Mr. Obama's negatives seem to
continue to multiply and grow with
no obvious counter argument.

What happened to the almighty campaigner???

Something smells ...

She does need 67% of the remaining primaries... in order to reach Obama in the popular vote

The delegate count is done, Obama has won the delegate count

The popular vote however she still has a chance

If she loses NC she's done...she would then need 75%-80% of the remaining primary votes

Impossible

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

Do you enjoy being an idiot vanessa?

You candidate is unelectable. He hasnt been treated nearly as bad as he would in a general election.

He has made his name off MEDIA HYPE .

You dont know much about math if you think north carolina is going to win the nominaiton for Obama.

Its just another REPUBLICAN STATE he cant win in november, riddled with easy 90% african american racist vote.

No candidate has EVER in the history of the united states once primaries were instituted WON the white house when LOSING all of Califonia, Ohio, Mass, Pennyvannia, Florida, New Jersey.

I mean cmon. The guy LOST by DOUBLE DIGITS every time.

Go look at the evidence and tell me Obama is electable.

http://www.electoral-vote.com/

by the way.

Obama hasnt WON anything. You need 2025 delegates to 'WIN' .

I know you are a professional Obama supporter 24 /7.

But you are full of it.

That's it... Mr. Obama has
permanently lost my trust and respect..
Go HRC08!! or McCain 08!!!

The 67% figure the Obama camp is citing applies ONLY if the courts or the committee do not seat MI and FL delegates AND ONLY IF none of the delegates switch before June 29 (last state convention) which has already happened and will continue AND ONLY IF the SD's do not switch camps (which is likely) AND ONLY IF the remaining uncommitted SD's overwhelmingly endorse him (which is not likely) AND ONLY IF the remaining state contest's delegate proportional allocation is proportional to % of popular vote (which is not necessarily going to happen ie. it didnt happen that way in PA because Clinton won 61 of 67 counties)... try reading the rules and learning how the math really works instead of listening only to any single campaign... it is all available on the DNC website under the rules. Neither candidate can win the nomination based on pledged delegate count as currently projected. There are not even enough uncommitted SD's to tip the nomination right now for either candidate. Now that the race is a deadheat, Clinton has proven that she has not been defeated by the numbers. Unless there is a backroom deal, a withdrawal, or a multi-ballot convention, neither candidate can be the nominee.

Obama lovers keep trying to HYPE the fact one candidate is AHEAD means he WINS.

Its not the rules. Its not even close to being the rules.

Obama cant WIN the nomination. He has to make the same suckhole arguement to super delegates.

Obama is going to lose the popular vote. He has lost EVERY major primary and swing state by a wide margin.

No one has EVER won the white house by losing all the primaries Obama has. EVER. Never once.

Your candidate is UNELECTABLE.

In a web video, Hillary challenges Obama to debate in Oregon. And in the morning press release, her campaign kind of taunts him: “Sen. Obama responded ‘call[ing] Clinton’s challenge ‘an old, Washington game.’ ‘ Since when did debating the issues and giving voters a choice become a ‘game?’ ”

Since she’s bringing it up again, it’s worth remembering again that in 2006, when Hillary was running for the Senate in New York, she and her courtiers repeatedly refused debate requests from her primary opponent, Jonathan Tasini.

So, the answer to her question is that debates became a game when public officials like Clinton became dodging them to avoid answering uncomfortable questions about voting for the war and such to their actual constituents, and then hypocritically embracing them as if they had some surpassing civic virtue when political defeat loomed.

Debates are generally good. But in the age of television, people in Indiana and Oregon have had as much chance as everyone else to see the 20 that have already been held, and doing it again in a TV study that happens to be in Portland doesn’t automatically add anything. Obama’s resistance is purely tactical, but for Hillary — after blowing off NY Democrats in 2006 — to act all worried about Hoosiers and rural Oregonians having their own debate is absurd.

The only constant with Sen. Clinton on this issue is that she constantly operates out of self interest, and is constantly disingenuous about her motives.

This idea has already been tried. So this is offered on loan from the internets via obsidian wings:

MR. GIBSON: So we're going to begin with opening statements, and we had a flip of the coin, and the brief opening statement first from Mr. Lincoln.

LINCOLN: Thank you very much, Charlie and George, and thanks to all in the audience and who are out there. I appear before you today for the purpose of discussing the leading political topics which now agitate the public mind.

We are now far into the fifth year since a policy was initiated with the avowed object, and confident promise, of putting an end to slavery agitation. Under the operation of that policy, that agitation has not only not ceased, but has constantly augmented.

STEPHANOPOULOS: I’m sorry to interrupt, but do you think Mr. Douglas loves America as much you do?

LINCOLN: Sure I do.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But who loves America more?

LINCOLN: I’d prefer to get on with my opening statement George.

STEPHANOPOULOS: If your love for America were eight apples, how many apples would Senator Douglas’s love be?

LINCOLN: Eight.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Proceed.

LINCOLN: In my opinion, slavery will not cease, until a crisis shall have been reached and passed. "A house divided against itself cannot stand." I believe this government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Excuse me, did an Elijah H. Johnson attend your church?

LINCOLN: When I was a boy in Illinois forty years ago, yes. I think he was a deacon.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Are you aware that he regularly called Kentucky “a land of swine and whores”?

LINCOLN: Sounds right -- his ex-wife was from Kentucky.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Why did you remain in the church after hearing those statements?

LINCOLN: I was eight.

DOUGLAS: This is an important question George -- it's an issue that certainly will be raised in the fall.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Do you denounce him?

LINCOLN: I’d like to get back to the divided house if I may.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Do you denounce and reject him?

LINCOLN: If it will make you shut up, yes, I denounce and reject him.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Do you denounce and reject him with sugar on top?

LINCOLN: Yes.

STEPHANOPOULOS: No takesies-backsies?

LINCOLN: Yes.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Whoa, so you would consider a takesie-backsie?

LINCOLN: That’s not what I meant…

DOUGLAS: When I was 11, my grandpappy and I chopped wood and shot bears.

LINCOLN: Ahem, I do not expect the Union to be dissolved -- I do not expect the house to fall -- but I do expect slavery will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing, or all the other...

STEPHANOPOULOS: Do you love America this much (extending fingers), this much (extending hands slightly), or thiiiiiis much (extending hands broadly)?

LINCOLN: I think we covered this…

GIBSON: If I may interrupt…

LINCOLN: Please.

GIBSON: I noticed, Mr. Lincoln, that your American flag pin was upside down…

LINCOLN: Yes, the wind caught it. Now, as I was saying...

GIBSON: We get questions about this all the time over at Powerline and on Hannity’s talk show. Mr. Douglas has said this is a major vulnerability for you in the fall. So I’ll ask again – do you love America?

LINCOLN: (scowling with a forced smile). Yes.

GIBSON: If your love for America were ice cream, what flavor would it be?

LINCOLN: (pausing with disgust and turning back to camera) Either the opponents of slavery will arrest the further spread of it; or its advocates will push it forward, till it shall become alike lawful in all the States, old as well as new -- North as well as South.

DOUGLAS: He didn’t answer the question Charlie. This fall, that question is going to be on the minds of the American public. I’ve proudly stated that my love for America is Very Berry Strawberry.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me ask it another way. If Elijah Johnson were chocolate chip cookie dough ice cream, would you eat it? Or would you decline to eat it?

DOUGLAS: Personally, as for me, I would decline to eat it.

LINCOLN (shaking his head): Let any one who doubts, carefully contemplate that now almost complete legal combination -- piece of machinery, so to speak -- compounded of the Nebraska doctrine, and the Dred Scott decision.

STEPHANOPOULOS: We’ll get to Dred Scott in the second hour, time willing, but I want to get back to the ice cream question. And that's what we'll do, after the break.

Bishop, you had me scared there.
First, let this Rev Wright thing go.

Second, PR is not winner take all according to washingtonpost and others"

`Both Brooks and Barone are wrong. Puerto Ricans will vote according to much the same proportional representation rules that govern Democratic party primaries and caucuses in the 50 states. The notion of Puerto Rico being a "winner-take-all" jurisdiction stems from previous presidential primary contests, which were pretty much over by the time the Puerto Ricans got to vote.

The Commander Guy - Excellent posting about Stephanopoulos and Gibson.

Sure, we can see how much fun you're having, Hillary. Telling lies IS fun, in your mind. You think we've forgotten about the debate that was scheduled in N.C. that you wouldn't commit to? Then, when it was too late for Senator Obama to change his schedule to suit yours, it's his fault there wasn't a debate? Senator Obama's commitments to speak to and meet with the people in Indiana and N.C., trumps you. It's not about you anymore, your desperation is very unbecoming.

Oh and John McCain may chime up at any moment and say that he knew Stephen Douglas, And ...... Hillary Clinton ain't able to measure up to Douglas

On 2006 only two years ago:
Hillary CLINTON was running for the Senate in New York, she and her courtiers repeatedly refused debate requests from her primary opponent, Jonathan Tasini.

People have only had a chance to see moderated debates with questions designed to improve ratings for the profit-making main-stream media. Voters and SD's deserve as many unmoderated debates as it takes for them to choose a nominee. This is the most important election year in the history of our country. If you dont want to watch the debates you are free to not watch. Senate races are nothing compared to Presidential races in terms of the importance of debates. She was a frontrunner by a huge margin and did what was politically acceptable to her constituents. Obama has never been a frontrunner by a large margin and is therefore not listening to the voters.

This year, each of the debates so far have had an increased number of viewers and every state contest has had record turnout. Voters do want to see and hear more than just speeches and townhalls from the candidates. We need a President who is responsible to the voters, who listens to the voters, who stands up for the voters, and who is not afraid - there are no yellow streaks in the star-spangled banner.

Hypocrisy
On 2006 only two years ago:
Hillary CLINTON was running for the Senate in New York, she and her courtiers repeatedly refused debate requests from her primary opponent, Jonathan Tasini.

tomdavie,
You sir, are the idiot. Leave Vanessa alone. Your numbers and arguments do not work and make no sense.

Losing California and NY in a primary doesn't mean losing them in the general.

Also, electoral-vote.com actually has Obama looking pretty good. Thanks!

You fool.

You debate with a human being who knows the rules of the debate not with a hypocrit Like Hillary Clinton that does not talk about issues and just opens her mouth and lies and lies

This is not a debate.

why not on the back of a flatbed? oh i get it obama and his followers prefer an "american idol" kind of set-up with flashing lights, music, and followers fainting in the bleachers.

I would rather see debates than a stump speech. I think they should spend more time on debates four one on one debates is not that many.

Either way, Obama loses on this one.

Don't accept the debate and come off as the weaker candidate. Accept the debate and come off as the weaker candidate when Clinton cleans his clock...again.

This is politics. Get used to it.

Obama is a coward.