HILLARY CLINTON and her surrogates, lke her husband, as shown by this article, are focused on issues important to the American people. The opponent wants to talk about inside campaign factors which do not affect the American public. Personally, I prefer the champion of issues important to me, and that would be HILLARY CLINTON.

One of the all time most loved and successful Presidents we love you and adore you Bill Clinton and we need Hillary more than ever ....President Hillary Clinton 2008 what a grand ring God bless america the land that we love God bless Hillary

Um, last time I checked, Mr. Clinton, a "wet blanket" was synonymous with being a bummer, a downer, and a drag.

So yes, I'm quite certain the Clinton cabal will *smother* Pennsylvania like a "wet blanket"! LOL!

And one last thing, Clintoneers: Obama had only two weeks to work the last two MAJOR HILLARY STRONGHOLDS, TX and OH, where she led initially by 20-30 points(!), and where she took one by a decent ten, and squeaked the other by measly 2-3, and lost the caucus. This time, Obama has a full SIX WEEKS to work PA. I wouldn't be so arrogant as to count it as a "sure thing" for Hillary just yet if I were you....

I know she Won!!!!!!!, daddywontsellthefarm.

Unfortunately, she just hasn't Won!!!!!!! as much or as often as Obama....

You and I don't agree often, smartprimate, but boy do we ever on that point! What a unforgivable waste of opportunity and talent....

Hillary's opponent, and his mouthpieces, even present in this blog, indicate a preference for emotional diatribes and name-calling. These are all marks of political immaturity. If you want to convince me you'll need to use some better quality logic with a bit of facts tossed in for good measure. Meanwhile, the CLINTON CAMPAIGN is spot on in making sure the Pennsylvania voter is heard from with great clarity.

Adam, I tip my hat to you for your loyalty to Senator Obama. The thing is this time you guys may want to spend at least four to five times more than Senator Hillary's camp in order to have a shot at winning Pen state. Outspending 3 to 1 in TX and Ohio and ended up with a defeat, that was a boneheaded mistake. History tends to repeat itself.

Unless Clinton plans to win Pennyslvania by 140 delegates, why bother?

johnwhite - I thought Obama won Texas.

johnwhite, I reiterate: Obama has SIX WEEKS this time, as compared to TWO weeks last time, to compete in just ONE Clinton 25-point-lead state rather than TWO, and with nearly double Clinton's war chest.

And with six weeks to work PA exclusively, Obama very likely won't have to spend so much on air time vis a vis the Clinton machine, and this point, he's not working from so far behind in his quest to catch and surpass Clinton.

Will Obama win PA? He might. No one knows.

But clearly, camp Clinton has already "decided" that PA is theirs. Their arrogance and condescension are showing -- all necessary ingredients for a surprise loss to a come-from-behind underdog like Obama.

So please -- PLEASE -- continue taking a PA "win" for granted, won't you?

If you look at collecting a couple more delegates in Tx( not by popular votes) justifies the 50 million dollars spending then it is not my definition of winning. I had a lot of admiration for Senator Obama but with all the money and all the rally, he could not even come close to seal the deal in Ohio and Tx.

And still you continue to miss my point, johnwhite.

You're comparing apples and oranges. The playing field in PA is leveling in Obama's favor. This time, he has the time, the money and the message to use to make powerful in-roads into Clinton's base, and this time he won't be blindsided by her bald-faced distortions and fear-mongering ads. He knows his enemy far better this time around...

johnwhite - yes, I look at the candidate taking a couple more delegates as the winner. Period.

The only reason Obama spent more is because he had it to spend. Clinton had already blown through too much of her money, because the disaster of a campaign failed to plan for any sustaining action.

But back to who wins. Clinton's own chief strategist said its about the delegates.

Actually it was a few delegates Obama won by, as opposed to a couple.

Good luck to the Clinton team (surrogates and camp included) in the quest for a win in PA! We are rooting for you from the nation's capital!

Again DCVoter, I'll ask: If she doesn't plan to win Pennsylvania by 140 delegates, why bother?

Obama's opponent from New York looks to be slipping in superdelegate lead in the latest count: 247-211.

When will ABC news webpage going to correct the difference in the popular vote between Obama and Clinton? He has a 680,000+ lead rather than just 100,00 as the front page shows. There is also a minor error in the number of delegates(It should be 1606 and NOT 1600 - check real clear politics and other sources)

Good catch, Meg. Does the 680,000 count the 100,000 lead in Mississippi?

I haven't been following the popular vote numbers. After all, Clinton's chief strategist told us its the delegates that matter, and her campaign wouldn't lie, right?

Carl, add Geraldine Ferraro to that top notch campaign team.

Hillary Clinton is lucky to be where she is in this campaign. She would NEVER be where she is if she were never married to an ex president. If she were a single female politican she would never have made it. That is a fact, hmmm wonder how Mrs. Ferraro feels about that.