The crisis: Don't be too sure about Romney winning in Montana. The Montana Republicans made a very controversial change this year from an open primary, held the first Tuesday in June, to a closed caucus in which only a handful of GOP officials, about 3,000, will make the decision. The rank and file at the casucus will be precinct committee persons. Also every party official and all elected Republican office holders at local, state and national levels, have a vote.

An important thing happened in Montana for McCain. McCain's Montana chairman had beeen Lt. Gov. Bohlinger, a former Republican Senator from Yellowstone County who ran as Democrat Brian Schweitzer's running mate in what was promoted as a bi-partisan ticket. Most Republicans, though, see Bohlinger as a traitor.

But this past week Bohlinger quietly stepped aside and former U.S. Senator Conrad Burns took over as McCain's state chairman. Burns was the senior GOP office-holder before his defeat in 06 by Democrat Jon Tester. He carries big sway in the state and I think the behind the scenes maneuvering to get McCain a chairman very acceptable to the GOP, involved the top officers in the Montana Republican Party.

Romney will have some strength, but don't assume the Mormons can carry him through. They are a significant part of Montana voters, but they are not a dominating force, even in the Republican party. And don't discount the fact that McCain is a westerner, Romney is from the east. There is a lot of resentment against easterners in Montana conservative and rural circles.

If I were to bet on next Tuesday's closed caucus results in Montana, I would bet on McCain.

Obama's camp may have succeeded in minimizing Hillary's win in Florida, but it also had the effect of insulting the 1.7 million people who voted in the Dem primary by calling it meaningless. Only 1.9 million voted in the "meaningful" GOP primary. This is the same "public be damned" attitude that the DNC displayed in Michigan. They probably won't lose Michigan but they deserve to lose Florida.

Florida may have been stripped by the DNC of their delegates, but I definitely think the votes themselves count because they tell the candidates and the nation who the 1.7 million Democrats who voted last night in Florida support.

I'm surpised Obama's campaign and supporters would say that these 1.7 million Floridian don't mean anything (just because they didn't win). Especially given the events in 2000, I think they more than anyone would want their voice to be heard in this election, delegates or no delegates.

And for the people who claim that Barack's name wasn't even on the ballot and that's why Clinton won, you should get your facts straight first. All of the Democrats were on the ballot in Florida. This is another example of gracelessness in action which goes exactly against the entire "new hope" and "uniter" retoric that supporters of Obama claim to espouse.

Also, in terms of Bill Clinton, even though I may not agree with everything he says, I feel he has every right to express his opinions in public. That's part of the fundamental rights protected in a democracy.

In addition, I know no one objects to Michelle Obama making appearances and speeches by herself in suppport of Barack. In fact, as with any good surrogate, she was the one who fired one of the first shots in the race debate during an interview she gave (by herself) on "60 Minutes."

The truth is, if you look a little closer, EVERY spouse of the candidates act on their behalf, not just Bill Clinton. He's neither the first nor the only one out there, so I'm not sure why he should be placed under special restrictions that other people are not, the way Obama's team would like.

proud wrote
"I doubt she would be so concerned about the Florida voters being unheard if they had voted for her opponent."

I had the same thoughts. The time for her to speak up about the poor disenfranchised Dem primary voters in FL was when the FL Dem party decided to hold the caucus earlier than Nat'l party rules allowed. Waiting to make her case until this stage in the game is a bit disingenuous, at best. Not unlike the NV drama, as proud already pointed out. Have we not had enough Clinton Courtroom antics?

dave, bhoomes, Here's a great article I thought you might like....

"regardless of who wins the nomination, Campaign '08 has illustrated that the Republican party's governing philosophy has become as much of a disconcerting mishmash as the Democrats'. With all the talk of Ronald Reagan this cycle, most have forgotten that Reagan painted with political broad strokes. That's how he united a solid majority of the country. For a few shining moments, Newt Gingrich did the same thing.

If the Republican party really wants to return to those glory days, it will heed those examples. More importantly, it must leave the ideologically confused and pandering pursuit of 51 percent of the vote in its rearview mirror."

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/014/670mqvok.asp?pg=2

lylepink: I am not "looking" for any word. I know exactly what words I want to use at any particular moment. "leukos" is simply the Greek word for "white, without color"--not what I wanted, so don't try to think for me. You have a lot of trouble doing it for yourself, and I want you to conserve your neuronal energy.

radicalpatroit: I think the word you are looking for is "Leukos" a Greek word, and what you are Posting is "Greek" to me.

lyle has now gone the way of rufus....in order to understand their cryptic messages, we must all don tinfoil hats. How sad that you embody the voting block that Hillary and Bill are counting on.

dave writes "many have said they will stay home or even vote Dem, wanting the R party to rethink what it stands for."

This thinking is suicidal lunacy. We will be faced with very clear choices in the fall: Big govt vs small govt, higher taxes vs cutting taxes, precipitous withdrawl from Iraq based on lefty ideas of military intervention vs. continued support of our allies in Iraq and stability in the Middle East. just to name a few.

Look, I voted for GWB both times. He didn't live up to his compassionate conservative pledge, he started nation-building, and spending got way out of control...that's why we lost in 2006.

Joining together now to support a fiscal conservative and military hawk is something that should not be difficult to do, if one just turns off the radio for a while and thinks for themself.

Proud: "There you go again", as Ronnie would say. Taking even a single word out of a sentence and giving it another meaning is the classic "Spin". This has not been your best day, to say the least.

MarkinA: "... a ghost writer for Nigerian bank scammers?" What a sorbet parfait! That's only the second time I have LOL in the last year while drifting among the blogs. [I think "caludialong" has the other honor, with her comments on Fred Thompson.]

"Average voters don't closely follow party delegate rules were likely unaware that Florida was not contested by any of the candidates and absolutely no delegates were at stake."

I love it when pundits call the average voter stupid. I guess as an average voter, I didn't question why Clinton, Obama, and Edwards were nowhere to be found during the lead up to the primary. I am too stupid to connect dots.

Whiskey Romeo

proud - "If we've got to reenergize the party, this is not the time to have fights with each other."

Judging from what I hear from the radio and people I talk to, this will be a difficult (many would say impossible) thing to do. The R base, based on what I have seen and heard, will not support McCain in the numbers he needs and many have said they will stay home or even vote Dem, wanting the R party to rethink what it stands for. We'll see if that holds true. That said, HRC would be a pretty good get out the vote impetus for R's (and independents).

Lyle, What is a FACT is that your candidate will do anything to get elected. When Senator Clinton was campaigning in Iowa and New Hampshire, she made it clear that states like Michigan and Florida that wouldn't produce any delegates, 'don't count for anything.'

Now she's using Florida for her own political gain by trying to assign meaning to a contest that awards zero delegates and where no campaigning has occurred.

Senator Clinton's own campaign has repeatedly said that this is a 'contest for delegates', and Florida is a contest that offers zero.

It sure seems like Hillary Clinton will do or say anything to win an election, even if the end result could be unimaginably acrimonious. Even if African-American voters feel the rules were changed to prevent Obama's victory, and even if young voters feel the delegate counts were shifted to block their candidate. Hillary just doesn't care. Anyone who stands in the way of her ambition for power had better be prepared; she's trying to pull a fast one.

Physician Drashek: It is an easy diagnosis--you are having aneurisms in your pre-frontal cortex, and I recommend for you a lobotomy as soon as possible. Lylepink had one, and you can see who much it has helped his thinking.

BB: When Proud or anyone else tries to get away with Posting Provable LIES, I will call them out. I may appear HARSH, and I intend it that way. LIES have no place in our discussions, and the old timers KNOW how I feel about them, having been Posting less than two years, or having a computer to do so.

Dr. Von Drashek, were you Charlie Chan in a former life? Do you double as a ghost writer for Nigerian bank scammers? Did what you wrote make sense to you?

To Keen observer it is obvious that Hon Obama Esq is going to choose Hon T.Kennedy Esq. to be Vice President.

Let US Now reNAME 1600 penn av nw PARTY HOUSE. Crooners who think pretending is real, well it will pass in few years with definate shift to British Common Law.

Signed:PHYSICIAN THOMAS STEWART VON DRASHEK M.D.

The more I hear Obama supporters demonize Hillary, the more I support her. Obama and his worshiper's dismissal of her Florida win sounds like sour grapes to me. I could just as easily dismiss his SC win by pointing out that only 24% of white voters chose him. That's just as spinnable.

" In some ways,..."winner" ...Florida was not contested by any of the candidates and absolutely no delegates were at stake... purely symbolic nature of the vote."

All right Chris, we get it. Now, the real question is why do you think it appropriate for you to be pushing this spin? It's unprofessional and unethical and you should have the decency to feel ashamed by it.

Romney remains marginally viable because of money--his own and the Corporates.

Never forget it was the Corporates' money that went a long way in foisting off the Decider on us. Romney would be their choice, although they prefer to back a candidate with better odds, or extract concessions from McCain.

As a Dem, I am ambivalent about McCain. I think he is the best of the Repub lot overall, but would much prefer any Dem.

I do think McCain stands a fair chance of upsetting Hillary. She has po'd too many within her own party, let alone the disloyal opposition.

Obama would run better against McCain.

Chris, has anyone taken a look at the effect the writers' strike may be having on the campaign? Since there is virtually no new programming, I, for one, am watching very little major-network television. I have to think that a lot of other people are doing the same thing, which means that a lot of very expensive ad-time is going unwatched. Depending on where the candidates are buying their time-slots, there could be a lot of wasted money being spent and no real return, especially for candidates who are relying on media buys to get their message out.

Romney has 5 sons. Not one has served in the military. Striking.

There is only one person in United States of America who will become the President of our nation, and that person is Senator Hillary Clinton.

She's a woman of candor and humor and directness who's comfortable with responsibility and know how to lead our nation in the right direction.!!!!!

Re: Clinton Ethics

With regards to a few facts, Clinton isn't resorting to litigation to get the Florida and Michigan delegations seated. She has directed her delegates to vote in favor of seating those delegations. Obama will do the same. The only case where this won't happen is if neither candidate has won enough delegates to secure the nomination. In light of Edwards' withdrawal, this is exceedingly unlikely.

Regarding Nevada, it was litigation by a teacher's union, not the Clinton campaign and the case was quickly thrown out. Furthermore, she won the strip 9 casinos out of 11.

Proud...

Please lay off the personal insults (and acronyms for vulgarities). Be proud of your behavior as well as your party.

Lyle...

I know you were responding in kind, but please remember that this is a public forum.

BB

Proud: Reread your 10:30AM Post, it is filled with flat out bald faced LIES. At least try and get your FACTS somewhere near accurate.

DID' YOU REALY THINK' THAT THE CORN-
BREAD AND HAND SPANKED, SOUTHERN; WAS
NOT GOING TO HAVE A SAY' IN THIS
ELECTION.WE ARE NOT BLIND, IF YOU YANK'S CANT SEE THE DIFFERENCE, THE
WHITE PEOPLE, SPOKE LOUD AND CLEAR LAST IN FLORIDA. REMEMBER NEXT TUESDAY
GA,ALA,MISS.CALIF. AND ALL THE GOOD-
PEOPLE IN THE MIDDLE' WE ARE READY
FOR A CHANGE BUT NOT COLOR'

John McCain spoke with Steven hayes on the campaign bus prior to last night's decisive Florida victory...."The important point is to look ahead." he said.

"I know that there are people who still have differences with me," he said, pausing a moment to reflect further. "What I really believe I can do is recognize that we now have a common opponent [Democrats] and we've all got to unite the party. And we not only have to unite the party but we have to reenergize it."

"Look at these vote counts in these primaries. Democrats' turnout, as you well know, is larger than Republicans. If we've got to reenergize the party, this is not the time to have fights with each other."

bhoomes, are you listening?

Of course Hillary's win matters. Why do people care about New Hampshire and Iowa? Not because of delegates. The two states offer a pittance as compared to super tuesday states like California and New York. Iowa and new Hamsphire matter ebcause they are indicators, signals about how voters may act. In the same way,Florida is a strong signal on what we can expect super tuesday just like South Carolina was. What we learned is Obama does not do well accross demographics. Latinos don't like him much. Higher educated and liberal whites like him a bite more. And ...blacks truly do love him. The problem is that in super tuesady states, his base will likely get him no more than 30% of the vote outside of GA and IL. So, as signal to other voters, FL was huge for Hillary because it says she is the stronger candidate among all democratic voters.

There are two questions and only two that Obama needs to ask of Hillary at the next public, NOT a press conference etc, debate to win or lose the Democratic nomination and possible the general election. These are:
"Hillary which one of you am I running against in this election?" "Is it you or Bill"? "If it is you then will you tell Bill to shut up"? The answer she gives is the election.

optimyst,
Agreed. Perhaps, if necessary, we can pick it up again at convention time...

My thoughts on Florida:

It does help Clinton, but isn't a huge surprise. While everyone seems to talk about the advantage that Obama had among African-Americans in SC, no one seems to be mentioning the fact that Clinton has strong support among retirees, and Florida has a disproportionate amount of them.

And can we ask CNN to include a gender/race/age question on their exit polls? Or at least gender + age? Especially on the Dem side, I think it would be interesting.

Careful lyle, your sexism is showing through. I am attempting to focus your attention on the FACTS of the unethical behavior of the Clinton campagin. Is that the best you can do? Insults about menstruation? That's a new low, even for a Clintonite.

You can be sure that the Clintons have a plan to get the Michigan and FL votes to count for them!!! They've shown that they can't be trusted and can't live up to the pledge they made to the DNC. How can voters trust them to live up to their campaign promises?

We've had 8 years of a president and vice president who haven't lived by the rules, if the Clintons get back to the White House they will throw out what's left of the rule book.

McCain clearly dominates the national security issue as the R nominee in a way that Romney, without the relevant experience, could never do.

Particularly in opposing a female liberal candidate amid a global war against terror that could heat up at any moment, this is no inconsiderable advantage.

Hillary's phony experience argument, which she could still maintain vis-à-vis Romney, would be hollow against McCain.

On the issue of the economy and jobs, Mitt's tired line about "knowing how jobs come and how they go" may be more accurate than we think. Romney founded Bain Capital LLC, a hedge fund type company that is notorious for cutting jobs and laying off workers.

The layoffs that must have accompanied Romney's efforts to "turn around" failing companies is an issue that deserves to be raised in response to his claims of economic experience and being better to lead America. That's not the kind of turn around we need.

Proud: You must be having your Monthly. About this time of the month you start spewing the bald faced LIES reminiscent of the current Administration. Most of the time you are a very nice lady, but if your Period does this to you, I would recommend as least an aspirin or two.

vwcat:

Too bad you turned off MSNBC, as then you would have heard that the analysis of the exit polls showed that HRC got a majority of the vote of those who polled early, but those who voted in person on Tuesday split their vote almost evenly between her and Barak. Some of the votes were cast in the last week of December, a week before Iowa. A lot has happened in the last 4 weeks.

And do you REALLY think that Faux News will be fair and balanced in any way, shape or form at any time? If you do, what drugs are you on?

Dave,

I will end our dialog about the significance of the democratic primary vote in Florida simply with respect and by saying we shall agree to disagree. And to note that mine was one of those votes.

avagabond,
CA, the biggest state on the list, is not a winner take all state for the R's so Romney may be able to limit damage there. I have a hard time thinking that Tenn will actually place Thompson first. But I think, based on the polls, that Romney has an uphill climb at this point as most are close to, if not, double digit leads for Mitt to make up.

That said, McCain was as good as dead in November so anything can happen. And that is the most remarkable storyline of this campaign so far (as well as the most ignored).

At what point does a candidate say this is a bridge too far? Are Romney's pockets deep enough to make a big difference.

Posted by: avagabond | January 30, 2008 10:49 AM

avagabond, in my opinion, the results and forecasting you've just made in fact proves that money is NOT the determining factor in any election. Yes, you need a certain amount to get your message out, to pay for staffs, travel, etc. But those who fear that the multi-millionaires will be able to buy any election they want are now being disabused of that notion, if they are intellectually honest.

(unfortunately, intellecual honesty isn't exactly rampant on this site)

This is why Mccain Feingold is such a poor law. It's premise, that money=corruption=election does not hold water. And its restrictions on issue advertising in the days leading up to elections is nothing short of muzzling political speech; our founding fathers would be shocked I'm sure.

So, rmcnicoll, you can testify and verify that there was voter fraud through electronic subterfuge in 2004?

And amazingly, the NYT, CNN, and every prosecutor have ignored your 'evidence'?

Wow, where will the conspiracy end?

Florida voeting "means nothing". That's why Giulani and Edwards dropped out of the race after the votes were counted.

A quick question - I did a quick read of state-by-state polls on Time Real Clear Politics blog and Super Tuesday looks (at this moment in time) like it is heavily weighted towards a successful day for McCain, particularly in the biggest states (less Georgia and Missouri which are weighted towards Huckabee). Out of the 10 biggest, McCain leads in 5, Huckabee leads in 3, Thompson leads in Tennessee, and Romney leads in only 1 (Colorado, the one with the smallest delegate count).

At what point does a candidate say this is a bridge too far? Are Romney's pockets deep enough to make a big difference.

bhoomes, Thank you for your congratulatory post. I see that the resident Clintonite and moron, lylepink, is here once again to spew his top secret unspoken rumors.

lyle, when are you gonna just STFU about all this crap you made up in your drug-addled mind? Lay off the benzos dude.
Isn't it enough that your candidate now wants to use litigation to reinvent the delegate count in her favor? Funny, but I doubt she would be so concerned about the Florida voters being unheard if they had voted for her opponent.

Look how she wanted to disenfranchise voters in Nevada by suing to stop caucusing from occuring, just because she feared the culinary worker's union support of Obama. Selective disenfranchisement...that is the new Clinton strategy. Now that Bill has been told to shut up (thanks Al Sharpton), she'll have to resort once again to legal trickery to win.

That's your candidate, lyle!

Gotta love those Clinton ethics! Oh wait, there are none.

bsimon - "Indeed. I wonder if he will make an endorsement during his official concession speech? That's about the last chance he has to make an impact."

Reports are that he will NOT be endorsing anyone at this time. But we shall have to wait for his official announcement.

It looked like Edwards was trying to be a player at the convention, I didn't think he had a chance at VP due to his run in 2004 and being pounced in SC. It looks like we'll have to wait until his press conference to find out why.

I find it interesting that the Obamaheads are all foaming at the mouth, without knowing their facts.

All three Dems said they would not campaign in FL but would do fundraising. Obama was in FL on this past Sunday doing so, as well as Hillary last week. But Obama was running ads on national cable over a week ago, which included FL, breaking the no campaign pledge.

I'm sure his zombies will say that he was not targeting FL, he could have then started the ads today, since it is a week until the 22 states are in play across the country.

Obama says he is tired of the game of politics but he is playing it himself, just not as well as Hillary.

The last thing I'd like to add is that Obama did worse with the white vote in FL than SC. In SC he got 25%, last night in FL his numbers were at 23%.

I have said it since he first put his name in the ring, when I was thinking of voting for him on the principal that it was an important thing to have a person of color on the ticket. This is still a racist country and you can not win with numbers like that. He also only got 1 to Hillary's 2 hispanic votes.

Mark_in_austin,
I think your characterization of me is a fair assessment.

optimyst,
I am, by no means, an HRC supporter. In fact, she is last in people that I would want as president. But I try to be fair in my assessment of all candidates and to the voters. Close to a million more Dems voted in this FL primary than the one in 2004. I know that there are some that probably stayed home due to the DNC decision. I think, however, the DNC figured that most FL Dems would stay home and they could "forget" about the results. Unfortunately for them, the turnout was huge for FL and the DNC has a problem. I think that your assumption that the voters did not have the information on the candidates to make informed decisions is faulty if you look at the exit polls. They show that the more recently people made their decision on which Dem to vote for, the more likely they were to vote for Obama over HRC. If the people of FL were tuned out and did not have enough info to make decisions (for the man with the funny sounding name :-)), there should not have been this trend. Now would Obama have gotten more votes if he were allowed to campaign there? Perhaps. Perhaps not. But 17% is a substantial margin to overcome.

"You had almost 1.7 million democratic voters who went to the polls without exposure to the normal campaign intensity where records are discussed, dissected and distorted so that a voter has more information with which to clarify a decision."

It was actually over 1.7 million. Democratic turnout was close to 150% more than last time. Floridians knew as much about the candidates as Marylanders and Virginians currently do and we are able to form our opinions on the candidates (prior to campaigning in our state). What campaigning in the state MAY do is help a few undecided voters make decisions one way or another. That has never happened to me or any of my friends/family that I know of, mind you, but it could happen. I don't know how many Alaska stops there will be this week but I feel safe in saying the fact that probably no candidate will campaign there will not mean that Alaskans can't make an informed decision.

Basically though, I simply think that 1.725 million voters (whether or not it meets your or my idea of a projected target) are a lot of people to just disregard.

Republicans and their pundit/operatives are "Trying to shape the battlefield" as Rummy used to say.. they "Know they Can Beat Barak Hussain" but not Hillary!

The Republicans STOLE the Democrats 2008 Primary Election Delegates Vote Again in Florida! Just as they stole election votes in 2000, and in 2004 by vote count and totals computer flipping I saw and verified, and "suppressed black votes" by Highway Patrol poll roadblock intimidation - checking for licenses and and proof of auto insurance. Thanks Jeb Bush for 2000 & 2004. Thanks Republican Controlled Florida Legislature 2007!

It is All About Experience and ability to Fight and reverse seven years of Lies by Republican Mal-Administration, rampant Federal Law violations, as documented 235 Lies by Bush and Cheney, Corporatism in government - allowing the manipulation of unregulated trading of oil and energy prices, lax enforcement of environmental laws, no mine safety regulation fines, attack on Constitutional Bill of Rights, Free Speech, spying on Americans, from imprisoning demonstrators in New York at Republican Convention to lying to Justice Investigation Valerie Plame violation of Federal Security Laws by Bush, directed by Cheney secret government Iraq lies and neocon Irve Libby manipulations, Karl Rove leaks to Robert Novak, etc. Yes, Experience Is More Important than Hype and singing Kumbaya!

Sure, there are no delegates being seats from Florida for the Democrats, but it's no less of a win for Clinton when nearly 900,000 Florida Democrats went to the polls and voted for her anyway.

And, consider, with no Democrats campaigning in Florida, the republicants had only 200,000 more primary voters than the Democrats had. The republicants should be concerned about the turnout the Democrats are showing in primaries across the country.

In response to those of you who believed that none of the Democratic Candidates for president were listed on the ballots, I will tell you that you are incorrect. ALL of the democratic candidates for president were listed and yes, one could even "vote" for that candidate. However because the national democratic party in its wisdom decided to punish the democratic voters of FL because the STATE democratic party wanted to move our caucus up before the 5th of FEB thus putting FL in the same light as those other states who are voting on or before the 5th of Feb. It seems that the state party felt that with the democratic caucus held after "Super Tuesday" our caucus put the state in the position of being an after thought in the nomination process.

Any, to make a long story short the national democratic party stripped ALL of the delegates that FL would normally have sent to the democratic convention thus putting those democratic voters in FL as true after thoughts in the process of selecting the candidate for the next presidential election. Actually what this has done is disenfranchised many of the democrats in the state with many of those same voters deciding to register as either an Independent or republican. WAY TO GO DNC!

Blarg writes, of Edwards's timing in dropping out
"This way he gets to make more of an impact."

Indeed. I wonder if he will make an endorsement during his official concession speech? That's about the last chance he has to make an impact.

My guess is that Edwards dropped out today not because of the FL election, but because of SC. If he'd made the announcement before today, it would have been overshadowed by FL results almost immediately. This way he gets to make more of an impact. Though you could argue that Edwards no longer cares about making an impact, since he's out of the race.

Giuliani, on the other hand, could hardly drop out fast enough. He ran a truly terrible campaign. I wonder how Zouk is taking the news.

Mark, your 9:25 post is exactly where I was going with my comment. I'm guessing seniors tend to go slightly liberal with their votes, since they rarely pay a lot of income taxes and they get lots of government benefits.

McCain doesn't have to win them to crush Fla in Nov - all he has to do is break even. People mostly like to vote for people who look and sound like themselves; that, plus McCain's moderate positions on most issues makes him formidable, maybe even Kryptonite, against either Barrack or HRC.

In fact, Florida might be the one state where HRC would run stronger against McCain than Obama would, due to the interesting demographics (well, maybe Arizona too, but if McCain can't crush Arizona, this race is already over).

dave, At 9:12A I responded to a post by optimyst and characterized you as not an HRC supporter, among other assertions. Pls read it and tell me that I did not defame you.

Just to clear things up -- all the Democratic candidates raised money in Florida. As a matter of fact, I've been watching Obama's ads on CNN all week in Florida. The Obama campaign claims they had to buy the national ad package which of course airs in Florida. I call that campaigning in Florida! Hillary won here because Democrats voted for her and she will continue to win on Super Tuesday.

Edwards departure is in my opinion a plus for Obama. First it stops any talk of Hillary's bueaty pageant 'win' in FL and centers all the talk on who this helps on Feb 5th. I can't see the Edwards folks going with Clinton do to the fact that her husband passed NAFTA.

It will also steal some of the thunder from the Guiliani endorsement of McCain today in California.

blert, did you know Obama put tv ad in Florida earlier? Obama team said it was already in there so couldn't pull out, does it make sense? Hillary told us Obama violated rule, where were you that time? Hillary didn't campaign there, she has no time to campaign in Florida, she just say thanks to Florida voters, why you are so narrow minded? Obama did all kinds of dirty trick, you don't want to see or know it, aren't you?

Both Obama and Edwards filed in Michigan. They removed their names from the ballot after the national committee punished the state for moving up its primary.

Clinton did not campaign in Michigan, as a previous poster claimed. She did, however, leave her name on the ballot. She's playing a more savvy game than Obama with both these states. Both will be important in the fall and making minimal gestures will leave a positive impression. Note the story in today's paper that if Obama is the presumptive nominee, he would seat these delegates. A bit late, methinks.

With regards to optymist's analysis, it's simply incorrect. The Obama is a Manchurian candidate email has been circulating for months and actively attacked by the campaign. He was asked about it directly at a debate. There is no evidence that this has suppressed turnout (which has been at record levels forthe Democrats). Likewise, you cannot say with any certainty that additional turn-out would have broken so heavily for Obama. In effect, it was a big straw poll and Clinton is playing it well.

BB

I need to get out of the prediction business. I had Edwards pegged as a different kind of candidate this time, more a person on a personal mission to bring about his ideas of change. Turns out, he's like every other candidate running. My question is why would results in FL prompt this from him? After all, it was a fairly safe bet HRC would win FL handily last week (and as I have been repeatedly reminded, the FL Democratic vote does not matter). If it is to send his support to Obama, one would think he would be endorsing him which he reportedly is not doing at this time. I don't understand the decision or the timing.

drindl, another interesting FL speculation.

You and I had a discussion about Jewish voters and Israel, the conclusion of which which I would capsulize as:

Elderly and religiously Orthodox Jews are more concerned about Israel than any other issue, but most Jewish Americans count it as an issue in the mix below the typical American priorities.

The south FL Jewish vote is skewed elderly, but they liked McC better than RG or WMR, who both pandered strongly on Israel and in RG's case, on the entire neocon line.

That's interesting, no?

drindl, the elderly retiree vote was reliably maybe 2-1 D in FL. So in a close state, if McC makes a substantial inroad, JD has a point.

McC could carry FL. But we do not know that JD is right from the evidence b/c it is a closed primary state, so the elderly Ds were not voting for McC, they were in the mix that gave HRC more votes in a meaningless D Primary.

That break down would be interesting. If BHO is the nominee against McC would the
"elderly" go with one of their own?

breaking: edwards out. too bad...a decent guy.

"will" not "we".

Again, I do not think the DNC will seat MI and FL unless one candidate has the magic number before the Convention, and that result would not be swayed by seating MI and FL. The ill will could be devastating among the Ds, officials, rank-and-file, and conventioneers, and a repeat of Chicago 1968 would of course lead to a repeat of Nov. 1968 for the Ds.

bsimon, the magic number that is being bandied about for Ds is based on excluding MI and FL.

JRE is dropping out. What we he do now?

'I'm guessing Fla becomes solid red, not a battleground anymore.'

that's a pretty wild supposition to make simply because senior citizens voted for one of their own.

I guess since Huckabee doesn't beleive in any separation of church and state whatsoever, it simply doesn't bother him to break the law and raise money in a church meeting. It also sounds like he's in real bad shape financially:

'Republican hopeful Mike Huckabee reached out to a questionable funding source this week. Texas televangelist Kenneth Copeland, one of the targets of a Senate Finance Committee investigation into the funding and governance of "prosperity gospel" ministries.

At Copeland's annual by-invitation-only Minister's Conference at his Newark, Texas, headquarters Jan. 23, Copeland received a call during the meeting from Huckabee requesting emergency financing. According to Doug Wead, former Bush family evangelical adviser, Copeland and his supporters at the conference raised $111,000 in cash for Huckabee, with about a million dollars in pledged donations.'

The investigation into these cash-cow 'ministries' that bilk members for millions and then live lavishly and tax-free, is being conducted by Republican Charles Grassley by the way, and about time, too.

Guillani losing couldnt have happened to a nicer guy!

http://p2plendingwithprosper.blogspot.com/

If you are a Hillary supporter, then her win meant something.

If you are not a Hillary supporter, then her win meant nothing.

optimyst - dave is not an HRC supporter. I think:

He is a right center conservative who prefers private solutions to public. He values competence, as well as integrity, perhaps above ideology, at least for anyone on or near the "center".

I am guessing that dave could be attracted to some D candidates sometimes, but far less often than I. I have not kept count, but I have only voted in one R Primary in recent years and none since GWB was the prospective nominee.

This is a subjective read. I would not want to speak for him. IMHO, in the past he has shown a good eye for the relevant and knows hype when he sees it, pretty much of any political stripe.

If you and he were senators, you would find that you could fashion many compromises with him and also walk away from your unresolved debates with no hard feelings.

But he might be slighted by your assumption he gives allegiance to HRC.

Clearly either wingnuts are out here trying to pump up Hillary's numbers, or the Hillary campaign has gotten to all the wonderfully low-information voters who are somehow trying to spin Clinton's FL "win." Why would wingnuts be trying to pump up Hillary's numbers? Because it doesn't cost them anything to be "supporting" their most hated adversary in the Dem primary. As Saint McCain might say, my friends, if you think Hillary has a snowball's chance of winning the general election, there's a rail line out to Dulles I'd like to sell you.

Did you see the exit polls, how McCain crushed with the Seniors in Fla? Since they probably skew liberal slightly (and boy do they turn out), if McCain gets the nom, I'm guessing Fla becomes solid red, not a battleground anymore.

Romney may want to flip flop back to pro-choice after last night's results because it looks like he might need a morning after pill.

'Insiders suggest that raising money wasn't the problem -- it was how and where the cash was spent'

yes, rudy's wife's need to stay at an expensive spa or resort every night, and to always require an extra seat [on a private jet] for her vuitton handbag [no, that is not an exaggeration] is probably not the best way to budget campaign funds.

but he could have used his own money if he really cared enough -- he's made millions off of war profiteering.

I'm glad McCain is ahead of the creepy Mittens, but I hope his increasingly loony foreign policy talk is just pandering to the base or we are in big trouble.

What I want to know is, HOW DID THE VOTING MACHINES WORK IN FLORIDA? Is this even a reliable count?

Democratic Florida delegates: watch how fast the Dem Party reverses its decision if Clinton wins big on Super Tuesday.

vbhoomes: I thought by your intense dislike for McCain you would have the same information I, and many others have, and don't want it to be used by anyone. My apologies.

sen. Clinton DID NOT run ads or make speeches UNTIL THE VOTE WAS OVER AND POLLS CLOSED!!!

sen. Clinton kicked Obams ass by plenty

Posted by: vergens2 | January 30, 2008 05:17 AM

Right. OK. Sen. Clinton DID PANDER to Florida voters on NATIONAL news outlets BEFORE THE POLLS OPENED. She DID wait till AFTER votes were counted in states where she might have LOST VOTES for suggesting Florida deligates be counted.

I know you are BITTER, but Florida voters, what ever Sen. Clinton may have promised you, your votes WILL NOT count in the primary process.

Chris: MSNBC had some guidance worked out in advance and did not say Hillary was the "winner" in Florida. Host were clearly avoiding use of that term. It said she drew the most votes or constructions like that.

Jay Rosen (pressthink.org)

Okay, this is for my friend Dave and anyone else who thinks the result last night on the democratic side had any significance:

Yesterday's Florida primaries were closed. Florida has 4.1 million registered democrats and 3.6 million registered republicans.

Prior primaries and caucuses in 2008 were open, but in every contest there was higher turnout on the democratic side. Also, because democrats are out-raising republicans significantly in campaign contributions, it is fair to conclude that if the Florida democratic race was contested that turnout would have greatly exceeded republican turnout. That has been the result in every state thus far. Because this was the first closed set of primaries, this is hard to quantify, so I'll just assume a modest 5% difference. (There will be some closed primaries next Tuesday to check this against.)

Here's the calculation of republican turnout:

votes cast on 1/29 1,920,169
registered voters 3,600,000

turnout % 53.34%

So, let's say that democratic turnout should have been 5% higher because of the greater energy on their side:

registered democrats 4,100,000
times projected turnout 58.34%

expected dem. turnout 2,391,940

actual dem. turnout 1,683,984

missing voters 707,956

Now, let me share two anecdotes from yesterday:

1) I talked with my 23 year old son on the phone last night. He's an Obama supporter. He said that when he heard there were no delegates at stake, he just didn't see the point of taking time out from a busy day to go vote since it didn't mean anything.

2) I talked with another friend whose 13 year old son reported this conversation from school: the topic of Obama came up between two students. One of the students said that his parents told him nobody should vote for Obama because he is a Muslim.

So, Dave, here's my point. You had almost 1.7 million democratic voters who went to the polls without exposure to the normal campaign intensity where records are discussed, dissected and distorted so that a voter has more information with which to clarify a decision. You had a state where the party machinery were Clinton supporters and had given their state's electoral votes to her husband twice previously, so that her name was well-known and respected. Voters were expected to educate themselves on this new guy with the funny sounding name of Barack Obama. Most people are too busy in this slumping economy eeking out a living to do their due diligence. So that distorts the result for the people who DID vote.

Then add the 700,000 democrats like my son who would have voted if their votes were real exercises in choosing a nominee, whose excitement would have been fueled by the energy brought by the campaigns, and whose vote would have been informed by the competition between candidates.

You may still wish to claim significance for Hillary's hollow "victory" but that would only be natural for someone already committed to her candidacy. In doing so, you deny plain the plain facts of this analysis.

Lylepink I am not sure what you mean by "Bad stuff" but I know why I and my fellow conservatives despise this guy. This is shaping up to be a most unusual election year. If it is HRC and Mac, they will both lead splintered parties into the general election. Might want to buy stock in Bloomberg, he may have a gaping hole to run through with Americans who don't like neither of the major party nominees.

Hillary broke the agreement and said she was going to FL on Sunday. She panicked after the SC primary. http://www.nbc-2.com/articles/readarticle.asp?articleid=17130&z=3&p=

About 1 MILLION people voting for Hillary Clinton and it doesn't mean anything? What are the star-struck entities on this forum smoking? The Floridians - a million of them - more than all previous states COMBINED - more than those who voted for the GOP winner - oh, I think they count for something. Maybe not to the eclectic Obama band - but to us common people, they do.

Here in Maryland it's a lot like florida. The candidates haven't really campaigned here and there is no tv, newspapers or even phones to speak of. I am, like a typical Floridian, completely unaware there's any alternative to Hillary Clinton in the race.

I've overhead in restaurants there's this magical fellow running against her, but I'm sure it's a myth...

Give me a freakin' break, people in FL have seen national media, hell they've even been getting Obama ads (despite the promise not to campaign there) What's the deal with the media playing this like FL (a major player in the last few elections) is some backwater where folks voted for Hillary because they've been sequestered since they moved their primary and they didn't know any better.

Hillary won in a major state with far more electoral votes at stake, and it's blown off. When Obama wins a dinky state where the electorate is 50% black and he pulls ~80/20 black/white votes, that's a landslide rebuke of the Clintons.

When he loses by the same margin as her rebuke in a big state it's because he couldn't personally go there and lay hands on everyone before they voted? Who needs koolaid when folks already believe he performs miracles.

Praise be to Obama, Barack be with you.

Will McCain split the Republican Party?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1657

.

vbhoomes: I can only assume you KNOW the "Bad" stuff that is out there about McCain. I have said I hope no one ever uses what I believe to be true, and would destroy him and his family and friends. Do you think Mitt will use it as a last resort to gain the Repub nomination??

Hillary Clinton won and won by a huge margin in Florida, which is a diverse state, more representative of the larger United States. If Senator Obama had won (with or without delegates) his win would be a testament to his high powered recent endorsements by the Kennedy's and author Toni Morrison. Moreover, an Obama win would be seen as "proof in the pudding" that he has a mandate from the people.

Give Clinton some respect and acknowledge that her win in Florida is significant. There is such a glaring bias in the media against Clinton's candidacy and campaign. But I suppose this is to be expected, since "the tallest trees always catch the wind."

Beni Dakar
Duluth, GA

This is an excerpt from an article by a journalist in the Boise Journal...I actually liked it very much. He is for Edwards, by the way and the name of the journalist is Ted Rall and the article is entitled The Politics of Dopes:Barack Obama,empty suit:

"What Obama has not done is answer the question: Why does he want to be president? The answer--that it would be a cool addition to his resume--is too unappealing to say out loud.

The night of the New Hampshire primary, Obama declared (four times!): "There is something happening in America!" What's happening? "Change," he said, "is what's happening in America." Change to what? Obama didn't say.

"Yes, we can," Obama said (11 times). "Yes, we can, to justice and equality. Yes, we can, to opportunity and prosperity. Yes, we can heal this nation. Yes, we can repair this world. Yes, we can." Great. How?

He cannot say.

All the candidates, except for John Edwards, want to be president because they want to be president. Winning the presidency is their goal. Like Robert Redford at the end of The Candidate, they have no idea what they'll do if they get the gig."

TO READ THE ENTIRE EDITORIAL:
http://www.boiseweekly.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A310467

Congratulations to the McCain supporters on this blog. But this is 1 conservative who will never vote for McCain, If it is Obama & McCain, I am voting for Obama, if it is HRC & Mac,then I am voting for Bloomberg or whoever is a 3rd party candidate.

noway: You must be reading something other than what is being Posted on this Blog. The first paragraph of your Post is the exact opposite of what I read every day. The overwhelming majority of the "Hillary Haters" Posts are coming from Obama supporters, or those claiming to support him, which I doubt, the REAL Obama supporters are not doing this, IMHO. Everyone KNOWS I am a strong Hillary supporter from even before she announced, and I have not said anything negative about Obama. There is something about him I can't explain, and I think he has ZERO chance of being elected Prez in 08. This is not a visceral hatred as the aforementioned are.

Re: Clinton in Florida: The unions sent out a mass mailing to voters with her approval, I'm sure. Thus, she was able to campaign in the state without explicitly violating her pledge not to do so. Obama, on the other hand, showed he has it in spades over her when it comes to honesty and character -- he stuck to the agreement. So don't kid yourself -- she found a way around that ban on campaigning in Florida. I am one white, female, liberal Democrat who will never vote for Hillary Clinton. This country has seen enough of lying sleazeball politicians.

This is entirely and utterly false: "how could Mrs. Clinton "win" in Florida? There was nobody of her opponents on the ballots there."

All the seven Democrats or so that started out was on the Florida ballot yesterday.

There was no advertising. I donated smaller amounts multiple times to Hillary's campaign and received no advertising in the mail.

Obama did advertise nationally on cable tv and his ads appeared here in Florida. It couldn't be helped, he can't control the ads from being shown in Florida.

Hillary did not advertise on those channels and no ads for Hillary were shown in Florida like Obama. Why bother, when MSNBC and CNN is giving her such fair coverage! lol

I have boycotted CNN and MSNBC. Won't watch them again, ever. They don't have that many viewers to start with, 1 to 2 million, from the ratings figures, and they have lost one of those in me. Permanently, long after their Pravda like coverage of Obama is but a dim and skanky memory.

I had to go to Fox News to get the ongoing poll results. There people saw the vote tallies for Clinton, Obama, and Edwards. Only Fox viewers knew there was voting among all the Democratic candidates going on unless you had personally seen it for yourself.

Rarely have the neocons on Fox News have had any analasys I wanted to hear but they are now the only source of unbiased information on Hillary of the cable channels.

Concerning what Obama can control, the only news organization doing real reporting is ABC (and CBS I understand) on the Rezko connection to Obama. This is an extremely serious matter of a land deal that Ken Starr would have salivated over instead of the $40,000 the Clintons lost in the Whitewater land development investment (more on that in next post).

CNN amd MSNBC may want to keep you ignorant, but you can betcha that Republicans are keeping their powder dry should Democrats less than informed on Obama's transgressions with Rezko on his house nominate him to face the straight shooter, McCain.

It would be ugly.

rd

Re: Mrs. Clinton's name on the Michigan ballot:

All candidates on the Democratic side had their names on that ballot until the DNC sanctioned Michigan. All Democratic candidates pulled their name from the Michigan ballot, with one exception.

Mrs. Clinton.

Mrs. Clinton stated that it was an oversight on the part of her campaign that her name was not withdrawn from the ballot.

Oversight?

Oversight???

O V E R S I G H T ? ? ? ? ?

I am very hard pressed to believe that it was an oversight.

I note the vitriol and pettiness in many comments supporting Hillary Clinton in these blogs. Why must they taunt supporters of her opponents and misrepresent the significance of any inconvenient information to their cause?

It is due to these factors not to mention the cheap shot nature of the Clinton campaign that I can not support her. I must point out that she and her supporters are in real danger of poisoning the well. How can she expect to unify the party if she and her supporters can't even be civil with those who disagree with them? The Obama/Edwards vision is for a large inclusive party not marred by ad hominem rhetoric. Sadly the calculated vitriol of the Clinton campaign may win the nomination but virtually dooms the party in the general election. Is that worth it? I submit that it is not. I disagree with you HRC supporters, like many of my fellow Americans. Is it too much to ask not be ridiculed, vilified or condescended to because of that disagreement?

I vote for hope. I vote for what we can be, not for what we have been. You can make fun of me or attack me but that is where I stand.

Obama '08!

MSNBC, Patrick Buchanan summarizes McCain's platform: "Here's the straight talk, my friends. Your jobs are not coming back. The illegal aliens are never leaving. And I promise you more wars." No appeal there, folks.

Chris...take a look at the numbers for S. FL for McCain. He crushed the opposition in Miami Dade and did very well in Broward and Palm Beach counties.

I suspect that the support of Martinez and the members of Congress in that area really helped him and racked up his vote total down there. The cuban Americans...and the retirees contributed greatly to his victory there.

Here in the Jax area, McCain didn't seem to have much a presence and it was reflected in the vote totals.

OMG so I see now the pathetic out of touch
with reality Washington Post apprears to
have a new hero in that senile old phony
Republican Amnesty John McCain,who a lot of
us here in Arizona,will not vote to be the
dog catcher of the smallest one dog town
in Arizona,as we saw what a two face sellout and illegal alien and cheap labor
big business panderer Amnesty John McCain
really is and we all also know how McCain
has milked his being a POW during the Viet
Nam War into 25 years of a pathetic failure
of a politcal hack career in Congress. And
we haven't forgot Amnesty John McCain hugging and almost kissing President George
W Bush's butt either now them... So is the
pathetic WAPO going to sell out their other
Hero Democrat Loser Con Man Barack Obama
for McCain as well now then. And why hasn't
the once mighty Washington Post investigated all of Barack Hussein Obama
close ties and role in Indicted,Arrested
and Jailed Chicago Slumlord Rizko now that
Obama's chief corrupt Chicago businessman
pal Rizko has been thrown in jail as a flight risk over crooked money deals with
Syria and ties to Chicago corruption that
St Obama is trying to lie and deny his way
out of any shady dealings with his Chicago
Slumlord neighbor on you WAPO. So afraid
to admit your two hero's McCain and Obama
are just as dishonest,phony and corrupt as
George W Bush and Draft Dodger Dick Cheney?

How is it "to his credit" that Obama tried to "educate" people about the purely symbolic nature of the race? It was certainly in his political interest to do so. Besides, ridiculing the votes of a million some-odd democrats seems a little jarring for such a symbols-based campaign.

South Carolina: Obama is not ready to be Commander in Chief

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/epolls/index.html#SCDEM

Obama overall vote: 54%
Obama as C-in-C / Beating Republican: 46/48
Clinton overall vote: 27%
Clinton as C-in-C/ Beating Republican: 35/36

Florida: Obama is not ready to be Commander in Chief

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/epolls/index.html#val=FLDEM

Obama overall vote: 33%
Obama as Commander in Chief: 28%
Clinton overall vote: 50%
Clinton as Commander in Chief: 53%

Florida: Obama not ready for Commander in Chief

Obama overall vote: 33%
Obama as Commander in Chief: 28%
Clinton overall vote: 50%
Clinton as Commander in Chief: 53%

Well, it will be McCain v. Obama, it seems.

One claims he is a dreamer and those "I have a deram" and "I have a draem" placards being held by Obama supporters on Corpus Christi TV, suggest that the dream need a program called 'No Adults Left Behind.'

The other is a proven Realist, who remained 5 1/2 years in captivity in North Vietnam. He was pulled out of a lake near Hanoi with two fractured arms and a fractured leg. Once on shore his shoulder was broken by a rifle butt and he was bayonet ted in the foot and the groin and then denied total medical treatment for 2 days.

The story of his bravery is in Wikipedia and of his ordeal by torture and refusals of early release is also there. McCain wants a renewed America also AND HE IS THE ONLY CREDIBLE CANDIDATE IN THE EYES OF AMERICA'S ADVERSARIES.

I like Obama, but this election goes way beyond who I like. It is about who is PROVEN and Osama is certainly not worried about Obama.

You can bet your a$$ that is not his view of McCain !!!

Congratulate Hillary for the win. Obama supporters must realise that he had the same opportunity as Hiallry to campaign in Florida. Hillary did what it takes to win. Remember Tim Russert said, "Florida, Florida, Florida."

First of all the idiot that said she campaigned in Fla. is full of you know what!!! Sen Clinton ran NO ADS and made NO speeches and had ONLY upaid vols. to do what they could to help AS DID Obama. Mrs Clinton was fully aware she would NOT get any deligates--as was Obama--she AT LEAST told the voters that she would work to get the deligatematter reversed--which is more than Obama did. The the snide unprofessional remarks about Obama 0 and Clinton 0 dels. is sour grapes and the usual whinning you get from them. If he stooped to such childish comments he should have hauled his rear end to Fla. The time I looked Sen. Clinton had over 850,000 votes --Obama about 400,000 votes from people who knew that no deligates were at issue. Mrs. Clinton went to Fla. AFTER the polls CLOSED. Mr Obama had the testcles to say zeroObama and zero Clinton
is crap. When you get whipped--as he did- those votes are there AND will be there in Nov. for Hillary Clinton. the difference is--despite His high and lofty speeches the Fla voters got a clean and unfilterd vote AND voted AGAINST Obama BY ALMOST 400,000 votes. If the vote was reversed Obama and his minions would be out there laughing and jumping up and down and probably making snide remarks about Sen. Clinton. He LOST and he was not even gracious to say that she got the most votes and moveon. It'ts bad enough to turn his back on Sen. Clinton last night and now this chilish responce today only tells me he LOST my support. I finally came to the light to see him for what he is --a phony---along with his camp. mgr. Axelrod. If they think Sen. Kennedy's endorement will help him thaey are way off the charts. There ARE NOT ENOUGH Kennedy dems. left to to follow that mans lead.

sen. Clinton DID NOT run ads or make speeches UNTIL THE VOTE WAS OVER AND POLLS CLOSED!!!

sen. Clinton kicked Obams ass by plenty

I guess the Democrats wil defeat themselves. The Obamasists and the Clintonistas will be so busy talking about the principled and dynamic Obama and the manipulating Clintons (from a Republican playbook) that we will end up with a Republican President. Remember how the Republican youth terrorised those chad counters in 2000? After Obama gets rid of Clinton the Rovians will get rid of Obama. Funny thing: the Clintons want to go back to the 1990s. The future with Obama involves going back to the 60s and then further back to King Arthur and his Rouund Table - knights and horses and damsels in distress - in Camelot. And this is the future.

Correction on my last Post. "or vise versa" should have read--"My read is that it would work, or vise versa it would not."

I think one fact that downplays the significance of the Florida Dem vote is that in the other states where the vote actually counted, the activity on the Dem side was clearly greater than that on the Republican side (i.e. more Dem votes were cast in total). This did not happen in Florida - there were more Republican votes - probably because people knew the primary had no weight in the bigger picture.

dschauer: The "Hillary Haters", mostly from the Obama camp, are out in force. On another thread FemaleNick offers a Hillary/Obama ticket, or vice versa, that would make history for the next 16 years, a woman and a black as Prez. I think she is on to something most of us hadn't given much thought.

I saw the ticket for this year on the stage tonight. McCain-Crist will be the nominees at the convention this summer...and the inaugurees on January 20, 2009. And America will be a better place for it!!

there's no real blame for giuliani's flameout in the primaries. he just had no business thinking that the name recognition alone could overcome the total lack of real connection to republican voters.
mr. 9/11 had no natural constituency, no relationships, and no ability to connect with voters. his perutformances in the debates and in interviews were stunning in their lack of conviction; every question was answered with the same nervous laughter - it might play at lunch in the Stage Deli of New York, but it didn't resonate as well with a greater audience which had trouble with his sense of irony.

Another way to look at this is that HALF the people of Flordia voted AGAINST HILLARY. The Clintons are masters of double-speak. Same old "trailer-park-trash" tricks, just a different day.

The Obama Campaign has not been totally honest about Florida.

The following appeared in the Tampa Tribune Newspaper in September of last year:

By WILLIAM MARCH and ELAINE SILVESTRINI The Tampa Tribune

Published: September 30, 2007

TAMPA - Barack Obama hinted during a Tampa fundraiser Sunday that if he's the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, he'll seat a Florida delegation at the party's national convention, despite national party sanctions prohibiting it.

Obama also appeared to violate a pledge he and the other leading candidates took by holding a brief news conference outside the fundraiser. That was less than a day after the pledge took effect Saturday, and Obama is the first Democratic presidential candidate to visit Florida since then.

To read the complete article, please go to:

http://www2.tbo.com/content/2007/sep/30/obama-vows-do-whats-right/?news-brea

She is certifiable. She loves to play the American people for complete idiots. You almost feel sorry for her when she gives a victory speech for winning the participation award. Congrats Hillary.....you just won nothing. You will always win nothing.

I think that the Obama campaign should send out congratulatory statements to the Edwards and Clinton campaigns for having won equal number of delegates in Florida, and one to Mike Gravel while they're at it. This is the first time that John Edwards and Mike Gravel come away even with their adversaries so it is more important for them than for the front-runners to have their victories acknowledged.
As for Florida, Michigan, and any number of other things (Las Vegas Strip precincts, etc.), all of the Clintons' fans insist that rules should be changed after the fact if and only if it benefits their candidate. As much as anything else, this seems to mark out the cleavage in the Democratic Party -- those who believe in fairness of process, and in the democratic principles expressed most forcefully in the Declaration, and The Clintons win any way you can, my way or the highway philosophy. This is why so many of millions of Americans think of Clinton-Bush (which sounds better than Bush-Clinton) as a unified political philosophy. Obviously the rhetoric differs greatly between the two families, one sounds interested in the working and middle class, the other in protecting capital and privilege, but their governing philosophies overlap and their mutual embrace of trickle-down economics. The Clinton campaign serves to repudiate all the warming rhetoric we've heard from them around election time all these years about inclusiveness. Witness South Carolina and the post-Iowa Clintons' campaign. Inclusiveness, for The Clintons, seems to mean, if it's for me, include it, otherwise challenge its relevance and deny, deny, deny.

Do check Campaign Diaries's analysis of the state of the race now in the GOP field (and McCain's marching towards the nomination): http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2008/01/republicans-john-mccain-marching.html

As well as in the Democratic race, where there is actually a lot about yesterday's vote that is very instructive: http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2008/01/week-from-super-tuesday-clinton-is.html

Oh, and to all of the people who say that Hillary is only interested in getting the Florida and Michigan delegates seated because of her ambition: Perhaps, Sen Obama wouldn't do the same if he had won, he didn't even bother to file for the Michigan ballot after all, but what would that say about his sense of inclusiveness or willingness to let every voice be heard? Not to mention that most likely, maybe not on the first ballot, but if the race does go all the way to the convention, I'm sure these two states will find a place.

More than twice as many Democrats voted in the 2008 Florida Primary than in the 2004, which also "didn't count" because there was already a front-runner by March. Apparently, according to the blogosphere, only those who would've voted for one of Sen Clinton's opponents decided not to participate or vote for any of the offices down ticket (real party loyalists?). I don't know, but the last time I looked at any numbers, Sen. Obama's vote count was approaching that which Sen. Kerry won in Florida to trounce his opponents, yet he still came in second during yesterday's race.

The Florida Democratic primary doesn't count, yet MORE Democrats come out and vote in it than the number of Republicans who voted in a hotly contested Republican primary?
Posted by: dougcriss | January 30, 2008 12:19 AM

Add up the figures. Far more votes were cast in the Republican Primary than in the Democratic Primary. Clearly, the DNC sanctions and absence of campaigning led to a drop in the Democratic turn out.

220646...

As a moderate GOP voter I'm very worried about that number. Despite my party pouring millions into FL for advertising and get-out-the-vote efforts, five candidates, and the Democrats' completely symbolic primary, they only drew 220,646 fewer voters...

Mr. Omama can't wait to get to the white house so he can invite his buddy brother marion barry over for a good cocaine party.

It would have been interesting to hear Senator Rodham Clinton fight for Florida and Michigan before the Iowa and New Hampshire contests, when such support might have been a political issue instead of simply a spin job by the Clinton trench warfare machine.
It makes me wonder whether she simply tells voters what they want to hear, when it is convenient for her own ambition.

The Republicans are bound to nominate McCain. He is the only candidate with a "fire in his belly" who is not certifiably nuts (Huckabee, Paul) or a total phoney (Romney, Giuliani).

On the other hand, he is old AND old beyond his years as a result of his POW experience.

Look at his pictures. Notice that he is so wasted that he CANNOT RAISE HIS ARMS ABOVE SHOULDER LEVEL EXCEPT WITH THE HELP OF HIS WIFE.

There is no way McCain can win the general election.

Obama held a fundraiser in Tampa on Sunday. Afterwards, he held a mini-press conference. Here's the link in case anyone is interested in FACTS.

http://www2.tbo.com/content/2007/sep/30/obama-vows-do-whats-right/?news-breaking

Elected officials are supposed to represent the will of the people not the will of the political parties. Florida and Michigan both were punished with the loss of economic boosts associated with campaigning. Seat all the delegates now that their primary voting is done please.

On the democratic side, however you feel about candidates, the bottom line in South Carolina was Obama won fair and square based on the will of the majority of the democratic voters who chose to express their wishes. The same is true for Michigan and Florida -- the will of the people was clearly in favor of Clinton in record numbers.

All American votes should count towards delegates in all primaries and caucuses.

Chris,

It may not be reported this way tomorrow in the Media, but I have to disagree with you on several points. First, McCain did not win a resounding victory tonight. If you look at the county-by-county results, coupled with the exit polls, you get the feeling that, had it been a two-man race, Romney probably would've handily defeated McCain.

In particular, Huckabee absolutely killed Romney in many Northern Florida counties where he most likely would've easily dispatched with McCain. The question going forward, at this point is, what happens if Huckabee sweeps the South on Super Tuesday? Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Missouri, Oklahoma and Tennessee are Huckabee country - as well as openly hostile to McCain.

As far as the Democratic side goes, while it won't be reported this way tomorrow (most likely) your analysis seems to be tainted by expectations setting. "Clinton got what she wanted"; well, only if you look so far.

Clinton has had an infrastructure in Florida for, literally, years; to a (much) lesser extent, so has Edwards. Obama, on the other hand, has not. However, even though he had only been averaging poll numbers in the 20's, he managed to take a surprising 33% in a state where he has never campaigned. Furthermore, if you look at the exits, while Clinton won handily amongst early voters, of those that voted today or recently, Obama convincingly beat everybody in the field.

In fact, a story that we will, and have not seen in the media, is that Obama has now out-performed in every state that has voted thus-far (except NH, which we can all agree was whacky):

Iowa: 38% (RCP 31%)
New Hampshire: 36% (RCP 38%)
Nevada: 45% (RCP 34%)
Michigan*: 40% (RCP 31%)
South Carolina: 55% (RCP 38%)
Florida: 33% (RCP 28%)

* Numbers for "Uncommitted"

That being said, the real question is, how much does this compressed calendar work against Obama? The record seems clear, thus far, that when Obama has time to campaign in a state, he beat the Clinton machine. What we will never know (sadly), is what would happen if we had the time for a campaign in California like we had in 1968.

How strange! Every time Hillary wins her opponents' supporters cry foul. Always it's a dirty trick, a racist card, a new low plumbed. Yet when their man wins it's because people have "fianlly" seen the truth.

Obama may win the nomination, I contiunue to concede that. And although he is not my choice, I will cheer him on as the Democratic candidate. BUT! If you keep painting him in Messianic terms ("If you don't vote for him you are leting down your country", "If you don't vote for him it's because you have been tricked", "If you don't vote for him..." etc, you are in fact sinking to the very levels to which you claim the Clintons have descended.

Grief people! Look ahead to the campaign for the Presidency. At this rate the Republicans wont need to spend as much money as the Deomcrats, because they will only need to rerun ALL the comments each of you have made over the last few weeks. The candidates have begun to tone it down. You all (yes, I'm talking to YOU, Obama supporters, as well as those for Edwards and those for Clinton) need to follow suit.

apelbaurn, confused, asks:
"Dschauer, how could Mrs. Clinton "win" in Florida?"

By garnering nearly 900,000 votes. Math must not be your strong point.

Are you saying the people of Florida don't exist?

Let's the spinmeisters after February 5th.

"Apart from a few rough edges in South Carolina, she's running an excellent campaign. In Florida, she received 856,944 votes with 99% of precincts counted."

Ummm... without hating HIllary, FL just isn't meaningful... because neither she nor any other Dems actually ran a campaign there. The results were decided by name recognition as much as anything. In contested states, Obama's numbers have surged late as voters get to know him. Despite the 800,000+ votes Hillary received, I suspect the turnout would've been much bigger in a contested race (Dems have easily eclipsed Repubs turnout in every other contested state).

And as others have pointed out, Hillary is trying to game the system and to prey on voters who aren't following the details. This is hardly characteristic of an honorable campaign.

Ultimately, if you believe politics is inherently dirty and messy and things like honor and integrity play little role, then Hillary may be your candidate. But if you think our politics would benefit from trustworthiness and public engagement, then you might want to look elsewhere.

I can't understand the hatred shown toward Hillary Clinton. I admire and respect the woman and politician. Apart from a few rough edges in South Carolina, she's running an excellent campaign. In Florida, she received 856,944 votes with 99% of precincts counted. That's more votes than McCain received -- without campaigning in the state. She's the clear frontrunner on the Democratic side.

Obama and Edwards should be good Christians and abstain, from now on from campaigning in the remaining states, and let poor Hillary lead the show.

It won't help her win, but it might appease her ego.

As a Florida voter, I still had not decided whether to go with Obama or Hillary this morning. Obama saying "Florida doesn't matter" was instrumental in my final decision to vote for Hillary. If you choose to diss an entire state in an attempt to minimize the fallout from a possible loss, it's going to cost you down the road.

For the Dems it is tight, as the web statistics here show:

SuperTuesday Analysis -
The Democrats Web Battle
Google Trend & Web Hits Reports
http://newsusa.myfeedportal.com/viewarticle.php?articleid=43

As for the Republicans... the charts are odd. for John McCain is way down the list, but something tells me McCain will not be the one...
http://newsusa.myfeedportal.com/v