Obama is good at talking but at thinking. If he was elected president I believe this country would be in a disaster. He doesn't know the first step about foreign policy, or what changes should be made. That's a phony speech he's giving to the college students and they are eating it up because they don't know any better. Do you think he's going to do what he says? The answer is no. His idea of change from old politics is electing a black president from a white president. That's what his change is all about. But I read between his lines because I have voted for many, many presidents and he is the most cunning in speaking and saying nothing.

Paul,
""Let the Republican outlets get all fired up over the new campaign manager, and the Clintons can fall back into impeachment defense mode, with a hope that most Democrats will rally around them""

There will no defending the Clinton's this time around.

That Ring Wing conspiracy stuff, exist in the minds of the Clinton's only - well them and their die-hard supporters. Any Dem. of reasonable intelligence will flat out refuse any sort of conspiracy talk, Investigation from Day 1, partisan divide, etc.

I can name 15 reasons off the top of my head why she is not a good candidate, dislike is not among them. I don't dislike Hillary at all. I just happen to like the party philosophy and the nation much better. And I think for the party and the nation too have success, Hillary should not be the nominee.

If by some fluke she is the nominee, there won't be ANY defending of them by me. I won't even listen to ANYTHING they have to say. Heard it before, don't need a repeat.

Hillary is struggling, it's one thing to change around some staff, maybe change what they're working on. However, at a time when you're approaching whats going to make or break your campaign and you change your manager. That doesn't look too friendly or too confident to me. Something of that says "I feel you're incompetent to lead us to victory in these coming primaries so I'm going to find someone who can."

Also, in reference to the people talking about how she didn't even mention or thank the people who were coming out and voting and putting their life savings on the line in donations for her. She commented she had raised $10 mil in donations since Feb 1st... that's just talking money, thats not thanking those who gave it. Obama on the contrary has every time came out, maybe on not that night but the next speech he gives and thanked everyone who has continued to donate or continued to support him and hasn't change his stance on the issues at hand. I would also like to remind people reading this who start talking about Hillary being more experienced.. maybe not in this article but others. Martin Luther King didn't have experience, Rosa Parks didn't have experience, John F. Kennedy didn't have experience, Gandhi nor Anne Frank had experience when they took the lead and changed the world.

Hillary you have been scapegoated by the M?dia. But now you have a new manager so there much happy with her but your already screwed. Time for change I will seek McCain as was my first thought he is a conservative and does not cherry pick as they do for you and Obama.

All the states Obama won are nothing compared to the big states that Hillary won and that he wanted to win and couldn't. And its not how many states you win its the total delegates you have with the superdelegates and she is ahead in superdelegates. Every time Obama wins a state Hillary gets some of the delegates which increases her total. And changing of the guards sometimes is for the best. I believe that Solis was not handling the financial like she should and over spent when she didn't have to. You don't over spend for states like Iowa or New Hampshire or the small states that Obama won. Maggie Williams will work out well for Hillary and she probably should have hired her months ago. But there is still Texas, Ohio and PA to win and those states she should win like she won in the previous big states and that would give her a good balance of delegates.

I'll start the conversation by mentioning the fact that Hillary has fired her campaign manager this past weekend. The media is once again implying that the Clinton camp is in disarray.

Wake UP Media -- It's another Trap!

Remember how the media had Hillary DOWN and OUT before New Hampshire because 'members' of the Hillary camp IMPLIED that they didn't know if they could pull out a win after having lost Iowa?

Well -- they are doing the 'FEEL SORRY' for me trap again -- along with all Hillary's TEAR episodes. Don't be suckered into believing she's 'losing' or 'in trouble'. Don't forget the fantastic maneuver her camp made by 'leaking' that Hillary had to 'loan' her campaign 5 million dollars -- within a week she got over 10 million for donors, 'feeling sorry' for her.

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

By the way, anybody every wonder why in just 2 months we've heard about or seen Hillary crying or getting 'welled up' the day before the next primary or caucus three times now -- but in the 8 years of the Clinton administration, through the sex scandal and the Impeachment trial of her husban, and through 7 years of constant reminders from the right wing about Bill, not once did we hear about TEARS coming from this woman.

It is stupid to think that latinos will not vote fo Hillary now that Patty Solis is gone.
It makes laugh!

Manuel,

I agree with your post. I think the media and the others that character assault the Clinton's is reprehensible. It is very scary the power that the media has over (especially) those that do not use their brain to think and only believe what twisted stories the media and others present. Presently journalists, pundits, and "talking heads", instead of just REPORTING the facts like they are supposed to do, get up on their soapboxes like preachers and lecture like there is no tomorrow about their own opinion (presently 99.9% of the media is Pro-Obama--in the last 8 years they have protected Bush and not said anything negative about what he has done to this country, and people had elected bush A 2nd TIME, after they knew what he was like the first 4 years). I would NOT be surprised if these same Americans voted for Obama and we find ourselves in WORSE of a mess in 4 years-----THEN THEY'll ELECT HIM FOR ANOTHER 4 YEARS!!! ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

Mariann Pepitone --- I think we have seen how good "experience is." We have had "experience". I can't imagine inexperience can do worse. Of course, if Hilliarry wins, can Chelsea count that as experience when she runs the way Hilliarry counts her husbands eight years in office as her "experience".

I don't understand the point of switching campaign managers, and implying this makes a difference.

People are supposed to vote on the candidate's character and policies. If the country truly wanted Hillary Clinton, no one would care how much money she had, or who ran the campaign. She has been losing support over the last month, that's plain.

I will add that her focus on "Big States" is faulty. She seems to be more focused on winning delegates, than voters. She's leaving out vast swaths of the country that will come back to bite her in the end. It's not Stratego - it's the presidency.

I'm voted for Obama because he seems to want to court all states, all voters, and is also willing to work with moderate republicans.

I looked at it from the standpoint of "When the president walks into the houses of Congress and says 'please pass this bill' - which candidate has the greatest chance of getting this done?"

Hillary Clinton's obsession about demonizing republicans shows she will not be able to do this. You need to respect the colleagues across the aisle, even when you disagree. Her scars go too deep for her to rise above partisanship.

Hillary cried AGAIN over the weekend. I would hate to see what happened if she ever had a "real" issue to deal with.

Mariann Pepitone - you are correct in that its a question of total delegates.

CBS is reporting that Obama now has opened up a large enough lead in pledged delegates so as to hold the overall lead when factoring in known super delegate endorsements.

MSNBC doesn't have Obama's total as high, but has him within 30 or so, pledged and super delegates combined.

I think CNN is showing the largest Clinton lead.

And Obama clearly has momentum, both in terms of national perception of this race and, from what I read this morning, in terms of making gains in Texas and Ohio.

Just to clarify, I don't mean to imply Clinton is out of it. Far from.

But today I'd say Obama has a slightly better chance of winning the nomination than Clinton.

If she were to pull a win tomorrow, that could change in an instant.

In spite of the Cilnton spin, Ohio and Texas do not offset Hillary's recent and possible approaching losses. The contests over the weekend and the Potomac primaries award more than 100 delegates more than Texas plus Ohio. The Giuliani strategy did not work for Giuliani and it won't work for Hillary. Every state counts and every loss hurts.

Well HILLARY CLINTON the DIVIDER has done it again...poor Ms. Solis. She didn't know what older dems have come to LEARN about the lovely CLINTON'S once they have used you up they will throw you out like a DIRTY OLD RAG! Now that this ALL POWERFUL LATINO VOTE IS SAFE AND SECURE thanks to SOLIS and others were reminding HISPANICS of the horrible job loss due to NAFTA. She becomes the scapegoat and gets kicked to the curb. Hmmm...Our first Black President refers to Obama as Jesse Jackson, and who will Ms. Solis become the good little "immigrant" maid? LOL. Wake up people, the CLINTONS are USERS, ABUSERS and DIVIDERS. BECOME APART OF ONE AMERICA THE USA FIGHTING TO RESTORE THE FAITH BACK IN THE COUNTRY. NOT DIVIDING AGAINIST RACIAL LINES, GENDER LINES, OLD OR YOUNG!!! USA! USA!

"Clinton Says Campaign Needed More Help"

Couldn't be because her candidacy follows the Mitt! model could it?

The "R" in HRC might as well standard for Romney. Two peas in a pod.

If Hillary manages to squeak out a nomination despite what the polls say, it will because the "Super Delegates" have determined that you don't know enough to vote and decided who should win for you.

Correction: I am a Florida resident. Florida is not a caucus state; Florida is a primary state. I have many concerns with Obama.

To Manuel. I guess you can speak for all Latinos right? You know how every Latino is going to vote? Wow, you are psychic.

Illinois for Hillary, I am with you. The media attention to one candidate is awful. I have already e-mailed CNN for starters on that subject. I agree with everything you said.

Take back the counry: I hear you. While Senator Clinton and the rest of the candidates were using their campaign money to pay for their campaign, Obama received huge donations from Oprah, including free television coverage, rallies put on by Oprah, etc. How much did that cost Obama from campaign funds. Maybe he should release that. Hillary doesn't let anyone push her around. She will release her income tax returns when she receives the nomination. She isn't hiding anything. She has already said she would. For those of you who want to accuse Hillary of spin, spin, spin...."people in glass houses don't throw stones." Look at yourselves.

Obama and his campaign did not even bother to put his name on the Michigan primary I mean, why would he? He had nothing to gain? In Florida, neither candidate was to put their commercials on T.V. down here, but Obama did it anyway. He is now answering to the democratic committee for that move. When asked why, he said, he didn't know it was against the rules; his people said he could. Well, ignorance of the law is no excuse. If he was the man he says he is, he would be fighting for Michigan and Florida voters. There's not enough in it for him to stand up for us. And I am sure he is afraid. Michigan might just hold another primary. Florida won't. We voted, and the state, not the voters or the candidates should be penalized. It does not surprize me with the very great possiblity that Michigan will vote again, that now Obama is going to rush to Ann Arbor and do damage control. Hillary won by an very large margin here in FL without a campaign visit from her or COMMERCIALS.

Obama knew not to advertise in MI, but not in FL? How odd is that? How believable is that. Obama can't blame his people. The buck stops with him, and "I didn't know", is not an excuse that I want from him as a President.

Obama was asked how the superdelegates should vote. His immediate response was they should vote according to the states. When the interviewer said, well, in that case, Superdelegate, Ted Kennedy would be voting for Clinton. Then he began to spin his answer, and tried to change it. Don't believe me? Look it up. It's on CNN.

As to Obama's claim he was never for the war..... Obama was asked, if he COULD have voted, how would he have voted? Obama said, he would have voted for the war. Obama was not even in the Senate at the time when the Senate voted to go to war vs. not to go; this is why the interviewer said, if you COULD have voted. His one claim to fame with the war is a fairy tale, just as President Clinton tried to tell all of you. But again, the media spent more time screaming and complaining about how it was said, and deflected what was said, and is true. Don't believe me, look it up.

I can't understand all the Obama mania going on. Clearly, among all the democratic candidates, he comes with the weakest credentials, accomplishments and experience. He accused Senator Clinton of being "the establishment", and then accepts the endorsement of the epitomy of establishment, Ted Kennedy. His involvement with this senator also makes me wonder. What does Ted want in return? Ted Kennedy is not really someone you want backing you, particlarly someone as new in politics as Obama. Obama should watch who he is associating with. Ted Kennedy is not a man of character. I am sure the majority of you know what I mean by that.

The reference to his similarity to President Kennedy in his speeches, also a false truth. MSNBC had an article on line with the original writer of President Kennedy's speeches. This man is 79, retired, and has been coaching and writing for Senator Obama and his young writers, and throwing him lines. The intention of the Kennedy family is all too clear. And this from Obama who wants changes in Washington, the same old people. What does he think Ted Kennedy is. New? The ressurection of Camelot, was and is a Kennedy failed plan. Their endorsement meant nothing in MA and nothing in CA. Hillary won them both.

Obama is a skilled politician nothing more; he has no great array of experience or accomplishment either internationally or domestically to give him the highest position in our country, particularly at this time in history.

Senator Clinton, Senator Biden, Governor Richardson, Senator Edwards -- this was our group of talented and accomplished leaders; among all of these people, including the ones that I did not list, Senator Obama is the weakest candidate. What a terrible waste, how sad I will feel if this man becomes President.

I just read the article on Hillary's statement today about the losses over the weekend. She really DID say that states like North Dakota and Alaska weren't going to matter in November, and she won the states that would.

I'm sorry, that is perhaps the dumbest thing to come out of a candidate's mouth yet this political season. EVEN IF IT WERE TRUE, you just don't SAY that.

How could she be so stupid???

I'll take change over experience this order, and add me on a large orange soda!

I am tired of the same old same old!! No more Bushes, No more Clintons! Fresh is what I want NOW!