Obama's efforts to connect to the Republican Party, specifically Bush, and Dick Chaney, of the Halliburton Company, dates back to the Presidents Grandfather, Prescott Bush, and indeed Chaney was once an executive officer of Halliburton.

The American military pounds Iraq with Artillary, bombs, and the like, destroying large sections of cities, and infra-structures, then Halliburton comes in to rebuild. Halliburton and Halliburton associated companies have raked in ten's of billions.

Obama is just like the BIG HALIBURTAN. Haliburton has contracted to build detention centers in the U.S. similiar to the one in Quantanammo Bay, Cuba. Halliburton does nothing to earn the Two Dollars for each meal an American Serviceman in Iraq eats.

http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/

Halliburton was scheduled to take control of the Dubai Ports in The United Arab Emiirate. The deal was canceled when Bush was unable to affect the transfer of the American Ports.

Now we see what some might suspect as similiar financial escapading from the Democrats.

Two years ago, Iraq's Ministry of Electricity gave a $50 million contract to a start-up security company - Companion- owned by now-indicted businessman (TONY REZKO) Tony Rezko and a onetime Chicago cop, Daniel T. Frawley, to train Iraqi power-plant guards in the United States. An Iraqi leadership change left the deal in limbo. Now the company, Companion Security, is working to revive its contract.
Involved along with Antoin "Tony" Rezco, long time friend and neighbor of Democratic Presidential hopeful Barack Obama, and former cop Daniel T. Frawley, is Aiham Alsammarae. Alsammarae was accused of financial corruption by Iraqi authorities and jailed in Iraq last year before escaping and returning here.

LIKE FATHER LIKE SON --
Recently, Obama's campaign staff have been vetted by the IRS to disclose his connection to the criminal money generating underworld. Besides, his connections to the REZCO MAFIA types, his up-coming tax fraud charges -- Obama needs to disclose why he is a MUSLIM "PATWANG-FWEEE" and disclose Obama's MUSLIM Farrakhan mob connection to Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ. Its minister, and Obama's spiritual adviser, is the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. In 1982, the church launched Trumpet Newsmagazine; Wright's daughters serve as publisher and executive editor. Every year, the magazine makes awards in various categories. Last year, it gave the Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Trumpeter Award to a man it said "truly epitomized greatness." That man is Louis Farrakhan. Farrakhan and Chicago's Trinity United Church are trumpeting Barack Obama AKA Barack Hussein Obama as the second coming of the messiah. Obama should stop suppoting our intervention in IRAQ. It's time to introduce this false, fake Xerox - X box Obama and invite the self-indicting thief plagiarizing pipsqueke "GLORK" Xerox - X box to meet the Buffalo "GAZOWNT-GAZIKKA" Police Department Buffalo Creek. He is MAD!!! --

OBAM YOU'RE NO JFK --

"GLORK" Obama looks like Alfred E. Newman: "Tales Calculated To Drive You." He is a MUSLIM "Glork" He's MAD!!! Alfred E. Neuman is the fictional mascot of Mad. The face had drifted through American pictography for decades before being claimed by Mad editor Harvey Kurtzman after he spotted it on the bulletin board in the office of Ballantine Books editor Bernard Shir-Cliff, later a contributor to various magazines created by Kurtzman.
Obama needs to disclose why he is a MUSLIM "PATWANG-FWEEE" and stop suppoting our intervention in IRAQ. It's time to introduce this false, fake "GLORK" Xerox - X box Obama and invite the self-indicting thief plagiarizing pipsqueke Xerox - X box to meet the Buffalo "GAZOWNT-GAZIKKA" Police Department Buffalo Creek.

Michelle Obama should be ashamed.

"GLORK" Michelle Obama should be ashamed of her separatist-racist connection to Farrakhan and Chicago's Trinity United Church trumpeting Barack Obama AKA Barack Hussein Obama as the second coming of the messiah. If Michelle Obama new what her husband -- the Hope-A-Dope, Fonster Monster -- Barack Obama AKA Barack Hussein Obama did in Harlem, she would wash her wide-open, Hus-suey loving MUSILM mouth out, with twenty-four (24) mule-team double-cross X-boX-BorraX. He is a MUSLIM "Glork" It's time to introduce this false, fake "GLORK" Xerox - X box Obama and invite the self-indicting thief plagiarizing pipsqueke Xerox - X box to meet the Buffalo "GAZOWNT-GAZIKKA" Police Department Buffalo Creek. He's MAD!!!

http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/

THE SPEECH --

The Apologia has arrived and once again the self-indicting, separatist-racist Barack Obama AKA Barack Hussein Obama, promises to heal the wounds of the world. The speech is the rude awakening of mass messianism of his campaign. Apologetically, Obama the MUSLIM double-cross X-boX-BorraX has an astonishingly empty two-prawn echelon explanation of his misjudgment.
In the first prawn: with regard to his connection to separatist-racist Rev. Wright; Obama summons voodoo and juju to express slavery as beginning and ending with the Rev. Wright.
In the second prawn: Obama's speech takes credit for Ashley's dream. A dream of unity Martin Luther King, Jr. borrowed from Ashley for his historic "I Have A Dream" speech. In Obama's speech, the connective bond Ashley, the elderly black man and Obama's grandmother share; represents Obama's self-indicting rise to the Harvard Yard. For Obama, the grand flag of language is the semi-fore of words, bestowed upon our nation by the messiah-alumni from Harvard. Obama's Swoon-Song Apologia to the nation represents a failed hymn -- a hymn that fails to heal the nation, repair the world, or make this time different than all the rest. Obama's speech is a brilliant failure.

http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/

In the general election it will definitely be situation #2. I have lived here in NC all of my life and, for several reasons, do not believe a Democratic candidate for President will be competitive here for a long time. For example:

1. The Democrats elected from NC are conservative Democrats. One only need to point to the victory of Heath Shuler in District 11 to prove that point.

2. There are a lot of registered Democrats in NC that almost never will vote for one on the federal level. Why do you ask that these people are registered Democrats? Local politics. Often time in NC you must be a Democrat to win on the local level, therefore the people of that area register as Democrats to be able to vote in those local primaries. I believe the numbers are grossly misleading.

3. While the black voting population is significant in NC, it tends to go Democratic anyway. The difference between what a Federal Democratic candiate has received in the past and needs to win in the general can not be made up completely by counting on an increase solely in this groups vote.

Let's see. Gore and Kerry put NO money into their efforts into North Carolina, and still got low-to-mid 40s.

This year, Obama is raising money like crazy, and I think we can all agree here that Obama will keep all the Kerry states, and that because of the economy and scandals Ohio is ripe for a switch. Obama can afford to spend some millions in a place like NC and see what happens.

Remember, even if he doesn't win the state, as long as he makes it competitive, he (and the Democratic Party) wins. If he loses NC by a point or two, he would have likely already won Virginia and maybe Florida, giving him the presidency anyway. Meanwhile, there is a governor's race, competitive House race, and a potentially competitive Senate race in the state. If Obama even comes close in NC, he is bound to give at least one or two points to downballot races, maybe more if he gets new voters to the polls.

Hillary likes to say she'll win Florida and Ohio while writing off the rest of the country. Obama's people have it right: losing big means everyone loses big; losing small (or even winning) on Red turf means the party wins big.

This is why the state-level superdelegates will give the nomination to Obama no matter what happens, just like they gave the DNC to Howard Dean.

It seems the Clintons are apparently involved in the disappearance of the CFO of the Clinton Library Builder. Very suspicious

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/Mar/14/clinton-library-builders-cfo-vanishes-leaving-ques/

Regardless of who wins what by how much, Hillary will not withdraw for anything or anyone. That much has been clear for some time. That said, let me promise one and all this much: If you liked Mississippi, you will love North Carolina. Hillary voted to authorize the war and then engaged in race-baiting one would expect of the Klan. She will get hers on May 6th here in NC. We can do so much better, Obama!

Adventure Number One.

Here's why.
Gore was handicapped by the baggage of Bill Clinton, particularly among independents. He didn't campaign much there and Bush ran with a promise of compassionate conservativism which softened resistance and attracted some support. Finally, Gore didn't run the best possible campaign.

Kerry was a fundamentally flawed candidate. Wealthy, northeastern liberals don't play well in N.C. Additionally, he had an ambiguous position on Iraq when Iraq was the defining issue. The Democratic party hadn't decided which way to go, rejecting Dean and Lieberman. So Kerry was vulnerable to being defined by his opponents--and he was. Finally, Kerry didn't run hard in N.C. either.

If ...

Obama campaigns well and contests N.C., it's not hard to see him picking up a few percentage points over Kerry and Gore, who clearly did not max out their potential. Throw in significantly improved registration and turnout and you might make it close. Harvey Gantt had a shot 20 years ago--Barack Obama has a better shot today.

One last note.

If Obama is running well elsewhere, McCain is in a very tough position. If he tries to shore up support with social conservatives, he drives moderates and independents toward Obama; and vice versa. In other words, McCain may have to choose between Northern Virginia, New Hampshire, Colorado, Iowa, and New Mexico OR the rest of Virginia, North Carolina, and Missouri.

That's a tough course to navigate.

"In 2004 the vast majority of NC's most populous counties -- Mecklenburg Country (Charlotte), Wake County (Raleigh), Guilford County (Greensboro), Forsyth County (Winston-Salem), Durham County (Durham), Buncomb County (Ashville), New Hanover County (Wilmington) -- went for Kerry over Bush (some by substantial margins)."

Wow. Where do you get your made up facts?
Kerry barely won Mecklenburg 52-48 (and lost the rest of Charlotte Metro by large margins). Barely won Guilford, too (50-49%).
Bush actually won Buncomb, New Hanover, Fosyth, and Wake, all by slim margins, but other than Durham County, your version of the way '04 turned out is completely false.

I truly don't get it. Look at past election results, and look at growing white populations in suburban towns and counties that are pretty solidly Republican already, and tell me that a liberal from Chicago is going to win because of it. Yes there are many socialist yankees moving here to escape what their lovely governments have created up there, but there aren't enough to swing the state 8-9 points. (Honestly NC State government isn't in that good of shape either and taxes are high, but it sure is naturally beautiful here with great people.)

I just have to think you people are delusional. Sure Hunt, Edwards, Easley have won state wide... so did Faircloth, Helms, Martin, Dole, and Burr. The Democrats talk education, and the Republicans talk Federal issues and they win on it every time in Federal Elections. The Democrats lose if they don't run as populist moderates.

Remember the big story before election day in '04 was that Virginia was too close to call in the polls?
I guess we see how that worked out.
The only way Obama can win is if a huge block of rural or semi-rural Republicans stay at home, and I think Obama's liberalism will scare the crap out of a lot of people. That's one thing the Prez can't screw up for the GOP that he's almost killed... the fact that the alternative is even worse. I think that's all McCain needs to win by at least 5 points in NC.

I am a NY City born, NJ raised Democrat living in NC for 10+ years. I love it here and vote in every election. It p*sses me off royally that anybody thinks my vote shouldn't count in this important election because we are "red state". Regardless of who I vote for, you should know that NC has increasingly, and quickly, being "infected" by northerners who are changing the dynamic of the election. So YOU pick the scenario.

I am a NY City born, NJ raised Democrat living in NC for 10+ years. I love it here vote in every election. It p*sses me off royally that anybody thinks my vote shouldn't count in this important election because we are "red state". Regardless of who I vote for, you should know that NC has increasingly, and quickly, being "infected" by northerners who are changing the dynamic of the election. So YOU pick the scenario.

I am a NY City born, NJ raised Democrat living in NC for 10+ years. I love it hear vote in every election. It p*sses me off royally that anybody thinks my vote shouldn't count in this important election. Regardless of who I vote for, you should know that NC has increasingly, and quickly, being "infected" by northerners who are changing the dynamic of the election. So YOU pick the scenario.

i can't think of anyone i turn off on tv faster than olberman. he reminds me of the kid in school who did mean stuff to people then couldn't figure out why someone sucker-punched him. his analysis is idiotic and onesided . the should move his chair back a little so the person who he is trying to belittle can get on screen beside him and grab his ear with a pair of plyers.

write55 hit the nail on the head in every respect. I too am a lifelong North Carolinian and an avid politico. North Carolina certainly can be in play -- in both the Presidential and Senate races -- but pary money will definately play a big role. So far, it does not look like the DSCC has NC on its radar and neither Kay Hagan nor Jim Neal (the two possible dems to face Dole) are campaigning with any vigor at the moment.

In addition to $$$, turnout -- especially in the urban areas -- will be a deciding factor. In 2004 the vast majority of NC's most populous counties -- Mecklenburg Country (Charlotte), Wake County (Raleigh), Guilford County (Greensboro), Forsyth County (Winston-Salem), Durham County (Durham), Buncomb County (Ashville), New Hanover County (Wilmington) -- went for Kerry over Bush (some by substantial margins). It is the large rural population that tends to go Republican. However, if Obama is the Dems' nominee (which I hope and pray he is) the turnout in urban areas and in rural areas of the east could counter the more conservative areas of the state.

I think Clinton is right to dismiss NC as a potential blue state IF SHE IS THE NOMINEE -- because (1) she will not generate turnout the way Obama will and (2) many North Carolinians loath Hillary.

However, with Obama as the nominee, NC WILL be in play.

"leichtman, why did Mark Warner's wife campaign for Obama????? Could it be that the Warners believe that Mark will fare better in November with Obama at the top of the ticket???? Or do you believe that Mrs. Warner wants to hurt Mark's chances???? Mark Warner has and respects his wife's independnce but has learly said she does not speak for me.

Furthermore, I was born and raised in South Carolina and I'll guarantee you that Obama has a chance to carry that state. Note, I said "a chance". Hillary does NOT have a chance in South Carolina.

You happen to be the only political pundit who believes that about S. Carolina, Chuck Todd certinly does not. How about Utah and Miss, and Wyoming don't you think it would be a great idea for our nominee to spend time and resources there in the fall?

This interview from Richmond NBC affiliate will answer your emark that you now absolutely(whic is realy gtting old) that illary won't win Vaand that neitr Wrner or Kaine willwork for Hillary. Note the caption of ti newsstory which is what I ATTEMPTED to tell you:

Mark Warner Won't Endorse Obama

It was the last thing out of his mouth before he said...."gotta go." But there was Mark Warner - former Virginia Governor, current U-S Senate Candidate on Thursday afternoon standing in the hallway of State Capitol. Warner about a year before had bowed out of the presidential race even really before getting it. He might have been a front runner at this time, so there we were askinghim, "Governor Warner, your wife Lisa Collis supports Obama...does that mean you support Obama?"

That's when he said it.

Warner never really had a good answer for why he was getting out of the presidential race, something about family...wanting to watch his girls grow up. Okay. Great. But was that really the reason? He sounded sincere but it always seemed we were waiting for the second shoe to drop. There were rumors of a high level meeting with Hillary, maybe somebody somewhere made him a "promise."

Nope. Don't think so now."

And why in the world should we care who his wife supports there are numbers of split poliical families which means nada.Mark Warner and Tim Kaine are 2 very smart politicians and you have still not disproven my theory that they and Va will suport EITER nominee. Soy if that doesn't fit into your neat lile bo, but I appen to have a lot more conection to Virginia voters. But neither am I so bold as to guarantee which candidate will win which state, and certainly neither do you.

As to Washington state, if that is where you are from, well all I can say in response is that is great, if Washingtonians don't care in the least if John McCain sends 'some' of their jobs to Airbus and Europe and will reward him in the fall for doing so. Again if that is what you and your fellow Washingtonias choose to do then go for it. Texans would not be so forgiving.

I'll take your number one. The fact that you used John Edwards performance says it all.

Edwards, say all you will about how great a populist he finally became, he is and was a terrible candidate.

Edwards got about three percent of the So. Carolina vote.

So Obama can carry that state, no doubt about it. Remember, I said, can, not will.

I'm inclined to believe that there is a strong #1. Also, there are elements which might chip away at #2. Nationally, the Republican party, in the grand manifestation of Bush, is not looking well at all. There is widespread exhaustion and anger. There is a sunken economy (always a red button issue) and a war that is going nowhere, despite the surge, the surge, the surge. Now, unlike any election, there is an electrified (good) electorate with new demographics causing upheavals. So, I am banking on scenario #1: Obama takes the South.

33rd street was right. Both scenarios are true. I have lived in NC all my life, and followed NC politics since the 1st Hunt governorship. Go back to 1984 Hunt v. Helms for Helms' senate seat, and you have seen, for the past 1/4-century, a very starkly divided state. However, the rural (i.e. conservative) areas are fading and collapsing, while the progressive areas, Charlotte and Raleigh, and booming. NC has become the "new" Florida for retiring northerners and relocated "Yankees".

So while Hillary brings her baggage (as she does to so many places), Obama brings the progressives out in force in a year when the Bush administration has damaged the Republican brand.

So, as it is in so many other areas Electoral Map changes depending on who the nominee is.

Sccenario #1.

Obama has denounced the minister. A congregant is not responsible for everything his pastor says. Now, what church does John McCain attend? Anybody know? Now that Obama's church has been oppo researched -- someone in the Obama campgaign needs to research McCain's -- interview members and formers members, see if there are existing DVDs of services. Journalists need to attend services with hidden cameras and microphones. Now that the McCain camp has decided this is all fair game, it's up to Obama's to disclose what goes on in McCain's church. Privacy is no longer an option.

And it's time for McCain to stop sucking up to fanatics and complete lunatics like the 'Rev.' Hagee and Parsley, both nuts who want to start a nuclear WW3 to bring on the Rapture. These hateful, divisive, money-grubbing loons should not be advising anyone's presidential campaign, they should be locked up.

"What he holds about Catholicism in my mind is despicable," said the Rev. James Heft, religion professor at the University of Southern California. "I totally reject Hagee's view of Catholicism."

McCain has said he was 'proud' of Hagee's spiritual leadership.
And here is someone else whose support he sought out:

'Senator John McCain hailed as a spiritual adviser an Ohio megachurch pastor who has called upon Christians to wage a "war" against the "false religion" of Islam with the aim of destroying it.

Parsley is upfront with his congregation about money. 'I just love to talk about money,' he told them. 'I just love to talk about your money. Let me be very clear -- I want your money. I deserve it."

So these are McCain's spiratual advisors, whom he not only refuses to denounce but embraces? These men are not sane, and we can not afford to have in the White House, a man who seeks the counsel of men who are hellbent on destroying the human race.

2008 Presidential Election Weekly Poll

http://www.votenic.com

Results Now Posted Instantly!

New Vids, and New Polls Posted Weekly!

I think #1 is correct. We in NC have a strong University system and the youth vote could be energized and increased in Obama's favor. Our cities are growing, adding to our urban populations and we have a strong African American population. The state is in large part conservative and the race would be very close, but in an energized election, Obama could take the state. There is a lot of enthusiasm for him here in the Asheville area right now.

The Obama campaign would make it competitive. Would they win? Maybe.
But you don't wini in politics by writing off huge blocks of states.

leichtman, why did Mark Warner's wife campaign for Obama????? Could it be that the Warners believe that Mark will fare better in November with Obama at the top of the ticket???? Or do you believe that Mrs. Warner wants to hurt Mark's chances???? Furthermore, I was born and raised in South Carolina and I'll guarantee you that Obama has a chance to carry that state. Note, I said "a chance". Hillary does NOT have a chance in South Carolina. Furthermore, Hillary doesn't have a chance here in Nevada because the MEN who didn't like Kerry don't like Hillary either and they are enough to tip it to McCain. And, in case you haven't been to Washington State lately, Boeing doesn't support the economy nearly as much as Microsoft, etc. and the young progressives there are not particularly excited about HRC.

proud

McCain had better denounce Hagee in the same terms as Obama denounced Wright. I can see the ads in areas with high concentrations of Catholics now - Hagee and McCain together, McCain grateful for the support, then Hagee's inflammatory and hateful anti-Catholic diatribes. So much for the idea that McCain can attract large numbers of Reagan Democrats who tend to be disproportionately Catholic.

You really believe that Hillary would not have as good a chance as Obama to take these 3 states:

Louisiana has been red since 1988 EXCEPT for 1992 and 1996 when Bill Clinton turned it blue.

Virginia has been red since 1988.

North Carolina has been strongly red since 1988 EXCEPT in 1992 when Bill Clinton tied Bush 43-43.

Hillary has just as much of a chance to turn them blue as Obama, maybe more now that the MSM has informed the public about the type of person the pastor of the church the Obama's have attended for the past 20 years is.

Posted by: cjones210 | March 15, 2008 07:19 AM

I absolutely believe that Obama has a better chance of turning these states blue. The one and only reason Bill Clinton won or came close in LA and NC is Ross Perot. The intense hatred of Hillary Clinton in the South will doom her candidacy in those states.

Virginia has been turning blue and with Mark Warner running for Senate I can see either Democrat having a shot - but Clinton's high negatives with independents will make her chances much dicier than Obama. Remember Virginia elected a black governor not too long ago.

One other factor to consider is the down-ticket impact of the presidential candidate. Clinton is poison in a lot of red states. Nothing will inspire a dispirited Republican base who are not too thrilled with McCain to turn out like the chance to vote against Hillary Clinton. Given the 2010 census and subsequent redistricting - this should weigh heavily on the super-delegates.

Chris -- In full disclosure, I worked for a NC Democratic Congressman in the 80s and 90s and also worked in NC for Democrats in nearly every campaign cycle from 84 to 96. I'm a life long North Carolinian and have followed politics in the state for more than 25 years.

My take is that NC will be in play for the Democrats if the DNC and the Democratic nominee (it will be Obama) changes their approach to funding the campaign in NC. When you look at who staffs the DNC in Washington, it's usually filled to the brim with staff who worked in NY, Chicago, LA, Iowa, Boston, etc. These people don't understand Southern politics and they certainly don't have experience electing Democrats to statewide office in NC, SC, GA, AL, TN, KY, MS, LA, AR, OK, TX or VA. (Fla is not southern by the way.)

When the DNC and Obama are making funding decisions in the summer, no one will be at the table who will have close ties to the NC Dems who have won statewide. No one will have ties to Governor Easley or to former Governor Hunt -- who served 16 years in office not 8 as you reported.

Instead, they will pump money into Calif. and the like so the Dems can win there by 20 points instead of 10. There will be no one at the table who will be able to skillfully advise which Congressional or Senate races to fund and back. (There is strong pressure at the DNC, DSCC and DCCC to spend the money where you raise it rather than where it will help expand Democratic majorities and the Presidential playing field.)

Look at how the DCCC and DNC handled funding for NC's 8th and 11th districts over the last several years. Heath Shuler won on his own... no one in DC helped him. And Robin Hayes never should have won Bill Hefner's seat, but the Dems in DC never looked at any Hayes race closely, including the last cycle where Hayes won by a razor thin margin. This was even after Hayes cast the deciding vote to screw the textile workers in his district.

All of this is to say that if the DNC funds an aggressive GOTV strategy NOW in NC, SC, GA, MS and LA, Obama stands an even chance to win some of those states and certainly will force an underfunded McCain to spend money there rather than in Florida, Ohio, Colorado and other states that everyone agrees will be battlegrounds.

As to John Edwards and his relationship with NC, if you talked to anyone in NC, they will tell you that many NC Dems were furious with Edwards for choosing to pursue the presidency in 2004. He had the potential to be what NC Dems have wanted for a long time -- a US Senator who could get reelected. When he veered left to win the White House, NC Dems lost confidence in him. Teaming up with a Massachusetts liberal was the last straw. Today, Edwards could win the Price, Butterfield and Watt district, but no where else. I had one NC Dem who was elected to statewide office 4 times over the years tell me he thinks Edwards is nothing but a phony -- many North Carolinians, Dems and GOP, agree.

Regarding Bowles, could there have been a weaker candidate? The best NC candidates -- GOP or Dem are the ones who capture the center.

That may be why McCain will win in NC, but with a Democrat favored to win the Governors race (Beverly Purdue is my pick) and with Kay Hagan set to run a strong Senate run against a weak and unpopular Dole, I think Obama could win in NC in the fall, if he and the DNC spend what it takes to win. That said, because of her husband's unpopularity and because of her high negatives Clinton would not win.

Scenario #1.

It's a shame that Ickes is putting such dire rhetoric out there, but he's right that Clinton would almost certainly lose NC, esp. if she is unable to re-energize black support.

But Obama would have a serious shot.

Look at the 2004 exit polls in the general election. There's a lot more to an election than race, of course, but in the South, blacks make up a significant portion of the electorate. In 2004, 26% of NC voters were black, and they went 85% for Kerry. Of the 71% of voters who were white, Kerry got only 27%.

So let's assume that Obama's presence raises the percentage of black voters to 30% and that he gets 95% of those. And then let's assume that he gets 27% of the white vote, as Kerry did. That gets Obama to 47.5% of the vote, before we divvy up the 3% who identify as Latino or Other.

It's possible, of course, that anti-Bush feeling, a lukewarm support among many Southern conservatives, and Obama's support among young voters might push his # higher.

So of course NC will be in play. Similar scenarios will also make a handful of other states at least competitive, based on the %s from 2004: Virginia, South Carolina, Georgia, and Louisiana.

McCain will not be able to take those states for granted as he would be able to against Clinton.

Is the church that Obama belongs to the biggest one in the black community in Chicago? If so, that has to factor into the equation.

About NC (and the South in general)... if Obama takes a page from the Warner/Kaine/Mudcat Sanders playbook and runs as a common-sense, get things done, work with both sides of the aisle, candidate, then, yes, he can put NC into play, and possibly even win. Heath Shuler won in 2006 (given, he's more conservative on social issues). But Clinton is seen as being divisive -- people either love her or hate her, and few are left who have not made up their minds about her. Whether it's justified or not doesn't matter. It's there and it's real. Half the country hates her. Her margin for victory in November is incredibly slim, which is why her campaign is focusing on the importance of OH and PA. There's no question that CA and NY will go blue in November. The question is whether the Democrats will have a candidate who will make full use of Dean's 50-state strategy or one whose strategy is to write off the South (some Democrats say that they don't need to compete in the South to win as long as they do well in the Rockies and Southwest, but with McCain the Republican nominee, that's gotta affect things).

In Nov of 01 Hillary's husband, Bill, blamed America for 9/11.

http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=1215

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/omicinski/103.htm

As an over 50 white woman, I prefer adventure #1 thank you very much.

Obama said he was not going to leave his church because Rev. Wright was retiring, a new pastor was taking over and his 6,000 member church community is tight. Obama said he did not know Wright talked like this. The question that should be asked is why would the Obama's want to continue to go to this church with this tight knit group of people that obviously did sit through this type of service and not only condone the words, but give the pastor high fives? Birds of a feather flock together.

Bit of the topic but its related to fix's V.P stakes.

fox-fallon for Obama V.P

Everybody should read this article and you would understand Obama's foreign policy thinking.

http://www.esquire.com/features/fox-fallon

Teddychan

Several states in Dixie will be in play IF AND ONLY IF Obama is the nominee, especially Louisiana, North Carolina and Virginia.

*********************************

You really believe that Hillary would not have as good a chance as Obama to take these 3 states:

Louisiana has been red since 1988 EXCEPT for 1992 and 1996 when Bill Clinton turned it blue.

Virginia has been red since 1988.

North Carolina has been strongly red since 1988 EXCEPT in 1992 when Bill Clinton tied Bush 43-43.

Hillary has just as much of a chance to turn them blue as Obama, maybe more now that the MSM has informed the public about the type of person the pastor of the church the Obama's have attended for the past 20 years is.

I would select #2, especially since the MSM is finally doing their job and vetting Obama. NC is only 21% black of which he can get about 90-95% of that block, but when it comes to the white voters the Rev. White discovery has more than likely cut deeply into that block of voters. I believe if the MSM informs the public about this issue and allows them to form their own opinion, Obama is toast now. If they let it fall by the wayside and allow him to run in the general election (when more people will be paying attention) the 527s and Republicans will use it and shread him to pieces.

Ditto! Fix is another media venue trying to change the subject..

Obama aligned himself and his family with two radically intollerant Pastors who are un-American,anti-Jew, anti-white, and we're supposed to follow this thread as if we too have to behave like the hoodwinked masses, turn a cheek, that he is worthy of representing us. When he admits he was not forth coming about dealings Rezko; such a double standard.

What audacity Chris.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/03/14/anti-semitism/index.html

Thanks Chris!
Your story #2 provides a great theory on why some area may lean more Democratic within their state, but lean more Republican on a national level. This is a great prism to explore presidential politics with. Given your story line I agree with story #2. I agree with story #2 because it appears to explain story line #1 also. I agree that unless it is a national landslide (a la Regan) then Story #2 seems more solid and democrats should not be surprised if they lose the state. However, because of local and congressional seats, they cannot pull out of the state all together.

Mark Warner and Tim Kaine and their vaunted voter turnout operation will proudly support either Hillary or Sen Obaama in Nov and seal the deal for either candidate in Nov. in the Commonwealth of Va. The intensity of Dems now in the Commonwealth with Davis retiring and the Va GOP struggling to find a candidate to get slaughtered by wildly popular Mark Warner in Nov and will guarantee the 13 electoral votes for our democratic nominee whoever that is.

Several states in Dixie will be in play IF AND ONLY IF Obama is the nominee, especially Louisiana, North Carolina and Virginia. In NC, the Research Triangle area has a huge population of college kids and upscale whites that will vote for him, and of course he will get a huge turnout of blacks.

Hillary could compete in Arkansas but that's about it.

Strength in the South is exactly why Obama is a better candidate against McCain than Hillary.

Direct url of chicago tribune audio mp3 of the interview with Obama. This interview is not restricted to Rezko, but includes open-ended questions on Ferraro, Wright, troop withdrawal etc.

A must listen for fair witnesses: http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/mp3/2008-03/36769266.mp3

Thought Mike_USMC would appreciate the fact that Pastor Jeremiah served as a US Marine.

Well. the GOOD thing about the Pastor Jeremiah story is that it will end talk about Obama being a Muslim!

Barack has now dropped him from his campaign and denounced his teachings.

Good enough for me.

As for Chris Matthews, sadly his show has become a tawdry and tedious exercise in pandering to the lowest common denominator of scandal....no longer focussed on real substantive politics. Shame he has gone down that road.

general election matchups and polls at this pint mean absolutely nothing until after the conventions and labor day.
"better find a way to counter fast".
counter what? a failed third term for W? Plouffe comparing North Carolina to Pa might be a good idea if you want to match basketball teams but not much else.

The latest poll from Ohio today shows McCain in a very strong position against both Democrats, leading them by 6%: http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2008/03/friday-polls-general-election-polls.html

McCain is starting to enjoy quite an impressing string of polls. Democrats better find a way to counter this fast.

lets see we had an agreement that you would not adress me by name or continue to make personal attacks that lasted less than 24 hours.

these were simply questioned raised by Chris Matthews not me. B/C I am a loyal Dem and would put up my credentials and contributions in time, money, volunteer work and legal work for the party and our candidates I will nt take a back seat to anyone. Have you ever maxed out for dem candidate, have you ever writtenlegal briefs for a dem candidate, orgnized a pct, set up virtual call banks, held Dem fund raisers, or worked diectly with a state campaign director for a succesful gubenatorial campaign, attended a state or national convention, organized absentee ballot and voter registration drives,organized nursing home polling places or acted as legal staff for voter protection,set up teams of out of state volunteers and their buses and housing, if no I would highly recommend that you stop your GOP garbage.

As a loyal Dem I would think it important that we totally know and vet our nominee BEFORE the nomination becomes irreversable.

You show your propogandist face leachman.

Can you make one post without bashing obama? One. You say your a democrat.

Can you make one post that trumpets hillary's acheivments without bashing a "fellow" democrat? One?

that is why I call you a republcain, without any other evidence. only republcains Attack attack attack. Screw the party screw the country. as long as you "win". Not knowing you already lost and are sabotaging.

One post Leachman. I'll be shocked.

test

You show your propogandist face leachman.

Can you make one post without bashing obama? One. You say your a democrat.

Can you make one post that trumpets hillary's acheivments without bashing a "fellow" democrat? One?

that is why I call you a republcain, without any other evidence. only republcains Attack attack attack. Screw the facts screw the country.

One post Leachman. I'll be shocked.

You show your propogandist face leachman.

Can you make one post without bashing obama? One. You say your a democrat.

Can you make one post that trumpets hillary's acheivments without bashing a "fellow" democrat? One?

that is why I call you a republcain, without any other evidence. only republcains Attack attack attack. Screw the facts screw the country.

One post Leachman. I'll be shocked.

You show your propogandist face leachman.

Can you make one post without bashing obama? One. You say your a democrat.

Can you make one post that trumpets hillary's acheivments without bashing a "fellow" democrat? One?

that is why I call you a republcain, without any other evidence. only republcains Attack attack attack. Screw the facts screw the country.

One post Leachman. I'll be shocked.

You show your propogandist face leachman.

Can you make one post without bashing obama? One. You say your a democrat.

Can you make one post that trumpets hillary's acheivments without bashing a "fellow" democrat? One?

that is why I call you a republcain, without any other evidence. only republcains Attack attack attack. Screw the facts screw the country.

One post Leachman. I'll be shocked.

You show your propogandist face leachman.

Can you make one post without bashing obama? One. You say your a democrat.

Can you make one post that trumpets hillary's acheivments without bashing a "fellow" democrat? One?

that is why I call you a republcain, without any other evidence. only republcains Attack attack attack. Screw the facts screw the country.

One post Leachman. I'll be shocked.

You show your propogandist face leachman.

Can you make one post without bashing obama? One. You say your a democrat.

Can you make one post that trumpets hillary's acheivments without bashing a "fellow" democrat? One?

that is why I call you a republcain, without any other evidence. only republcains Attack attack attack. Screw the facts screw the country.

One post Leachman. I'll be shocked.

there are plenty examples of Dems winnig local races, mayor of Salt Lake, Gov of Kansas and I believe Wyoming. Winning these races which are about local issues like who has the best plan of picking up garbage or making the trains run on time, getting pot holes filled, have virtually no correlation with national elections whch deal with issues like nationl security and economic policies. Apples and Oranges Plouffe. The next thing we will hear from their campaign is that they expect to win Mississippi, Utah and Wyoming(especially after those 9,000 caucus voters attentened) in Nov.
Again Obama is ither a 55%or a 45% candidate.

you're hot

The "Fix" is a name that has a double meaning during this election when Barack Obama is concerned. There seems to be only positive spin going on here. It would be out of place to talk about Barack Obama's Chicago minister, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright here but Chris has not mentioned it. Would a story like this bring to much attention to what Chris knows I have been reporting on his this blog and all over the internet even since before Obama decided to run. Information that can be verified. IL. U.S. Senator Presidential Candidate Barack Obama , IL. U.S. Senator Dick Durbin co-chair Obama 2008 are being complicit in allowing the Illinois Department of Human Rights and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to treat me an American U.S. Hispanic citizen who reported incidents of race discrimination in the state of Illinois in an unequal, biased, & discriminatory manner by preventing me the same race discrimination charges non-Hispanics enjoy as a matter of record and then covering up their conduct. Despite there being ample time for each to respond, redress, and stop the above mentioned serious form of discrimination nothing ,to date, has been done to fairly & fully address, redress,and stop this still ongoing serious form of discrimination which has allowed Hormel Foods Corporation, UFCW, and Target Corporation to not be held accountable for race discrimination against me because I happen to be Hispanic. Inaction ,complicity, & deliberate silence on the part of (for instance but not limited to) Obama and Durbin are responsible for my American civil rights continuing to be violated in Illinois as it relates to this serious form of discrimination in their state of Illinois and for nothing being done to fully & fairly redress and stop this still ongoing form of discrimination against an American who happens to be a Hispanic in Illinois. Hispanics who Know are just showing they will not be willing victims of his "Good Judgment". He has this still going on in Illinois as we speak but Barack Obama tells Hispanic/Latinos nothing about it! I repeat this is verifiable, ongoing and Barack Obama should address it but does not and you can guess why. Included is a link to just one example (If you happen to be a Hispanic in Illinois you have no race and therefore cannot be a victim of race discrimination as I can atest) this is on IDHR's own website in the public domain.

http://www.state.il.us/dhr/Orders/2006/Oct_06/Zuniga,%20M.htm

Barack Obama is continuing to get a free pass from Chris as this verifiable information has been posted by me and ignored to date. Why? What part of verifiable is not clear.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2007/04/fix_picks_edwards_and_obama_un.html

I asked these quetions this morning and they were simply ignored but repeatd a few minutes ago on hardball with a minister supporter who was visibly shaken by the video:
1. Why has it taken B.O. 7 years to repudiate the inflamatory language of Pastor Wright?
2. Why hasn't B.O. simply walk out of and away from this church. Are we to believe that utube was he first time B.O. heard this inflamatory language?
3. Mathews just reported that Pastor Wright advised B.O. in April 2007 to distance himsef from the pastor. Why in the world would he ignore that warning and what does that tell us about his judgment.

My only comfort is that we discovered this link to a divisive figure before he becomes the nominee if that should happn as those videos could cerainly be explosive in a general election.

No one is blaming B.O. or suggesting he condones those statements but what does it say about his ability to handle a divisive event and basicall be embarrased by it before he acted?

I am sure that this message will be slammed by hs supporters, but someone tell me that how that how he handles those videos may not eventually determine if in fact can still be the nominee.

I heard his public statement and comdenation but why has it taken him years to do so?

"The Purpose of War is Peace"

Mitch mcconnell

Unintended? you be the judge. Fascists? you be the judge.

Barack is favored to win the primaries and the general election in N.C.

For the primaries, he can count on the large population of african-americans and new comers that are more opened to changes. For the general election, he will be competitive with McCain with the independents while McCain will have problems motivating the basis of social conservatives. Some of them might be enclined to vote for Barack because of his young family that will make him attractive for family-oriented voters.

Like everything else in this campaign season, the truth is somewhere in the middle. SC is ground zero for the RW base. When Obama wins in November, if it's a close electoral battle but he wins SC, I would consider that a definite mandate for change.

NC is his for the taking, like VA and a few other red states. Plouffe is right about that.

PA is a false goal in this race. Hill can win it by 10 points, but if Obama rolls in NC and IN, her continued quest for the nom becomes pointless, even to her.

I see that MI may get something done in time to seat the delegates. Message to the Hillary Club - Obama is going to open a 1970s Ford LTD-sized can of whoop-ass in the Wolverine State. She could have had a 50-50 split of delegates, but like a drunk at a craps table, she is foolishly letting it ride. Obama will end up with a 10 point victory.

The question is not can a Democrat win NC, the question is can Obama win NC. Look at the numbers:

Kerry won 44% of the vote and presumably Bush won 56%. NC had a turnout of 55% (58% of eligible voters) which means Kerry won 24.2% (25.5) of the potential and Bush won 30.8% (32.5). I didn't find the turnout of the black population in my quick search on NC, but we'll assume it was the same across racial groups. We'll also assume Kerry won all of the black vote. That means 11 of those 24.2 points were black votes. The Plouffe assumption would be a record black turnout, say 80%. Assuming they are all Obama votes that adds 5 points to the Kerry total (.55 * 20 versus .8 * 20). So a 2004 election repeat with an 80% black turnout puts Obama at 29.2% of the total voting population and McCain at 30.8%. Obama still needs 1.6 points.

What about the young? On average 29% of North Carolinians aged 18-25 voted in the 2000 & 2004 elections. Well below the 55% overall turnout rate. Seniors meanwhile voted at a rate of 67%. Seniors are 15% of the population, 17% of the registered voters and 19% of the actual voters. People aged 18-25 are 16% of the population, 11% of the registered voters and 9% of the actual voters. A marketer would point out that the youth of North Carolina are ripe for voting growth while the seniors are about maxed out. 1.6 points of young vote is certainly there. Can Obama tap it?

Of course there is still the troubling performance of Obama in Mississippi among whites. The question is not are there whites who will not vote for a black man, the question is how many of them voted for a Senator from Massachusetts who was the poster child for elite-coastal-liberal? Say Obama loses one or two points from Kerry's take because of race. Can he make it up by bringing the young and blacks into the voting booth?

I don't know, but I do know of a precedent. Jesse Ventura did not win as a third party governor in MN because he stole Republicans and Democrats. He won because he drove new voters to the polls. It is not easy, but it is possible for an electric personality.

I'll take #1, not because it's likely, but because it is possible.

First, let's dismiss Erskin Bowles as part of the argument. He didn't "fit" NC at all. He would fit the image of a New England senator, if anything.

The key to the possibility of NC being in play is turnout. I think we will have record turnout in the general election just like we have had in the primaries. It doesn't mean that some Reagan democrats won't cross over to McCain, but I think the turnout and enthusiasm gap will overwhelm traditional patterns in all but the reddest states. Of course, if NC goes blue, so does FL and VA. The electoral margin would be huge.

In 2004, much was made of the 4 million "values" voters the republicans energized for Bush. Not only will a good fraction of these voters stay home, but the surge of young and new voters will be much greater than 4 million.

Expect polling to under-represent these trends. It will look close until the end, but the results will surprise when the undecideds all beak in one direction.

Do we have to go there now? By the time that primary comes around the world (ie the economy and Iraq) could have significantly changed and the hot button issues look entirely different. Too much counting chickens before they hatch IMHO

I go with scenario #1. HRC seems to think she is doing something by winning states that were blue in both 2000 and 2004 and that she may be able to win Ohio (sorry HRC, but winning it in the Dem primary doesn't mean you will win it in the Genreal). On the other hand, we see that Obama is making significant inroads in many states that voted Repub in 2004.

So we have a choice between a candidate who has admitted she can add nothing more than "possibly" winning Ohio and a candidate that can make the Dems competitive in many historically red states, INCLUDING Ohio.

Looks like a pretty easy choice to me.

PG

I think McCain's seeking out Hagee's blessing now is much more troubling than Barack having to deal with a pastor he has known for years.

however, I no more believe that McCain believes in the crap that comes out of Hagee's mouth than I believe Barack believes in the crap that comes out of his former pastor's mouth.

In fact, Barack's courageous stand against black insularity and prejudice, expressed when he visited baptist churches in south carolina spoke more practically to me about his view of religion and government.

i haven't seen Hillary or McCain challenging evangelical christians about their homophobia or racism the way Obama has.

For me, that trumps whatever the wacky pastor says.

The Obamas were not merely endorsed by, or attended the church of, Rev. Wright, but subsidized his hatred with generous donations, were married by him, and had their children baptized by this venomous preacher; there is nothing quite comparable in the case of Sens. Clinton and McCain.

Rev. Wright's invective is not insensitive or hyperbolic alone, but in the end disgusting. And when listened to rather than read, the level of emotion and fury only compound the racism and hatred, whether in its attack on the Clintons, or profanity-laced slander of the United States and its history, or in gratuitous references to other races.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=Y2ZlM2ZmY2UwNWNkMzIxZGRhOWM3YjVkZWI5MzkzZjI=

Obama used his best judgement as a potential President of the United States to select this man for a top committee spot in his campaign.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWvxTUy47Fk

I hope I'm wrong, but I'd have to go with adventure #2. I've lived in both North Carolina and Virginia, and the two don't compare. Northern Virginia these days actually feels like a small northern city. Arlington and Alexandria are very liberal and Fairfax county looks like a lot of New Jersey suburbs.

North Carolina, in contrast, still feels very southern. The urban centers (Raliegh/Durham, Greensboro, Charlotte) don't have nearly the same cultural scene as Northern Virginia. There are also racial tensions, even in the urbanized parts of North Carolina (remember the Duke rape case), that you don't see in Northern Virginia.

Virginia has only been turning blue because of strong liberal center that has grown in Northern Virginia. Without a comparable region, I don't see how the Democrats can carry North Carolina in November.

Plouffe is right. A Clinton nomination is the same old Blue/Red state lines. She might win because she can carry two out of three of the swing states (Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania), but the south will not be in play. Obama opens up the entire coastal south (Atlantic Ocean and Gulf states). This is especially true with McCain as the nominee, he's hardly a conservative hero. Potential superdelegates should also be looking to the future, for the next presidential election the 2010 census will probably put more electoral college votes in the Carolnas, Georgia, and Florida at the expense of the traditional northeast and "rust belt" states, so democrats better make inroads before the math gets more difficult.

Ah can we put something up about the preacher man not pipe dreams in NC.

I would like to know what people think.

I always thought Obama as an Agnositic like many in his and my crowed. Obama and preacher man had an understanding on secular issues.

Anyway I did not know about 9/11 comments five days later. Wow

I don't care that much - it makes me think less of preacher man but I was never under Obama's spell.

This is a huge problem for Obama because he was just playing the violin again after pushing the latest story on race which was nothing in contrast to preacher man IMO.

He is still an un-known even to his die hard supporters so this could 'other' him. Meaning 'NOT LIKE ME' me being white\Latino middle American voter.

You can point to City Council numbers to say the cities are growing for Democrats, but the areas that are really growing are suburban. Wake County (Metro Raleigh) has a considerable Republican representation on the Board of Commissioners, a Republican Sheriff, and Cary (the big "new" suburb) has a Republican State Senator.
Charlotte has a Republican Mayor, and the counties surrounding Mecklenburg County (Charlotte) are growing at a fast rate, and they're solidly suburban Republican.
If Obama is the nominee, medium sized bedroom Piedmont Counties like Davidson, Alamance, Rowan, Randolph, that are the Republican stronghold of the State will have record turnouts to counteract the black turnout down east and in places like Durham, Charlotte, and Winston.
I see no way Obama wins North Carolina. He might do well down east, but he'll get crushed from Burlington to Morganton.

33RD street writes "Senator Obama awakens passion and excitement in voting segments that have not tended to get to the polls in the past."

Perhaps this is because Sen. Obama promised to transcend race and millions of sincere people of both parties took him at his word and invested psychologically and materially in his candidacy.

"Part of his message was that collectively America had made great progress, and their Ivy League and subsequent careers, in addition to his rhetoric of inclusiveness and tolerance, bore witness to that progress in racial equality.

Now we learn, that for much of his career, he was not only attending hate-filled sermons against "rich white people" and the "g-d d----d America" (in hopes of solidifying his racial fides in regional Chicago politics?), but subsidized that ministry of intolerance.

So while he promised an evolution beyond the race-identity politics of Jesse Jackson or the Rev. Sharpton, his own minister trumped anything that either one of those preachers might have sermonized. All in all--a betrayal."

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=Y2ZlM2ZmY2UwNWNkMzIxZGRhOWM3YjVkZWI5MzkzZjI=

Adventure 1. The growth in the cities has brought in voters that are not influenced by the one issue scare tactics. Raleigh for instance has a Democrat mayor and 6 Dems of 7 councilpersons. Similarly for Greensboro. University areas have strong liberal voters. The rural areas have been hit hard by NAFTA plant closings. Growing international communities may favor Dems as well. The state does seem to fall for Rovian fear tactics (gays, guns and terror) if McCain uses them. Growing miliary areas favor the Repubs. Obama 50-48

Chris: I'm next expecting a Gary Gygax reference.

Regarding North Carolina, the Obama campaign has a compelling argument to make. First, its very telling that the Clinton campaign is so quick to dismiss potentially competitive, though traditionally 'red' states. The candidate herself did so, again, on NPR this week. It seems that the party should not squander one inch of advantage available to it, in pursuing the White House this November. If they can force the GOP to play defense in even a couple traditionally red states, they are far ahead of the game, compared to both Gore and Kerry. Even if we accept 'adventure' number 2, which concludes "Could Obama do better than then Vice President Al Gore (43 percent) or Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry (44 percent)? Sure. Can he get to 50 percent plus one? No." - Isn't that a far better plan than to just ignore the possibility altogether?

If Barack Obama is the nominee, then Richard Nixon's Southern Strategy will be nibbled apart this year. The primary reasons are that both Howard Dean, who has lots of issue money to throw that direction, and Senator Obama firmly believe tht they can win in the South (and in other supposed GOP strongholds). And in presidential politics, believing is the first and most important step in winning.

Second, as you note, Senator Obama awakens passion and excitement in voting segments that have not tended to get to the polls in the past. You mention descendants of slaves and they are a critical factor this year in an Obama/McCain race. In addition, however, there are significant numbers of white voters who tend to stay away from the polls in the South because they "know" they are going to lose anyway. With Obama in the race, they will vote alongside their disadvantaged brothers and sisters. Look for North Carolina, Georgia, Louisiana, and Alabama to be in the Obama column in November. South Carolina and Mississippi won't make it this year but they will in 2012 when President Obama stands for re-election.

Oh, and Obama also will make sure all those folks in Palm Beach County know how to mark their ballots this time around so Florida won't be close. Solid win for the Democrats. In case you consider it a southern state.

Kentucky also will go Democratic, but Tennessee will stay in the GOP column.

I also like adventure number one.
(turn to page 43)

Hillary is eaten by a crocodile.

McCain would lose, it would appear, vs Obama;

Obama vs. McCain-
http://newsusa.myfeedportal.com/viewarticle.php?articleid=48

On the other hand, Hillary is coming on strong and she is getting a lot more appeal the last days, thus one never knows...
Clinton is up against the impossible and she, if anyone, could pull it off...

I'll take adventure number one.

McCain won't campaign there because their contest is over, so North Carolina's voters will never see the exposure from him that they are guaranteed to see from Obama in the next few months leading up to their contest.

South Carolina, on the other hand, went for both Obama and McCain, but they have a larger black population that will almost positively go for Obama 95+ percent over McCain. If McCain fails to pick a staunch social conservative as a running mate, the lack of voter turnout on the Republican side might be enough to defeat him there.

I would say these two states are highly competitive, considering who the candidates are. If it were the long-shot Clinton v. McCain, Clinton would lose both states by double-digits.

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.