Chicago newspapers or other local sources.

In past boards, I also posted about Obama taking credit for other people's work or coming into committees asking questions that have already been settled, in an attempt to look like he contributed. That was in the NYT and sourced by Sen Spector and apparently was within the committee transcripts. Spector also points to Hillary as doing such things.

Of course Spector came up with the single bullet theory, and the NYT help to lie us into war, so you can decide for yourself.

Read something beyond his website and there is a lot of information out there on everyone.

Cali girl, has anything you said about Obama in ANY of your ten or so posts here been true?? Where the hell are you getting your "facts"? Fox news??

I am a rural, small-town American. I’m not bitter. I don’t carry a gun but I do believe in the Holy Bible and God.

Hillary won in Pennsylvania, despite being outspent by Obama's “mega bucks” and bombardment on TV, radio, internet ads, phone calls, etc., etc., because we believe Hillary to be the better candidate --- pure and simple. True Americans cannot be bought!

Hillary was GREAT in the Pennsylvania debate --- Obama did quite poorly.

OBAMA HAS REFUSED TO DEBATE IN NORTH CAROLINA. He apparently can only read a pretty scripted speech from a teleprompter --- And he wants to run our country??? NO WAY!

Does he plan to have Jeremiah Wright spewing “God Damn America” from the White House? It’s bad enough he did it in a church of God.

Are Obama’s frequent visitors going to be their anti-American, terrorist friends: bomber Ayers, Farrakhan, Rezko, among others?

We need someone to show respect to ALL Americans, regardless of where they live.

GOD BLESS AMERICA --- HILLARY 2008!

again,
to make the point for the general election and the person winning the larger states. in the general election the delegates are doled out as winner-take-all, not proportionally as in the primary. if you go back and add the total delegates for each state to the candidate with the most vates in that state(without super delegates) it comes out something like:

hillary 1800+ delegates

bho 1100+ delegates.

so, who will do better in the general election??????????

dl,

The Superdelegates don't want to end this now, as much as you think. They get 'goodies' from the candidates. Obama has spent three times as much as Hillary has on Superdelegates.

So, it isn't in their best interests to come out now, but rather wait until the country has spoken. They have to get re-elected as well, so it would be stupid to come out against Hillary if their district actually votes for.

This ruse that Superdelegates are going to shoot themselves in the foot is being spewed by people who don't understand the process.

Or who are trying to help Obama and his typical campaign tactic of clearing the rolls for himself.

dl,
much of your vitriole is mute as, hard to believe from you and many others, hillary is running, not "the clintons". Most the things you mention are bill's issues. I do know my politics! why don't you try googling the acccomplishments of the clinton years and just see how long the list is.
then, if you to just talk issues, and you choose to lump the "clintons" together, try to come up with even 5 sSIGNIFICANT things bho has down.
You are blinded by your hate for the clintons, and your blind adoration of an empty vessel.

dl,

Obama has been messing with rules all over the country too.

Blame one but not the other...doesn't fly with me.

Hillary has never sued other Democratic candidates completely off of the rolls however.

That is subverting choice and democracy, like it or not.

dl,

As much as you want to pretend they didn't the Clintons tried to implement their campaign promises.

The first hundred days they went into office they went through the govt and took out wasteful duplicate govt programs saving huge amounts of tax dollars. His wife tried to get her health care package through and despite the fact that she couldn't, a lot of people made it clear that they wouldn't help a First Lady make any policy changes. However, they still tried to fix what was clearly broken, the health care industry, last century.

He went through and worked with Republicans on the needed welfare reform and his policies help raise incomes $7000.

Clinton helped stablize Mexico and their peso and helped Russia as well.

Peace and prosperity...it was so horrible...lol

Those are just off the top of my head.

dl

I believe it is the Hunt Commission, of which Geraldine Ferraro was a made a member for some reason, presumably due to her stature. We agree that the unpledged delegates have a right to vote for whomever they wish. My point is that intimidation and threats are counter-productive, and both candidates should be encouraged to take and answer all questions put to them. That way, the unpledged delegates will be better informed. No one need take my advice.

and pp ...they spent more than that and they did get something...and once they had that that is what they focused on ...the clinton scandals are not, as much as Hillary supporters keep pretending they are, ...they are not all wrapped up with happy endings, answers and bows. In fact very few of them are.

and actually you probably don't even know your caniddate to know what all the scandals are...you might want to find out...

becasue most of America doesn't knowthem either outside of the word "whitewater" something about cattlefutures...and oh yeah that Monica stuff that went on...

that is three in a list of 50, 60?...more... and they deal with a lot of differing shady issues, ethics problems from every corner and more "coincidences" than you have ever seen from 2 people. These are people that have been caught lying from everywhere on the stand to the tv to each other.

They do not have a chance of bringing that back to the whitehouse.

pp "where is the money from"?

You are kidding...you are asking that about Obama...lol did you realize that your candidate is Hillary (and her husband let me fly around the world with some really bad leaders and get them things to have them help me) ...the woman who has not released LAST years tax returns or anything from the Clinton Library...

we hav eno idea what very large strings the Clintons have set up...and the way they are campaigning ...that they have to have this... might just be , don't ya think, that they promised some pretty hefty favors and if they don't win someheads may roll.

Obama donor questions you are funny Hillary person... pshaw.

etch....
bho would be swift boated from"sea to shining sea," if the nominee. but it would not matter since 1/4 or more of hillary supporters will vote mccain instead of bho, anyway.

All of Hillary's baggage are not out there. Obama could run ads about Whitewater, or "I chose not to cook", or her sitting at Walmart meetings during Union bashing, clapping with approval, or Travelgate, or stealing stuff from the WHitehouse on the way out the door, or the pardons-for-money scandal... the list GOES ON.

People know about these things, but Obama graciously has not reminded people of these things. A few ads reliving the mess of the 90s... the losing Congress to Republicans, the IMPEACHMENT trial, the disbarred former president coaching Hillary. There is more and more and more.

If you think Republicans won't run on this stuff, you're crazy. It's one thing to say people are aware of her baggage, but the public has not been reminded of these things lately. Maybe it should...

Hillary at this point is either

1. just dumb and selfish because there is no way she can win. (and you are right about McCain going after the ad and taking the high road...Hillary will never win)

2.smart and selfish because she wants to trach the party, the country her rivals thinking she will run again in 2012...you know after things get worse with the economy because we will still be in a war and Roe vs. Wade is overturned by McCain...

because as I said you can not name me one time where the Clintons had the choice between doing the right thing for the country and doing the right thing for themselves ...where they chose the country over themselves.

yes, dl, it worries me alot! we are talking known acquantences with terrorists in this country, having them fundraise for you(where is the money from), and even being on your website with your wife as a "friend" of the terrorist!
Starr and his group spent years and 40 million dollars looking for something to get the clintons on. they did not. that is far more investigation in to shadiness then we will ever get about obama, et al.

LA,

I look at all of the candidates equally, and was raised that it was our civic duty to do so without taking into account their party affliation or anything else.

I don't expect to change anyone's view on Obama especially when it is clear they haven't looked into him.

However, there are a lot of people out there who are new to watching this political game. If I can inspire any of them to do research on ALL of the candidates then that is a good thing.

The fact of the matter, even looking into Clinton's scandals of the past can help people decide what is a valid scandal in Obama's background, or Dubya's, or Bush 41, Reagan, etc.

If you actually pay attention and read through boring govt documents, and the odd sentence out of a newspaper, while staying on top of the results, you can start to even predict what will happen despite what is coming out of the candidate's mouths.

When Dubya ran on no nation building, it was clear he was lying when he surrounded himself with PNAC members, that Iraq would be in his crosshairs despite campaign promises. Within a few short weeks he confirmed my prediction and lobbed cruise missles at Saddam telling him that Dubya was coming for him.

You might not understand that type of commitment to watching these people, but like I said it is our civic duty to research and pay attention past what the favorite cable network, or newspaper, or political party, is trying to pass off on Americans.

What you see as 'transparent and disingenuous' is a lifelong, family tradition of taking our civic duty seriously. You should know, I usually hang out in political debate forums and trade ideas with people from all sorts of backgrounds. This is actually the first blog I've posted on that isn't diverse with opinions but mostly focused on one party.

Sorry but I view the spreading information as helping others find a place to start their own research. Not as a way to change someone's mind.

John McCain just pulled a negative campaign ad against Obama because wants to run a "clean" campaign! Can you imagine what happens if Clinton wins the nomination, and in facing McCain she comes off as the negative campaigner, and McCain as the positive campaigner?? We will have democrats abandoning us in droves to join McCain!! McCain is not stupid, and he saw the power of Positive campaigning when its done right by Obama. The clintons can't help but be aggressive and negative, and the result will be that he will "obliterate" her(to quote her recent sickening comments on Iran).

pp are you concerned with Maggie Williams cleaning Vince Foster's office the day after his suicide ...before nay investigation could happen and it was not her job and the only person who approved of it ..was HIllary.

shall we start there and go down the lists...

If you think we should look into these things shouldn't we hear these from the candidates mouths...because Hillary hasn'tbeen asked a single question about any of those questionable relationships and returned funds and fines and investigations and censures and fund raiser (MrHsu...Mr. paul)...I mean what was she doing with those men...okay they are bad men and she was fined... but what was she doing hanging out with them?

"should we be concerned?"

I personally want to hear more about the issues that are taking food off the table...and issues of our relationship and image in the world as more people are going hungry and with our image becoming more and more of that of an imperialist country... what that is going to do to terrorist numbers?

or how she sees similarities in using an arms race tacticwit Iran (a country that unlike Russia and reagan where they had massive amounts of warheads they could not keep up with...Iran does not have nuclear weapons but there is one sure quick way to help them get them...threaten them with obliteration by nuclear weapons)

but if you would like to focus on the candidates possible "shady dealing" sure...lets start with the ones that we know there already is investigations or fines or lawsuits with...where the candidate was the defense.

to make the point for the general election and the person winning the larger states. in the general election the delegates are doled out as winner-take-all, not proportionally as in the primary. if you go back and add the total delegates for each state to the candidate with the most vates in that state(without super delegates) it comes out something like:

hillary 1800+ delegates

bho 1100+ delegates.

so, who will do better in the general election??????????

Obama's taking a day off. Maybe Mrs. Obama will make him withdraw.

ABOUT FLORIDA:

THE ONLY DEMOCRAT TO CAMPAIGN THERE ..ALBEIT HE CLAIMS IT WAS "BY ACCIDENT".. WAS OBAMA..

... AND YET.... DESPITE HER 'NEGATIVISM'... HILLARY WON!

GO FIGURE!

Hillary can't win. Period. Veep is the best solution.

Liberal Academis yes it is true that the superdelegates can vote their will...but it is also true their vote and creation and purpose stemming from the creation of the committee that created them...stated in their directive that, that committee was created to make the party MORE democratic not less...and to reinforce culpability to the voters and members of the party. there fore to represent members of the party's will.

Go look up why the Sloan Committee was created...not what Ferraro keeps telling people it's creation was but the documents that outline the purpose of the committee itself and why the superdelegates were created.

It was not for them to overturn the votes as many keep trying to spin now.

It was to make sure that things like a candidate who agreed to play by the rules whose name was on a beauty pageant election...or on a ballot where other peoples weren't did not find some way of "workign the rules" and didn't try to work numbers that were in direct violation of the spirit of the election.

So if anyone should be overruled it is Hillary... in fact if everyone actually read those documents they would see it is almost the supers responsibility to end this for Hillary now because her campaign is not in the direct purpose of helping the party when she can't beat him in pledged delegates which in the spirit of the Sloan committee is the direction the supers are supposed to vote for barring manipulation of the system.

can you say manchurian candidate....

Cindy, one thing we have leaned this go around is we can not trust the polls.

And that is not a problem Silvia, vote as you please, as that is your right.

Understand its a two-way street. I wouldn't vote for hillary for class clown. Even though she fits that description perfectly at this moment in time. As she whines about seating MI and FL in unfair election procedures. The rules only apply to the black guy.

So yes, you have the right to vote for hillary for class clown.

calli girl

"one set of rules for him and another for everybody else"

and yuo are trying to say that is Obama?

I do not think you are even close.

You aresupporting hillary right? and you are trying to say it is "OBAMA" that has 2 sets of rules..

It is well documented that the system of counting delegates that was worked on 2 and a half years ago was created by the people that are running Hillary's campaign! It is well documented that she said they would not count and she agreed when she thought it didn't matter...because it didn't affect HER.

Now we have a situation where she may get hurt so she suddenly cares about her voters. Does that not disgust you? She only cares about your vote when it effects HER. Just like everything else. She wants rules when they protect HER.

I would love for you to tell me one...just ONE... one time where the Clintons had the choice of hurting themselves or hurting the nation where they put the nation first.

When have they ever put the welfare of anyone, anything, values, morals, voters, family, children, friends ahead of their own welfare.

Name me one. Does it not scare you that unless you make one up...you can't.

Even this Clinton Foundation where all their charitable contribution went has not really distributed anything of substance...but Bill has sure flown all over the world on it...and while he was there you know he might as well raise money for his library and support for his wife's campaign.

Name me one time where they had the choice not to hurt the nation, their party or an associate or hurt themselves when they didn't choose the CLINTONS

and that sums up how you all are being once again duped in this race... it is all about the Clintons...not the issues.

LOM, The voting in both FL and MI ran with only Clinton on the ballot in Michigan, and no campaigning done in either. There is no way these votes were fair and should not count, and their delegates should NOT be seated unless a re-vote was planned. There were clear rules and both states violate them knowing fully well what would happen, just to flex their muscles and force the party to move them up. This is typical of a red state! They shouldn't count and they should be further punished for breaking the rules. Period! Are we going to start seeing some more Clinton tears to seat the Florida delegates now? Give me a break! Clinton is behind and the only way she can get ahead is by trashing Obama as she's been doing since the start. I'm disgusted.

TO YOUNG COLLEGE-STUDENT VOTERS: Please learn from the mistakes of the past. I am a liberal academic, have great respect for college students, and was a college student, myself, during the Weather Underground years. As students, we shouted down any attempts to make our anti-war candidate account for his positions before he ran against the Republican opponent. We were aggressive in demanding that middle-America see things as we, in our idealism, did ("Power to the People!") Having little handle on how conservative most Americans were (compared to us), and having been teenagers when the last Republican machine did it's thing, we were shocked to find out that "right is might" didn't quite make it when our candidate won Massachusettes (and that's all.)

I am all for young voters choosing their candidate for whatever reason they wish. The point is that I also hope that young voters acknowledge that Superdelegates have a right to vote for the candidate that they want to vote for for whatever reason they choose. Please avoid making the mistake we did in 1972 - using threats and intimidation to force the nomination of a candidate who may be least likely to win in the General Election. While there is no draft, partly due to no one wishing to address the issue of Selective Service registration for women, important student loan legislation, the high cost of tuition and other economic policies make it important to honestly assess the "electability" of each Democrat. Please encourage you favorite to answer questions put to him/her rather than shouting down the questioners.

Interesting that subverting democracy is playing by the rules.

Playing by the rules, means he should let other Democratic candidates run against him and give voters their right to choose.

As usual one set of rules for Obama....another set for everyone else.

"obama would not have won many early states if the media had done their job... now that all of his skeletons are out of the closet he can't win dem primary"

There is NO reason to believe "all of his skeletons are out of the closet" -- and "the media" is certainly responsible for that, and for cutting John Edwards out of the election.

Is the Democratic "leadership" determined to throw the election to the Republicans AGAIN? It seems so, and one constant is the John Kerry factor. Remember that Kerry (with a big assist from the mass media) sabotaged Dean at the ... Iowa caucuses, which is just where the media manufactured the Obama "phenomenon".

If the primaries were beginning NOW, how different the outcome would be! The arguments over "popular vote" -- I'm not up-to-speed on who's claiming WHAT on this today -- should take this, and the difference between open and closed primaries, into account.

If I were Howard Dean, I believe I'd have a nationwide poll of DEMOCRATS only, as to which original Democratic candidate they'd prefer, knowing what they know NOW (we certainly know a lot more about Obama, Bill Richardson and Dennis Kucinich at this point; Mike Gravel has left the Democratic Party to run as a Libertarian). Just for the sake of history, you know.

the way to get the Democrats

Ed Rollins said something interesting on CNN. It doesn't matter if Obama wins the N.C. primary because the republicans will win it in Nov. I think you could say that about many of the states Obama has won.

Clinton/Obama '08--unstoppable

Obama alone--we're sunk. Those two GOP negative ads yesterday are just the beginning.

How is what Alice Palmer did any different than what hillary is doing now? Changing the rules in midstream is still changing the rules to benefit you when you're not winning.

Alice set him up to take her place, but when she didn't win her race, she wanted to come back. After all the time and energy he put in, I wouldn't have quit either. And I believe most people would have done the same thing.

If Obama is elected president, who do you think he'll pardon on his way out. All the Islamic terrorists now under lock and key perhaps?

lol Andrea....

and I see how easy it is for you to paint someone into a box....angry and mean?

Apparently you are one of those that doesn't believe what the hillary campaign and hillary herself has done in this election cycle to be considered angry and mean.

What they have done for me?

I don't have 110 million dollars, so what they have 'done' has been to the benefit of themselves. Have you seen your share of 110 million for voting for them??

What I DO see is they have used us for their benefit. When we were no longer useful, or we didn't conform as they hoped, they kicked us.

NIckberry,

Thanks for the analysis. I would add that many voters who voted Obama in the primaries would now take back that vote based on later disclosures. He just was not vetted before being crammed down the throats of the voters. HOPE, CHANGE? More like FURY, ANARCHY, a la Ayers, Dohrn.

obama would not have won many early states if the media had done their job... fro 16 months hillary got hammered and obama got a free ride... now that all of his skeletons are out of the closet he can't win dem primary... smells like mcgovern and dukakis and gore and kerry.. the ultra liberal democrats are going to give the whouse to mccain... vote hillary.

The Dems' fight is the fight between anti-clintons and pro-clintons...

Every one knew Obama is just a puppet used by anti-clintons...

obama is a McGovern clone, the superdelagates were created as a deterent against this kind of candidate. A candidate who is unelectable in the GE.

"Obama used the political system to get rid of his opponent(s) in that particular [election]. But because he used it, and it worked for him, its now considered cheating??"

If not "cheating", betraying one's (black) female mentor to run with rich white people doesn't exactly compute with the tender candidate's claim to be above politics-as-usual.

I don't suppose un-rich young and/or black voters in North Carolina and Indiana will become familiar with the details of this story -- but if they DID know about it, the frothy post-partisan's "black skin privilege" might not do him any good.

This guy may look "black", but so what?

Obama may not win the crucial BIG states...

Obama showed in Pennsylvania that he cannot win the conservative (Reagan) Democrat vote (Hillary 55% to Obama 45%). In the polls, McCain beats Obama 48% to 40%. A Democrat cannot win the general if they lose Pennsylvania.

In Florida... Obama lost in the primary to Hillary and whines that he did not campaign there and no one knew him. First... Obama DID campaign there by running national ads for three weeks and saying that those ads were for South Carolina. Second...Florida does know him now, but he loses in the polls to McCain (53%-38%) which is eerily similar to Hillary's primary win (50%-33%)... and we know how important Florida is in the general election.

In Massachusetts.... Hillary beat Obama (56% to 41%)... yet had backing from the "political machine" of the Governor and both longtime Senators. And McCain is able to tie Obama in the polls, while Hillary beats McCain 56%-41% (notably equal to her defeat over Obama). And here is the Obama spin... He thinks that as a Democrat that he automatically will win Massachusetts, but the numbers right now do not indicate such.

In Ohio... Hillary beat Obama (54%-44%) and the polls show Hillary beating McCain (53%-42%) whereas McCain beats Obama 47% to 45% and 47% to 40%.

In Missouri... Obama beat Hillary (49% to 48%)... In the polls McCain beats Obama 50% to 42%.... Clinton essentially ties McCain 47% to 46%.

The pattern is evident... Obama does not do well with certain demographics which are very influential in determining who wins crucial states in the general election.

FEAR??? That ad was great. It spoke to the people of Pennsylvania who being older experienced the Depression, Pearl Harbor, as well as a 9-11 plane crashing. And why is it wrong to bring up Osama bin Laden... who to date is still free???... That used to be a regular image for bashing Bush.

Not fear politics, but addressing experience and leadership. Hillary is now being "begrudgingly respected" by the GOP pundits for her toughness and tenacity.

Hillary is connecting with the voters who will decide the general election... Obama and his ilk keep complaining that these voters are just not smart enough and/or are responding emotionally.

P.S. The Bosnia "fish" story or Bill's alleged slip-ups do not compare to his 20+ year association with Wright or his comparing Senator Coburn to a guy who bombed public buildings.

No Obama used the legal system to subvert democracy and steal from the voters a choice of leaders.

Rule changes...lol. The Republicans control Florida and are the ones who moved the race up. It wasn't a Democratic choice. Even though it isn't widely reported they were only supposed to lose 1/2 of their delegates. Not all of them.

Obama was just a coward to pull his name off of the rolls in Michigan while he still campaigned for uncommitted votes.

Obama isn't running this fair campaign at all, it is consistant with all of his campaigns however. Cowardly tactics.

He and his handlers went so far as to open closed divorce cases to smear the other candidates. Both candidates had children and private divorce case records are never opened to the public because of the children.

Obama help to smeared these children's parents and release all their dirty laundry and then claims false political ground with it and the claim he is upbove such tactics.

It is a flat out lie and why Obama isn't a strong candidate. The only way he wins is by subverting democracy.

Like it or not...

cali girl,

I didn't 'smear' bill clinton....he smeared himself. It is not a smear to talk about him pardoning terrorists. I didn't make it up....he did pardon terrorists...hispanic terrorists. Since you have read up on all the republican talking points, you are literate enough to read up on that I'm sure. Don't just avoid it because it doesn't work for you.

Ayers has not endorsed Obama and Ayers has not donated to Senator Obama's campaign. They are/were collegues in the same university, live in the same neighborhood.
So again...what is it here, besides guilt by association? They know each other. What has Obama done or said that would give the impression he believes anything having to do with the Weather Underground??

Absolutely nothing. Which makes you look even more transparent....but I'm sure you'll keep trying.

looks like the so called big tent of the democrat party is more polarizing than the republican party could ever be... the fact of the matter is that the backbone of the party...working class people... are being pushed out ....these are the people you need to win elections so you better start talking to them no at them... Hillary gets it

Shore....Obama used the political system to get rid of his opponent(s) in that particular. But because he used it, and it worked for him, its now considered cheating??

No...what hillary clinton is attempting to do is cheating. Changing the rules in mid-game is considered cheating. That which most of you don't seem to have a problem with.

No LA in Indiana,

Your double standard is blatant, you accuse people of not understanding the issue of his church simply because his skin is brown, but in the next paragraph you complain about Clinton's ties with Arabs. Hello!? You just smeared a President with some odd implication for working with Arabs!? That is a bit hypocritical to say the least.

The issue with Ayers is far more that $200 donation. Obama was presented by his mentor Alice Palmer to Ayers and his wife, in order for Obama to take over her seat, since she was running for another office. Ayer had a coming out party to introduce Obama and kick off his political career. When his mentor didn't succeed in that race, Obama wouldn't give up his race for her seat and even had to SUE to get her off the rolls so he wouldn't have to run against an incumbant. As well as all the other Dems who were running. That isn't democracy or a man who believes in himself, that is a cowardly, back stabbing move.

Then we have Ayers tied to Commonwealth Edison owned by Exelon the largest utility in Illinois who is supporting Obama, and in much higher amounts than $200. They have a nuclear waste probelm, which they want to force on other states. Despite the fact that Obama claims he is against Yucca Mountain, that is exactly what Exelon wants to do. Is force Nevada and every state in between to host their nuclear waste on thier road and rails, in order to get to Yucca Mountain. Frankly, Exelon should have a plan to deal with their own nuclear waste within it's own business plan, not a Presidential business plan.

And this belief that only the Clintons support the NAFTA agreements down south are naive, and even Obama's own record and statements on free trade with various countries is all over the place. Anyone who really believes that Obama will take us out of any of these agreements frankly hasn't been paying attention since George H W Bush has been in office.

LA in Indiana,
I have been reading these truly angry and mean comments from you for the past hour about the Clintons and I have to wonder, how you can simply write off all the work the Clintons have done over the course of their lives on behalf of civil rights and progress for African Americans?

jackie

So what? Clinton won 60 of 67 counties.

Right on Shorwoodian! I live in Wisconsin too and agree that if the press had attempted to vet him earlier we would have seen diffrent results here and many other states as well. The MSM has certainly affected this primary with their biased reporting.