I think you'll find that the individual in question is a community organizer these days. He is not wanted for blowing up buildings but has become a respected member of his community.
Is your point that people are not allowed to reform or is it that you'd rather talk about him than Marc Rich or Charles Keating?
Everybody has baggage, Tweet. Everybody knows people that other people find objectionable. I don't think that kind of stuff sways many votes since it's just a political parlor game, or as Obama likes to call it, a distraction.
Really, that's what it is, an attempt to distract. Bush knows many members of Osama Bin Ladens family, did that disqualify him from being re-elected in 2004? John McCain knows members of organized crime families, does that disqualify him (not in my mind, and I'm quite liberal)? The Clinton and the Rich families go back many years, is that a reason not to vote for Hillary?
What's telling here is the weakness of the arguments against an Obama presidency. They range from the fictitious (He went to school with Osama Bin Laden!!!!) to the inconsequential (He knows a guy who used to be a weatherman forty years ago!!!!).
You don't want to get into the "who do you know" game with the current crop of candidates, they all know some unsavory characters, some better than others.

"Consorting with black preachers and reformed Weathermen"

Noew THAT is some politico spin......

We're talking about politicians here, Tweet, they all have baggage. Nobody over thirty five doesn't have at least a carry on. The Dems could run Mother Theresa (if she weren't dead), the Republicans would call her a "too liberal for America" and then seek to paint her as a closet Hindu. It's just politics, nothing really stunning there.
George Bush once snorted cocaine off an under aged latina hookers rear end in front of witnesses, he got a slot in a national gaurd unit during Vietnam and then failed to show up for duty, he even started a war by accident, he still got elected president. I don't think Obama has done anything that rises to that level. Consorting with black preachers and reformed Weathermen is all anybodies come up with so far. In the comparison, that's pretty minor.
Baggage is what the other side likes to talk about, it doesn't win or loose elections.

Dijetlo Of course Barry O has no baggage....LOL

I have to preface this with admission that I am not a Clinton fan. My issue with her stems from the fact that one day, our descendants may look at the Presidential roster and see "Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton" and wonder what in Gods name were we thinking. Why didn't just coronate both the royal families and let them hash it out in some kind of ghastly 21st Century War of the Roses. In a nation of 300 million people, somehow the best choice for president is the last guys relative. It may sit well with the Republicans, but I still hold out the hope the Dems are a tad to proletarian to go along.
That said, I'm a little disturbed at some of the things I'm hearing from the more extreme elements of the Clinton camp, to include the candidate herself. Their arguments seem to fall in two categories.
First, the idea the will of the voters is not of paramount importance in an election is ridiculous. If the super delegates attempt to subvert that, we are no longer a democracy but an oligarchy. The rule of the elites.
The second argument I've heard her and some of her more ardent admirers state is that somehow the states that disqualified themselves from voting by refusing to follow the rules set up by the National Democratic Party should have their votes counted anyway. Back when she was the front runner, she held the opposite view and in fact pledged to avoid campaigning in either state.
Now we can argue if she broke that pledge, but what can't reasonably be argued is that Obama broke that pledge. As a result, in Michigan in particular, she ran a basically uncontested primary. To now petition the Democratic super delegates to consider those votes is a rather nefarious undertaking and once again calls into question her moral integrity and basic honesty.
People, it's time to do the math. Unless we allow for a brokered convention, with all the inherent back room deal making and corruption, Hillary can't win. Not by ballots or delegates. Any other politician would have bowed to the inevitable but Hillary vows to fight on. That leaves on to wonder, what is her objective? To reach the convention with Obama so tarnished by her attacks that he can't win the general? That may be the goal of team Clinton but it is the one sure way to insure a Democratic defeat in November. Other than that, the Dems have a lock. They are running against what appears to be an Alzheimer's patient who seem inclined to continue the policies of a president who has a 28% approval rating. People are not going to like what this guy is saying once Dem primary circus folds it's tent and we move on to the general. All we need now is for Hillary to realize there is no way to win this primary without relying the the back room deal making that would insure the Democrats defeat in November.Their is no path to the White House for Clinton this time, she'd be better served to mount another attempt four or eight years hence.

IT'S TIME AMERICA:

It's time for everyone to face the truth. Barack Obama has no real chance of winning the national election in November at this time. His crushing defeat in Pennsylvania makes that fact crystal clear. His best, and only real chance of winning in November is on a ticket with Hillary Clinton as her VP.

Hillary Clinton seemed almost somber at her victory speech. As if part of her was hoping Obama could have defeated her. And proved he had some chance of winning against the republican attack machine, and their unlimited money, and resources. In all honesty. I felt some of that too.

But it is absolutely essential that the democrats take back the Whitehouse in November. America, and the American people are in a very desperate condition now. And the whole World has been doing all that they can to help keep us propped up.

Hillary Clinton say's that the heat, and decisions in the Whitehouse are much tougher than the ones on the campaign trail. But I think Mr. Obama faces a test of whether he has what it takes to be a commander and chief by facing the difficult facts, and the truth before him. And by doing what is best for the American people by dropping out of the race, and offering his whole hearted assistance to Hillary Clinton to help her take back the Whitehouse for the American people, and the World.

Mr. Obama is a great speaker. And I am confident he can explain to the American people the need, and wisdom of such a personal sacrifice for them. It should be clear to everyone by now that Hillary Clinton is fighting her heart out for the American people. She has known for a long time that Mr. Obama can not win this November. You have to remember that the Clinton's have won the Whitehouse twice before. They know what it takes.

If Mr. Obama fails his test of commander and chief we can only hope that Hillary Clinton can continue her heroic fight for the American people. And that she prevails. She will need all the continual support and help we can give her. She may fight like a superhuman. But she is only human.

Sincerely

Jacksmith... Working Class :-)

THIS HAS TO STOP! When will people wake up and see what is really going on here? Sen. Clinton will not be the nominee and yet people continue to waste their votes and money on this person. She lost this contest when Obama won 11 in a row. That is just the facts. For her to continue, and just wait around for Obama to make a mistake is terrible. To continue to have people pour money into her campaign and help her damage the nominee, is terrible and self-rightous and selfish. Clinton has had her chance and she blew it. She blew health care as well and now she is saying that she is the best for the job? This is laughable. These people had over 10 years in a governer's mansion, 8 years in the White House, a library worth over 100 million dollars, they have traveled the world, on our dime, they have made over 100 million dollars, sold millions of books, and she is a 2-term senator from the state of New York. ENOUGH! WE OWE THEM NOTHING! It's time for these people to exit the stage.

What a pity the American people have no say whatsoever in who becomes president. If they did, anyone, and I mean ANYONE would beat McCain. The current prez has done more to damage America than any other prez in history. The American people know this. I wonder just how many voting Americans would really vote for "more of the same McCain". To bad we'll never know because McCain WILL be the next prez. Don't bother to vote. It won't count anyway.

I live in West Holywood and believe that realitycheck could be right because as I see it from here, hispanics will vote McCain over Obama. Now I grew up in MA and have a ton of family in MA and I can tell you that Obama will not get their votes and from what I hear not even Ted Kennedy will get their votes again because he and Kerry and Patrick endorsed Obama....all 3 of them have lost many votes for thei own next elections....Obama has zero chance of beating McCain in MA.

According to Reality Check, McCain will win California if Obama is our nominee. The democrats really should be freaking out at the prospect of losing California and NY in November because we all know those are big Republican strongholds that Clinton was miraculously able to win with her appeal to Republicans. The liberals should also be concerned that the conservatives have taken over Hollywood and San Fransisco too as proven by all movies promoting Jesus and the high rate of homelessness among homosexuals in SF.

Actually, I don't think the big states like new york and california are even an issue. Either democrat will take those, regardless of who edged ahead in the primaries.

But it doesn't matter.

I think either democrat would win in November, and personally think Obama would win even more overwhelmingly. I think his focus on the issues, transparent debate, and involvement of the people would kill any attempts of neo-con resurgence in the future. I think he'll influence the media to stop running these nonsense issues (Has ABC learned its lesson?).

But it doesn't matter. Why? Because it is not the super delegates' place to decide that my opinion on Obama's November chances is so wrong that it warrants their reversing the results of the primary elections. They simply cannot honestly make that case. The evidence certainly isn't that strong to warrant such a drastic subversion of democratic process (even less so when the backlash of such an action is considered), and in my opinion, the evidence goes in the opposite direction.

Hillary has two ways of winning: the superdelegates or seating FL & MI as is. Neither option is popular with a majority of democrats with exception of obsessive Hillary supporters like Reality Check. So obsessive Hillary supporters, are you satisfied winning the nom but not the general because you've p***** off everyone to get your way? Will you tie a big bow around her?

Reality Check: He won't have enough delegates so we should support her because she has LESS?!?!?!? I said if the popular and delegate count is the SAME come June, and she is no closer than she is today, she should drop out. If, however, you are correct and Hillary somehow overtakes Obama (and the only way that is possible is to seat FL and MI as is without revotes AND she wins big in the rest of the contests) then we (including myself) should fully support Clinton. You are clearly a person who is only concerned with getting Hillary nominated (notice I didn't say elected) regardless of the consequences or how you do it. I also mentioned that despite who gets the nom, the winner will have an uphill battle to win over the other's supporters. I support Obama, but I would be saddened if he were given the nomination without even having a majority of the popular vote or delegates because I would know that victory in November will be impossible without a majority of Hill supporters, but the same goes vice versa. Go ahead and be an a****** Reality, but your only victory in a dirty fight will be the nomination because the general will be McCains. The dems' problem is people like you who are so obsessed with their candidate (Hillary and Obama) that you can't see a best-case scenario with what we are handed.

Rob : Big state argument is NO JOKE! Forget the losers you mentioned and think back to Gore......would he have been that close if he lost MA? or CA? Gore lost NH, OH and FL which are all states that Hillary will win but Obama will lose without question. Add to that the clear fact that Obama could not win MA or CA even with the Old Guard Kennedy and Kerry endorsing him. Hillary is the only chance the democrats have. Embrace it and "hope" that she will still give Obama the VP slot after his trashy campaign.

T-bone: Good grief!! All that circular and conclusionary reasoning just to make excuses for Obama and to try to explain away his inability to win among core constituencies and in big PRIMARY states?

THERE WON'T BE ANY CAUCUSES IN NOVEMBER.

If there had been primaries in those RED caucus States, would Obama have won? Would he have won in the BLUE caucus States had there been primaries instead? DOUBTFUL, in both scenarios. Not against Clinton, but what about McCain? Same result, different reasons. The crossover vote won't be there for him. The white male sexist vote won't be there for him. Disaffected, disillusioned, and disenfranchised Democrats will vote McCain, or stay home. White racists will vote McCain. There just aren't enough blacks, college kids, and elitists to offset those votes. "HIS INSPIRATIONNESS" is not electable.

If the superdelegates cling to the "results" of the DNC's "recipe for disaster": tainted delegate counts because of undemocratic caucuses and disallowed delegates from FLA & MI, and tainted popular vote counts because of disenfranchised FLA & MI voters, AND nominate The Obama, they will have abrogated their responsibility, ignored their ostensible raison d'etre, and virtually ensured a Democrat defeat in November, possibly the worst defeat of any candidate since Goldwater in 1964.

It is interesting to review all these posts which have analyzed why either of these two potential nominees will either win or defeat the other. We all should have learned, at least by now,that the pollsters and the pundits "slant" their results or their "expert" analysis in the manner to which they lean, or at least regarding the pollsters who has hired them.

What all these political geniuses have forgotten is that by November this entire scenario will have changed many times over. The American voter will then decide for themselves who they wish to see as the next President UNLESS the electoral college (the process which actually decides the presidency) fouls up the process.

What is most distressing in this battle within the Democrat party is to what great lengths these two people continue to go through to besmirch each other. Surely the Democrats have more qualified people who can obtain the Presidency with a modicum of civility.

And to think that we are continually attempting to foist this form of government on other nations of the world. This is an embarrassment.

Hillary leads the popular vote counting all voters that went to the polls this primary season including FL and MI. She leads the popular vote by more than 121,000 votes and the only primary Obama is now likely to win is NC. The rest will be Hillary Clinton's votes. By June the popular vote lead is Hillary's and the deligate count difference will be narrow, There is no prize for having the most "pledged deligates" (from primary and caucuses) unless the candidate has 2024 and neither will. HILLARY 08

DoTheMath: You forgot to consider the $11 million Barry spent to lose PA. He did not spend that kind of money in NY.

: Alice :The required 2024 deligates will not be possible for either candidate. There is nothing in the rules that says then the guy with the most deligates from primaries and caucuses wins...NO the rule is that Super deligates are to elect for nomination the most electable candidate. When looking for the most electable candidate one must look at the democratic states needed to win in Nov. and it is there that Obama has failed. It is not a matter of any democrat can win a state like MA or CA....The popular vote lead will easily be Hillary's by June 3rd. Both names were on the Florida ballot and Obama did run campaign ads for 10 day in Florida despite his promise not to campaign there. Hillary has endorsed re-voting in both FL and MI but Barry would not agree because he knew that he would lose....his "hope" is not to count FL and MI unless evenly split....certainly he is not democratic and would rather steal the nomination. Barry Obama has no chance of being elected because of his plan and execution of playing the race card. To play such a race card against anyone is trashy but against Bill Clinton and Ms. Ferraro was stupid. Barry Obama can not win because of his great lack of character and the office of President is all about character.

T-Bone : Smoke another one hon!
You said:"Clinton has no chance of winning the popular vote or the pledged delegate count. Do you understand that?"

You have been listening to msnbc and cnn and therefore you have bought into their pipedream. Today Obama is 501,138 popular votes ahead not counting Florida and MI. Obama refused to redo those states and will wish he had tried once they are at the DNC hearing for primary issues. Florida will end up counting as it voted with both names on the ballot. MI who knows? But no matter how you call it, the popular vote consists of all votes regardless of DNC problems. Obama is already behind in the popular vote which counts all people that went to the polls to vote. When just Florida is counted Obama today is 206,366 votes ahead but with MI counted Clinton leads the popular vote by 121,943 as of today. It was Obama that removed his name from the MI ballot....poor judgement. Obama will likely win NC based with blacks voting on skin color only but Hillary will likely win all the rest and the popular vote will be Clinton's. Neither candidate will have enough deligates assigned from the primary or caucuses of each state.

Now it will be up to Super deligates to vote for "the most electable candidate". It makes no sense to nominate the guy that won causcuses in Republican states that will never vote Obama in a general election. Look at MA, a clearly democratic state that has elected in the past a Republican Governor and despite Kennedy, Kerry and Gov. Patrick and Oprah and Caroline Kennedy all endorsing Obama.....Hillary still won MA.....and that was before the Rev. Wright, the Aires friend, and the "clinging to their guns and religion comment"........so if our option is McCain vs Obama....McCain will easily win MA. My bet is that if the option is Obama then McCain will even win CA since the hispancs will not vote Obama and CA has re-elected their republican Gov....no fear of republicans.

The Obama supporters are young and will learn from this experience. If Obama is nominated then McCain will win and it is the young people that will lose abortion rights and likely get drafted to a war....but you were the fools drinking Obama kool-aid.

It is a Puric victory for Clinton. Does it cahnge the reace? It is like the Yankees wining some games after the Red Sox clinched the division. Fact of the matter is that the only way Clinton can win in my view was to win the popular vote and muddle conversation. She won by around 200,000, which is not enough to close the gap. I think it is probable that Obama wins NC by aroudn 100,000 and Indian is a toss up, perhaps 60,000 on way or the other. The remaining contests should split. From what I know this would leave Obama ahead between 400-500,000 in votes. So without wining the popular vote or pledged dels, I don't see what her argument is. The big state argument is a joke, Kerry won the big states California, New York, New Jersey, Penn, I guess he should have been Prez.

The native daughter perspective:

States where one of the candidates lived or had important family ties have tended to favor their native son or daughter by wide margins.

In primaries before Pennsylvania, the states which have claimed Hillary Clinton as a native daughter, as far as I know, are:
Arkansas: Clinton 70%, Obama 26% (44% Clinton margin);
New York: Clinton 57%, Obama 40% (17% Clinton margin);
Average Clinton margin: 30.5%

The states which have claimed Obama as a native son, as far as I know, are:
Hawaii: Obama 76%, Clinton 24% (52% Obama margin);
Illinois: Obama 65%, Clinton 33% (32% Obama margin);
Kansas: Obama 74%, Clinton 26% (48% Obama margin);
Average Obama margin: 44%

When viewed in that context, Clinton's 8-10% margin in Pennsylvania is hardly a sign that, as she puts it, the "tide is turning." Or, if it does show a turning tide, the tide does not appear to be turning in her favor.

Everybody knows Hillary would have also won Michigan and Florida and is therefore the winner in the popular and delegate vote. The same people who wanted all votes to be counted in Florida in 2000 now want them not to be counted. Obama made sure they are not counted. Let's see them try to prevent the seating of the delegates from those states.

Obama, Kerry, Gore, Dukakis, Mondale, Humphrey, Stevenson: effete, ethereal liberal losers anointed by the party elite and the flake fringe. Carter and Bill Clinton: centrists hated by same.

Do the math, twinkies.

Go Hillary Go. Never give up and never give in. I want a fighter to clean up this mess. A "grassroots movement" is not enough. Support for Obama keeps growing? Why couldn't you get your people to the polls then? With twice as much money and a free ticket from the press? You can hate her if you want but she can do it all. And Obama is already cracking. She will never back down and I love that.

People, forget about race; I would vote for anyone yellow, black, white, brown if he/she was a patriot and would make a very good president and commander-in-chief. Neither Clinton or (especially) Obama fits this category. Obama has been mixing with some real characters: Wright, Nation of Islam, Weathermen, Rekzo, (even the Senator who drove drunk and a woman was killed because of his actions) just to name a few, and he needs for his wife to be proud of America more than once. The Democrats really blew this one, having these two as a potential President. McCain will get my vote even tho I do not agree with many of his ideals. Too bad the Democrats don't know how to pick good candidates.

To dems: As democrats, we are supposed to question why he hasn't closed the deal? The rationale is that he can't close the deal so we should support the candidate that is even further from closing the deal? There isn't any good, easy solution to this. If the dems want to beat McCain in November they are going to have to tread very carefully; they need to resolve FL and MI (and the fair(est) thing would be either a revote or split them evenly as neither candidate campaigned), we need to finish the primary season and let the states finish voting in June BUT it would be devastating to the dems to let this go all the way to the convention because regardless of who wins the nomination the party will need time to heal wounds before the general and two months isn't going to do it. The superdelegates (whose very existence is another black eye for the party) need to wrap it up at the conclusion of the state primaries. The superdelegates need to reflect the will of the voters (yes, even the Obama super in Clinton territory needs to vote for Clinton). In the end, after all the math, Clinton will still be behind in popular vote (although by slim margins) and delegates, and although it looks like the dems will have an uphill battle to unite whomever the candidate is, it is still better to give the nomination to the person with the most delegates and popular vote. Even if you believe she is the stronger candidate, will she be the stronger candidate if she wins the nomination through the superdelegates? People like to bring up Mondale vs. Hart, but Mondale lost the election in the end and the dems ticked a lot of people so the Repubs were the only winners there. Although I support Obama, I have never expected Hillary to drop out, and I think she should finish this primary for the sake of her passionate supporters, but come June (if she isn't any closer than she is today), her supporters, as hard as it is, need to accept this. And any Obama supporter or Hillary supporter needs to not be so stupid as to vote for someone that doesn't reflect their positions on issues out of spite.

He can't close the deal so we should support the candidate that is further from closing the deal?

Kind of surprising that not one of the comments posted in this article mentioned that Obama has insurmountable leads in the delegate count, popular vote, and number of states won. Pennsylvania did not erase the results of previous contests.

Additionally, it's a bit disingenuous to claim that Obama can't win key constituencies. The fact that some of these voters chose Clinton over Obama does not suggest they'd also choose McCain over Obama.

I can't believe this... How can people be so far detached from reality? Look people. Clinton has no chance of winning the popular vote or the pledged delegate count. Do you understand that?

The only possibility for her is for the superdelegates to step in and disregard the will of the people. The Obama campaign is a grassroots political MOVEMENT that has energized an unprecented number of people (even in foreign countries) to support Obama. And people think the superdelegates would deny this man and this movement the nomination that the majority of people voted for? Unbelievable.

Now, the popular knowledge (as baseless as it all is) was that Clinton needed to win PA big, a 20 point victory. And that was nearly what her lead was in the polls a short while ago. But the day before election day, Clinton lowered the bar. It was now "just a win" would be huge. So now an 8 point victory, which indicates a drop in support for Hillary, is somehow a turning point?! Seriously, try to think for yourself instead of repeating the latest talking points. That is nothing more than a false reality.

Speaking of thinking for yourself, do you really think Obama can't win in November? Forget what you hear from Clinton. Why would you even think Clinton would be more likely to win than Obama?

In my opinion, Clinton versus McCain is more of a traditional battle of character... Who do you hate less, who's the bigger liar, who can you bare to vote for while holding your nose. It's politics along party lines. Not many people will believe that Clinton actually represents more change than McCain. So independents would go either way. Nobody will believe Clinton to be honest. She won't have credibility to sway people. It'll just be attacks and counter-attacks. Actual policy will be eclipsed by people's personal feelings for each candidate.

On the other hand, in an Obama versus McCain battle, the focus will be much more on policy. These are both candidates who are typically regarded as being a change from the norm. But McCain is just a false change. He talks the talk, but his policy is completely contradictory from his image. Those policies aren't just different... they're deeply flawed as well. They simply don't add up logically.

And versus Obama, Obama will constantly blow off these worthless personal attack, as he's done versus Clinton. And your average person actually does notice this and agrees with Obama. That's why support for Obama keeps growing, even after he makes a supposed "gaffe"(which if you read the full transcript, it seems like nothing of the sort), and even after Clinton starts one new talking point message after another. Obama will be as steady as he always has in remaining civil, and appealing to the sensible person inside of us, rather than the sensationalist. McCain's policies are anything but sensible, and he'll be laughed at when he has to debate Obama, and he can't hide behind failed character assassinations.

Obama had amassed a formidable fortune and directed it with his well organized machine and yet he fell. He is neither efficient nor effective.Why? Because most of his energy or money are pure fat, not muscle. Second, his election machine or staff, is equipped with defective sensors, out of touch, lack of intelligence. 'To be' is more important than 'to have.'
Hillary, pushed into corners, starving, nearly broke, has managed to give the best of herself, like carbon when crushed, transforms itselfs into diamond.

Why do Clinton supporters insist that an Obama-McCain election would have the same results as some Obama-Clinton elections? Are Clinton supporters really stupid enough to vote for McCain if Obama is the Dem nominee? I am a strong Obama supporter, but I could NEVER vote for McCain. Could Clinton supporters really vote for 4 more years of war, bad economic policies, and ignored domestic problems? Give me a break.

harvard school of medicine definition for being racially black,

"a person who's geneology is somewhere between 1% and 99% white"

standard: who's gotta quota, you gotta quota, we don't need no damn quota

Get your Math right all of you pundits and news organizations!! 55% - 45% is a FIVE PERCENT MARGIN OF VICTORY, it is not Ten Points. Here is why. . in a 2 person ballot, the voter has 2 choices, Candidate A or Candidate B. . it is a Zero-Sum Game, meaning any vote for A necessary reduces the vote of B. Put another way, let's say total voter pool is 100 persons. If Candidate A receives 51 votes, he has won by 1 voter in 100, or 1%. Similarly, if Candidate A receives 55 votes, it means 5 persons more than 50/50 split gave him the victory, and 5/100 is 5%.

Get it right for a change, Pundits.

Hey skinfest1978.... you can't even count...Clinton didn't win the last 4 out 5 primaries. You must have adopted the Clinton method of counting. Keep counting those imaginary delegates from Michigan and Florida. If there is one thing that America stands for, is that We are a nation of Laws, and Michigan and Florida broke the Democratic laws. The Democratic Party is not going to show the rest of the country that they will break their own rules."If we had the same system as the Republicans, I would already be the nominee...." yet another Clinton scenario for winning the primary. Do you think that you can make any other points as to whether the superdelegates should back Hillary ? Why did the media fail to chastise Ed Rendell" " There are some people in this State that will not vote for a black man" but they vote for someone who channels Truman and said " we can totally obliterate Iran" By the way that wasn't McCain who made that statement... it was Hillary. I did not say Clinton, because you may have understood it to be Bill Clinton.

CHENEY FOR PRESENT DICTATOR

So if Obama can't win because he can't win middle-class whites, how is Hillary going to win if she can't win urban blacks? Furthermore, how is McCain going to win without the support of evangelicals? OH GOD WE WON'T HAVE A PRESIDENT!

HILLARY VS MC CAIN

THE WRITING IS ON

SUPERDELATES WALL

ONE PERSON
2/3 VOTE

BLACKS ITS OVER

GO BACK TO WORK

YOU TOO KIDS

HILLARY WINS IT ALL

GIVE IT UP

SHE PUT HIM AWAY

ITS OVER

GO HOME KIDS AND OTHERS

So, we know no more today than we did yesterday. If Obama is the eventual nominee, Dems risk disinfranchising Catholics, women, and working class voters. If Clinton prevails, Dems lose the young, black, and college-educated; not to mention the enthusiasm Obama has generated. McCain seems to be the only clear cut winner. And that means, America is the clear loser.

The game is over now. It has become clear that Obama can not win the states we democrats need to win like PA, CA, MA ect. I am a lifetime MA democrat and have to laugh when I hear msnbc or cnn claim that any democratic nomonee will win MA and CA and NY. Well perhaps NY could be won by Obama if he were the nominee but I can tell you that he will never win MA against McCAin when he could not even beat Hillary with the Kennedy and Kerry and Gov. Patrick all out stumping for Obama....Hillary won MA by double digits. CA is also not a given when Obama has been unable to get hispanic vote while McCain can.....Hillary won CA despite Kennedy, Kerry, Oprah and I for one do not believe that CA can be won by a democrat that does not carry the hispanic vote....remember that CA also has a Republican Gov....the voters are not afraid to vote Republican and McCain is a very liberal Republican. Obama should drop out and let the party get on with the race. His best option now is to acept the VP slot from Hillary if she will still accept him for VP. Black candidates in the future should remember that we Americans will defeat the guy that plays the race card as the Obama's have done since SC. It is not that we won't vote black...but we will not vote for the guy that calls lifetime civil rights works racist as he did.

SALE USA FLAG PINS
made in CHINA of course
sing

BOMB BOMB BOMB
BOMB BOMB IRAN

when hand place near:)

Why would anyone vote for an american presidential candidate who will not wear an american flag lapel pin, say the pledge of allegence or take the oath of office on the bible? How could a person like this possibly be considered a representive of the american people. This has nothing to do with choice but rather being patriotic toward your country.

HILLARY PUTS OBAMA AWAY

HES DONE

HE IS GONE

ITS OVER

bomb bomb bomb
bomb bomb IRAN
vote MCAIN NOW

IF you match up the swing sates that he won and that she won I read it some place that in terms of Electoral collage he gets more than she dose plus i dont think these polls have much to them C was killing him in the polls 5 months befor the first votes. I think C should get out now befor she dose more damage to her self and the party.
Can any one tell me what happens if O takes a hispanic as his mate. Dose it give him Fl Nevada, New Mexico.... plus all the states Gore won????

It is "racist" for whites to vote Clinton in numbers, but A-OK that a large percent of blacks went for Barry O? Barry O cannot win the general election, no matter how many blacks and elitist self loathing, anti American whites vote for him.

Hillary VS McCain

A NEOCON DREAM

bomb bomb bomb
bomb bomb Iran

Hillary's lead has shrunk to 8.4 points according to latest results with 99.5% reporting. Go OBAMA!!

"The notion that Obama cannot attract core constituencies is only being tested in matches against Hillary Clinton. That's not an argument that he can't win them against John McCain," Trounstine said. "If Barack Obama were the nominee, you would expect Ed Rendell and (Philadelphia mayor) Michael Nutter would work like crazy to deliver Pennsylvania. The same thing would happen in California and Texas, which Clinton also won."

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.