Yo Pablo

In case you were asleep, Loser Gore got more votes than moron Bush.

What WVa and KY show is that there are certain critical demographics Obama cannot penetrate. More importantly, though, he claims not to try, which is even more alienating to these voters. Yet he spent millions of dollars in both WV and KY. In other words, his behavior of avoiding areas of conflict but using $$ to try to gain the vote has not succeeded. What is he going to do in the General Election when he has to confront possibly hostile voters face-to-face? Obama has not shown himself to be strong in facing confrontation, or and he is not "quick on his feet." Primaries attract a lower percentage of voters than the GE and Obama's victories have tended to be in the lower turnout states. If only 30% of Democratic voters turn out in a primary, and that is high, Obama needs to be concerned with the majority who didn't turn out, most of them white and working to middle class. Most people are not college educated, or if they are, are more like those college educated students in KY who went for Clinton.

Hillary, stay in it. You are battle-tested!

So Obama wants to pay attention to FLA and Mich, now. He acts like a spoiled child, he realized he was not going to win in those states, so he put no effort in. So why should the people of WVA, Kent, and OH want to vote for him? Ummmmmmm!

But what is really unbelieveable, he wants to split the FLA delegates. Get real, they didn't matter before! Why now? After-all Obama is looking for a running-mate. Well, he better pick someone I really respect because I certainly will have to hold my nose and cover my eyes before I vote for him.

I work everyday and I do not have the pleasure of not showing up like Obama. Hey thats a great idea! So lets calculate how much time Obama showed up for work in the Senate, and let him get those percentages of votes. Afterall- if he only gives his contiuents 30%, how much time will he give in the white house? Oh please........

Am I bitter, no. I just WILL not vote for him. Stay home in Nov? I don't know, yet.

Obama,

Better realize, this is the United States, meaning everyone matters. He can look the other way and not go to WVA, Kent, OH, etc, and campaign. Guess what, the people of those states won't come out for him, no matter HOW deep his grass-roots campaign is!

Another note, How dare he think he should share in the delegate count from FLA!!!??? what nerve, he didn't care about the people from FLA or Mich because those states went to Clinton. So now, he whines and changes his mind and wants Hillary to share the pie. NO way, the people of FLA did not vote for him. If he so viable, they could have written him in.

So, stay in the race, Hillary because what matters most--is the endurance, do not quit until you cross the finish line, because its more important to finish!
You are tried and true--battle tested.

So Obama -what are you tested in? writing for the law review, submitting legislation?!! oh wait a minute, shouldn't you be present to vote on your submittals?
It must be nice to have a job that you can be abssent so much?!.

OBAMA WON'T WIN IN NOVEMBER...AND HERE ARE 10 REASONS WHY:

1)He'll get killed over his LACK of experience
2)He'll get killed over the fact he was voted the MOST LIBERAL Senator in Congress.
3)HISPANICS won't vote for him.
4)Working-class WHITES from SWING states won't vote for him.
5)He's a 1/2 black guy, with a muslim name, who's portrayed as anti-american with his flagpin, wife, preacher, etc, from the big city. Way TOO COSMOPOLITAN for independent voters from swing states.
6)He can't tell you the difference between Alan Jackson and Tito Jackson.
7)If America didn't vote for a decorated Vietnam War vet that was white and more experienced (KERRY) against a man as stupid as Bush....WHY would they vote for Obama vs. McCain? Not gonna happen.
8)Obama is (perceived as) a latte-drinking, volvo-driving, hippie-loving, tree-hugging urbanite. Same as Kerry, Dukakis, McGovern, Gore. Loser. Loser. Loser. Loser.
9)His two biggest support groups are blacks and youths: two groups with terrible voter turnout. Will that change? Probably not...just look at how he's doing vs. McCain in the polls right now.
10)Republicans know how to run a national campaign.....Democrats don't.

Pelosi just came out and said that sexism is not an issue for Hillary Clinton in this presidential nomination process:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbzT2YqhGT4

Of course the democrats need to look back at the W. Virginia and Kentucky primaries before November. And if Obama wants to win against McCain, he needs to take a very hard look at W. Virginia and Kentucky right now, like yesterday, instead of simply shrugging them off as irrelevant to his big wins in Oregon and elsewhere.
From the beginning of his campaign, it has seemed to me that Obama has worked very, very hard to alienate the under 50 income, white, blue collar, non college educated group of people. Some analysts say Obama is simply reflecting an elitist attitude. I could cut him some slack in that direction with his SF statement. But his repeated turning his back on states or voter blocks in that particular contingent seems now to be, well, deliberate. Which means of course, if they continue to pick up on his hostility toward them and resent it, their vote will go to McCain in November.
I'm just not sure Obama has what it takes though to convince people that he has the vaguest idea what their lives are like or what to do about it. He appears to have no clue.

just written:

May 22 (Bloomberg) -- House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said women won't suffer a ``step back'' if Democrat Hillary Clinton loses her presidential bid, and rejected the idea of sexism in the presidential campaign.

HERE YOU GO, glad it doesn't exist:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ulw4dBr7e4

pelosi, brazille, boxer - all dems who support obama - these are they type of "sweetie"'s that would sell their own daughters to get ahead but could never support another woman to get ahead.

obama does not have the experience yet these women support him. why?

Hillary will become our nominee DESPITE these type of women!

Have they stopped teaching history in school? There are plenty of books out there on the events leading up to the second world war. Read them.

This article should be entitled, "Obama Slaughter of McCain Inevitable but Journalists Need to Eat So We Will Make up Stories Like This to Create The Illusion That There is a Race". 4,079 dead in Iraq as of right now. McCain wants to continue the occupation in perpetuity. Obama wants to end it. Election over. Does anybody know who won the Yankees game tonight?

Pretty obvious from many of the comments that the ignorant white boys don't like Obama. Ya' know. Screw 'em. The dem's haven't been able to win with that group since LBJ, and we don't need them. The poor white boys are going to vote republican, because they don't know how to vote their interests.

Hillary is right up there with Linda Tripp at this point, and she has so totally brainwashed her supporters that Obama can't beat McCain, it's insane. Please note that the only people in the game right now that believe this crap that Hillary has a better chance against McCain is Hillary's group. Some how it got into the Clinton's cool-aid that the republican's pretended to be Obama supporters, but the opposite is true. They pretended to be Clinton supporters because they now that Clinton is McCain's only chance to win the presidency.

I am of male gender.
My ancestors were English and Cherokee - but am primarily Caucasian.
My father served in the United States Navy for more than half the years he was alive.
My Grandfather, both Aunts, Uncle, older brothers, and younger brother all served in the Armed Forces.
I am a firm supporter of the Bill of Rights (not just the 1st and 2nd Amendment).
I interpret the 2nd Amendment to mean the "People" just like all other references to "the People" in the Constitution.
I had a public school and Department of Defense primary education - supplemented by the works of the Atomists and Sophists, letters and essays by the Founding Fathers, John Locke, English Common Law, foreign languages, and religious studies.
I work in Information Technologies field, and make over $50,000.00 a year.
I have some college education, but had to discontinue because I could no longer afford to go (White Males are assumed to be able to pay for their own college by the government).
My College studies focused on International Relations, Political Science, History, and Government.

I would rather be a White Woman in the United States than a Black Man - based on the racism, perceived threat of Black Men, difficulty of being considered competent, and living with the distrust of a society that automatically assumes you are only out to get things for yourself.

In Western society, as well as Near Eastern,, there have been numerous female leaders of Nations. Not just in modern times, but dating back to Cleopatra and Nefertiti in Egypt and the Puabi, Queen of the Sumerian City of Ur.

Throughout Asian, Indonesia, Central & South America, females are being chosen for positions of leadership at a far greater rate.

However, it is still very rare for a nation that isn't primarily Black to elect a Black person to lead its people.

Look at Europe. How many Black men or Women have been the Prime Minister or President of the various European countries of Great Britain, Spain, France, Germany, Italy, Austria, Hungary, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Netherlands, Finland, Poland, Czech Republic, etc...?

Yet most of those nations have had at one time a female head of state. A quick Google-ing of "Female World Leaders" will return quite a bit information, but "Black World Leaders" seems to confuse Google.

So, could we please focus on the actual Presidential election, and stop focusing on excuses as to why the lesser candidate (even if that does end up being McCain or Obama) lost?

Why can't you all see that there are no radicals/liberals, blue/red states..No Dem's or Repubs. We are all in this country together! And If we don't get our act together we will inevitably go down like other great civilzations in history! SO enough with the polemics!

He lost the same demographics in Oregon. He won, but he didn't get the rural or working class voters. He must've gotten alot of those Republicans for a day again. We know they were accidentally mailed ballots for the democrats. They say it will get sorted out but the exit polls there tell the story. He doesn't connect with the working folks period. Now I hear he changing his comments again with regard to Iran. Whichever way the wind is blowing. How could the DNC be so syupid again.

Blacks for Obama 9 to 1 (= Racism)
Elitists for Obama 7 to 3 (= Blind).

Weren't they the so called educated folks (elitists) that created the DotCom disaster and now this mortgage fiasco by duping unsuspecting folks (I call it white collar crime) and selling pipe dreams.

Wake up and smell the impending disaster.
Why is the press giving him and his wifee such a free ride.

lclon

Please listen to the works of the Rev. Wright - AND tell us why Obama brought his children to listen to this man week after week, year after year.

Then get back to us about racism.

Until then, please read about what Obama did in South Carolina and then tell us who the RACIST is.

Obama is the best candidate for President. He currently have most of the delegate votes and will win the Democrat nomination and eventual the Presidency. All racist haters of Obama are ignorant and have nothing decent to say about anyone. Obama have the votes of people who have integrity and does not need the votes of the ignorant racist haters in order to be President.

I have a Masters Degree and make far above 50K, I will not support Obama either. How naive are some. All he did was write a book to create a personafication to run on. He grew up white, then decided to throw the white family under the bus, when he figured out he could be African and get ahead easier. He has no experience at anything. Nada. The Democrats don't want to win. Hillary and former John Edwards supports like me will not vote for Obama. There is no substance. I have never seen a bigger raciest than Barack and his wife Michelle. How do they pander.

The electorial college is a winner take all state by state process. If that process was followed. Hillary would clearly be the nominee. How fair are caucauses, whose ever people on the ground are the bigger bullies win. That doesn't make sense. That is not democratic at all.

Barack can not and will not win the States that carry the electorial college. Super Delegates, wake up! You are handing the Republicans 4 more years. You are costing Americans Healthcare. What a mess you are making.

Chris:

Obama's campaign theme has been destroyed by his own actions. Obama has made his own campaign theme a FRAUD.

That is Obama's major problem right now.

I do not see how he gets out of it. South Carolina was a mistake. Calling out Gerry Ferraro was stupid. Telling the Superdelegates to be fearful of a race revolt if they do not vote for Obama is out of control.

Obama has disqualified himself.

He has shown his inexperience and perhaps complete lack of ability to lead ALL the people of this nation. It's over for Obama - the people of this nation have seen enough already.

.

I have been writing about the misogynistic media, pundits, bloggers and Senator Obama since Late February.

Back then there was much less evidence of this misogyny then there is now (eg: Senator Fingers' act post PA debate) and the attitude was "come on, what are you talking about?"

So now we have Senator Finger, ON TAPE,carefully choreographed, flipping off of Hillary, and NUMEROUS acts also ON TAPE by Pundits (such as Olbermann and Matthews) and IN WRITING by columnists, of sexist disrespect of Senator Clinton as a worthy opponent.

AND, I still get "come on, what are you talking about?"

So, I say now to all who care....write to Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi and ALL the Democratic leaders how you feel.

We supporters of Hillary are NOT prepared to "play along to get along". We are NOT prepared to "disbelieve our lying eyes". And, lastly, we are NOT prepared to "unite and vote" for the MEDIA and DEMOCRATIC ELITE's choice.

Any honest person can see that Senator Clinton is by far the smarter, better informed and better prepared person to be our next President. And she should not have to "step aside" for this guy who is her inferior in every measurable way, just because he is male.

To Democrats Unite.... I, along with so many, think that Obama is the Democrat version of Bush. Can't you see the parallelism? Both talked about non-sensical stuff... Obama's position on race - let's have a real dialogue about race in America. Obama's position on illegal immigrants - let's have a real dialogue about what to do with these people. I bet if one asks him about oil prices, he will prescribe yet another dialogue somewhere. What is "dialogue" to Obama was "compassion" to Bush.

Oh, please!

Who was the front-runner last August when the DNC made the call on MI & FL? Does the name Clinton ring a bell?

True or false: Harold Ickes voted, as a member of the Rules Committee, in favor of the decision to strip the states of their delegates.

Only two possibilities exist: either Hillary didn't give a damn about Michigan and Florida primary voters when that decision was made (and she's now a total hypocrite), or she was so incompetent she couldn't influence the party - or even her own campaign honcho - back when she was thought to be the prohibitive favorite for the nomination (and her current claims of ability to get things done therefore have no basis in fact).

Pick 'em. There's no third explanation.

A big reason that working class whites are voting for Hillary is that they have memories of the old Clinton administration which righted the economy after the first George Bush and left a surplus at the end of its term. The economy was good and the country was in great shape.
Many of the kids who vote for Obama have little to no memory of the Clinton administration and have learned little in school about it. Only the steamy side and the Republican attacks seem to have been communicated to them. You don't think was another aspect of the Republican attack team do you?
Also, the younger set don't quite understand about the dangers of communism, many know little. Kids are still being asked to read The Giver, 1984, Fahrenheit 411 without any understanding of the background and motivations for the authors writing choices. Obama looks good to them. No more dissension, everybody getting along and a place to belong to where HOPE and CHANGE are going to take place. These are kids where with very little history of trauma in their lives so they have no comprehension of what other generations have lived through. Everything is a game and the object is cool and to win.

CP Cook

You are 100% correct, Obama's campaign is seeking to divide.

"Obama is attempting to STEAL the nomination with underhanded RACIST attacks on Bill Clinton, Gerry Ferraro and RACIST threats to the Superdelegates that there will be "riots in the streets" if they do not vote for Obama."

Obama is NOT running a post-racial new politics campaign.

That is a FRAUD.

.

Please wake me up! I'm having a nightmare. Tell me Obama will fold up and go away. Intelligent people they say are voting for Obama but I've yet to see why. What do they know that I don't? Obama is a liar, obnoxious and sickening to listen too. If you think you are voting for a "God" who will wave a wand over our country and we will be living in paradise, think again, longer and harder. Stop thinking like a idiot!

"Obama is attempting to STEAL the nomination with underhanded RACIST attacks on Bill Clinton, Gerry Ferraro and RACIST threats to the Superdelegates that there will be "riots in the streets" if they do not vote for Obama."

"Obama is attempting to STEAL the nomination with underhanded RACIST attacks on Bill Clinton, Gerry Ferraro and RACIST threats to the Superdelegates that there will be "riots in the streets" if they do not vote for Obama."

To sum this, Obama is not the unifier that he sells himself to be. His support is primarily the right liberal wing of the Democratic party and black voters. All other demographic groups can't/won't support him primarily of 2 reasons: 1) his lack of experience, and 2) his character issues. Despite resigning to the conventional wisdom that Obama might be the eventual nominee, the vote in Kentucky, PA, and WV are reminders that many Dems just can't vote for Obama on good conscience. I want to see a Dem in the White House, but given that the Dems will have a stronger control of Congress, I don't think it would matter much if McCain eventually wins. BTW, when this happens, we can all blame the rich liberals and the blacks for yet another missed opportunity.

It is funny that looking at the results, it is actually Clinton who transcends gender, religious, economic and racial divides. It is unfortunate that she did not contest several caucuses. It is doubly unfortunate that the caucuses where Obama has taken his lead are controlled by the noisy activist, ultra-liberal few within the Democratic party. When will the Democratic party learn that it is the center that decides, not the extremes, either left nor right?

Dear Kicked out by Democrats,

I found your response interesting. I never realized that anyone considered Obama a democratic version of Bush. I urge you to take a step back and make an objective comparison. Obama is so clearly superior, intellectually, to Bush - it seems as if it doesn't need mentioning. I've never found Bush charismatic, and he's certainly never inspired the American public.

As far as experience goes, JFK was an "inexperienced dreamer." But great changes began during his presidency that have created a lasting legacy for the generation who elected him. While I was a supporter of Bill Clinton, because I thought he was smart and clearly the best choice against GHW Bush, I can't say he's inspired me the way Obama has. Obama has energized the good will of millions of Americans. I believe as our leader, he will continue to inspire and lead us into action, taking on various social issues at a grassroots level, using the same techniques used in working on his grassroots campaign.

Obama's positions are very close to Senator Clinton's. I started reading his senate webpage about his position and read through his speeches many months before he announced his candidacy. His positions on domestic violence, equal pay for women, and addressing poverty were all issues important to me, and he addressed these issues with depth, detail, AND hope. This is something I think we need to help America overcome the disastrous policies of the last 7 years.

My other major concern has been our standing in the world. Our reputation has been badly damaged. We need a leader who can inspire not only Americans, but citizens of the world, at large. We need someone who will mend fences, not drive tanks through them. The world has become smaller and smaller, making strong international relationship more and more necessary.

I am from a military family, and have a great deal of respect for John McCain and his service to our country. But he is NOT the leader we need right now.

Please vote Obama in November.

The next big Mash-Up for the Democrats is May 31 Rules Committee Nightmare - On one hand the party has a chance to right what is wrong and seat the Florida and Michigan delegates - on the other hand the party has the chance to finnally prove to everyone that the nomination is there to be stolen.
Is it Obama using the rules and the delegate distribution formulas and his racial baiting ways to steal the nomination OR is it Hillary who will use her insider dealing and smoke filled insider contacts to steal the nomination? Valid Question.

However for Florida and Michigan one can predict a very big weekend for Hillary on May 31 and then the Puerto Rico primary on June 1.

Obama is in for a big deflation - don't know if he will be derailed but the race will get closer.

The issues have to be addressed - the idea of a 48 state convention in a close race with an affirmative action candidate squashing election results in two states is nuts.

The issue is:

First, the state legislatures are sovereign, why in the world do they have to listen to and follow the inside deals which make up the rules of a political party ?

Second, taxpayer funds are involved - the parties are essentially ordering a state how it should spend its money. That is crazy and if a Court ever reviewed that issue, the party would not have much to stand on.

Third, because taxpayer money is involved, Constitutional protections of equal protection should apply - THUS the very selecting of South Carolina and Nevada OVER Florida and Michigan violates the equal protection protections - The COOPERATION of the states which are bound by the 14th Amendment in such a plan which violates the principle of equality among citizens of states is CONSTITUTIONALLY SUSPECT.

Fourth, the Voting Rights of the Citizens should prevail over any other interests in any event - such voting rights are incorporated into the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.

Again, I challenge the right of the party to be able to choose one state over another , in this case to select Nevada and South Carolina over Florida and Michigan

Again I challenge the right of the party to enforce it.

Fifth, the Voters are essentially innocent bystanders in the dispute between Harry Reid of Nevada and Carl Levin of Michigan -

Basically, a penalty is being assessed to the Voters if the Legislature does not grant its authority over elections to the parties. How does that make sense?

Good Luck Rules Committee of the Democrats - the Truth is behind every shadow.

Go ahead and vote for someone who could care less about you. Comments like that are the reason many are skeptical about a women even being president. If you are so easily swayed just by your own weak emotions and would do something against your own best interest, i.e.. "I'll show you i'll drown all the children" how could a woman be trusted. Personally, the more I think about it the less I would want any woman as a president. Hillary is such a moron by the way, today she was quoted as saying she read a poll that said 70% of the people said they would vote for a black man before a woman. Interesting thing to say since the basis of her argument is electability. She just said she is less electable because she is a woman so what the hell is she talking about that she is the most electable she just contradicted her argument.. Lets face it, she is such a lier there is no where to go with her, she is a piece of s**t.

++++++++
Millions of women will vote for McCain in November. Obama promised us unity, and instead he gave us a civil war. It's not about the issues anymore - it's personal. Welcome to identity politics. I will gladly vote for McCain in November. And yes, I know it will be Bush's third term. In the end, emotion always beats logic.

Posted by: Jane | May 21, 2008 4:52 PM

It is almost like the democrats want to lose. The very idea of putting up an un-vetted candidate in these times of trouble is mind blowing. I truly believe Obama could lose 47 states , that's out of the 50 I count not the 57 he lives in .

"If you think about it, Oregon hippies voted for Obama and he did not win by a huge margin. In KY, Clinton did win by a bigger margin and she won the mainstream 'working white' vote. YES, most of the voters are working whites who earn less that $50K a year. Obama has a weakness. I'm surprised to see the DNC leaders turn against her and back a losing candidate"

They can spit on the woman, the working class whites and everyone else ecept the Afro_American voters. Everyone else is a racist . As can be seen by reading the comments by O supporters, and how the Afro-American community voted. Afro-Americans are IMMUNE from racisim.

There are many Dems who resent the fact that the party is DOMINATED by it's reliance on the Afro-American vote. It is that block that catapulted Obama to many primary victories and proveded him with "MOMENTUM". The party decided that Clinton had to contest Obama with one hand behind her back or be race baited.
Worse she was constrained so that there would not be "RIOTS" in the street if the party did not deliver the nomination to a "viable" Afro-American candidate.
This fear was even bantered about after Clinton Won super tuesday. Clinton has had to tread lightly on anything that The Obama camp could twist into a racist issue . This was a part of Obama's stated stratagy to race bait.
This truth was proven in the memo that was leaked from Obama's camp proving their race bait stratagy.
This was to leverage fear in the Dem party of any insult of the Afro-American community.

""The O supporters here have absolutely no idea or care how difficult this election has been and how so many of us refuse to sell out our most cherished right to vote to support"

Looks like the above supporter doesn't know that it is not your "cherished right" to vote in the Democratic primary."
-JR quoting LEECHMAN

Yeah... and he claims to be a lawyer... You'd think he'd have sat down at his lawyer desk, used his lawyer computer to look up the relevant cases and precedents before flapping his lawyer gums (One in 1974, One in 1981). But what do you expect from a boomer?

"Millions of women will vote for McCain in November. Obama promised us unity, and instead he gave us a civil war."

Wave goodbye to Roe V. Wade, and any progress on gender equality. Of course, it would be like women to sulk and then cut off their noses to spite their faces.

If you think about it, Oregon hippies voted for Obama and he did not win by a huge margin. In KY, Clinton did win by a bigger margin and she won the mainstream 'working white' vote. YES, most of the voters are working whites who earn less that $50K a year. Obama has a weakness. I'm surprised to see the DNC leaders turn against her and back a losing candidate. I'm sure Obama offered them great things if they backed him but he will not be able to delivers these favors as President.

The way I see it is that the DNC had better see the light and use the convention vote to overturn this mess UNLESS they want McCain to be the next president and subsequently never obtain what Obama offered anyway.

It's like gambling on the stock market You can pick a very risky commodity and if it wins, you can win big, if it fails yo lose everything. BUT if you pick a safe guaranteed commodity you are certain to keep your shirt and make some gains. The DNC, which favors Obama, are going to lose everything. I think they despise the Clintons so much that they are willing to make a huge gamble on Obama even though the odds are big can't win the election. In the end, the DNC has sold us out of getting a Democratic Pres. in hope of making the 'big kill' off of Obama.

Although I did not read every comment, I would guess from the one's I did read that few if any comments mentioned the race subject. Is this not in some way a part of the voting pattern in the states of WV and Kentucky? I'm not saying that all of the votes can be dismissed on the basis of race but anyone can assume that a percentage of white voters both young and old, rich and poor will vote white before black no mater who the candidates are. For all the talk contained in the comments, we still have a problem in this country of coming to grips with race. As to Obama writting off both states, there are only so many hours in a day that can be divided among future supporters. Just as HC has spent a majority of her time with those who are more inclined to support her, so must Obama. Lastly, if the middle and lower class white population is still convinced that the Republicans are in there corner, they should vote in that direction and suffer the results. If Obama is the democratic party selection and looses, I will be disappointed but glad that the party finally found it's courage to ignore the pundits and trust the people.

I think this is just another symptom of a much wider problem in the Democratic party that has existed for years. At least part of the party just isn't ready to embrace the 50 state strategy and what is required to implement it.

It seems to me that SOME people in the Democratic party tend to discount those who don't fit their normal demographic instead of going after them in a sincere and respectful way. Obama should have shown up in Kentucky and West Virginia if he really is sincere about expanding the Democratic map; Clinton found a way to relate to those people; Obama should have at least tried. It should be remembered that Harold Ford, a black man, won 48% of the vote in TN in 2006 in the Senate race, and TN contains a large segment of Appalachia.

Writing a state like Tennessee off is a huge mistake, just like writing off West Virginia is a mistake. The smart move is to keep ALL the possible cards on table; you never know what might happen if you try to win these people over. Why presume failure instead of trying?

I've been reading comments all over the Democratic blogs with those who are frustrated about this phenomenon and who are calling people in Appalachia "hillbillies" and the "Clampett clan" and "racists". But in the next breath those same people are talking about Obama expanding the Democratic map. Talk like that doesn't help expand the map. Democrats can't dismiss people in a geographic area with name calling and then turn around and hope to win their votes. The same goes with talk of cowboy diplomacy while trying to get the votes of cowboys in Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada.

Democrats have to choose -- (1) do Democrats seriously want to expand the map or (2) do you want to dismiss the lifestyles and culture of people who aren't currently voting Democratic or who are Reagan Democrats who cross over in presidential elections? It seems to me Democrats can't have it both ways. I think we should try to be respectful and go after these votes. We may not get some of them, but we will get others and it may be enough to make a difference in November.

@ Jane:

Yes, if you are not logical enough to overcome your emotions they will win out everytime.

Unfortunately, that scenario increases the chances that we all lose.

It's only not about the issues if you let it be that way.

ANY WEAKNESS SHOULD BE OF CONCERN, AND THE CHALLENGE TO OVERCOME IT SHOULD BE WELCOMED. HOWEVER, "OVERCOME" DOES NOT EQUATE TO "REMOVE". IF DEMS WANT TO WIN BACK THE WHITE HOUSE IN NOVEMBER, THE LAST THING THEY SHOULD DO IS GAMBLE IT AWAY, BY GIVING IT TO THE CANDIDATE WHO CAME IN SECOND PLACE. THE PROCESS IS SUPPOSED TO BE DEMOCRATIC. IF THE DEMOCRATS REVERSE THE RULES, OR THE RESULTS OF THEIR OWN PROCESS, THEY WILL UNDERMINE THE IDEALS, CREDIBILITY AND STRENGTH OF THEIR PARTY. PEOPLE WILL COME BACK FROM THE DISAPPOINTMENT OF THEIR FAVORED CANDIDATE LOSING, LONG BEFORE THEY WILL COME BACK FROM THEIR FAVORED CANDIDATE HAVING THE NOMINATION STOLEN FROM THEM. IT IS NOT A DEMOCRATIC OPTION. THEREFORE, THE WINNER OF THE RACE SHOULD CONTINUE TO RUN. HE SHOULD RUN WITH WHAT HAS BEEN PROVEN TO BE A QUITE BRILLIANT CAMPAIGN. HE SHOULD RUN, AS HE HAS, REDEFINING MORE THAN ONE NOTION OF WHAT ELECTABILITY IS. HE SHOULD RUN, AS HE WAS NOMINATED TO, BY THE RULES, AND THROUGH A PROCESS THAT SHOULD ALWAYS REMAIN TRUE TO IT'S NAME, "DEMOCRATIC". AND HE SHOULD RUN WITH THE TRUEST OF THE PARTY IN FULL TOW, HELPING HIM TO OVERCOME THE WEAKNESSES, AND MORESO, HELPING HIM TO CAMPAIGN THE STRENGTHS THAT BROUGHT HIM THIS FAR, AND EVEN MORESO, SUPPORTING HIM THROUGH HIS VICTOTY IN NOVEMBER, AS THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, THE DEMOCRATIC NATION.

Millions of women will vote for McCain in November. Obama promised us unity, and instead he gave us a civil war. It's not about the issues anymore - it's personal. Welcome to identity politics. I will gladly vote for McCain in November. And yes, I know it will be Bush's third term. In the end, emotion always beats logic.

To anyone that claims Obama's campaign has been dirty or below-the-belt, please explain what smearing Obama has done that HRC hasn't. Name calling, and digging into the past of opponents, isn't that the way politics goes by nature? I don't think either of those tactics have a place in modern politics but this is the nature of the beast. If you want to analyze smearing, analyze how HRC or Obama react to it. Obama has handled it like a true politician, and that's why I'm behind him. The attacks on him have been far-reaching and enough to drive anyone crazy but it doesn't seem to change his primary focus. To the HRC supporters, do you feel insulted at the way he hasn't been talking about her at all of lately? Is it the fact that the numbers show one thing while "analysis" trys to assert that she's somehow better by some metric we haven't come to grips with yet? Her campaign is running at a loss. Any citizen, I don't care if you're black, white, yellow, white-collar, blue-collar, making + or - $50K, if you were in as much debt as she's in, without a real way to finance it, the credit rating agencies wouldn't let you hear the end of it for 7 years even if you turned your situation around today. So why is it that she gets a pass? We need to hold candidates by the same standards we have to live by. The party needs to be unified so let's stop crying about NOTHING. This is politics, nothing personal.

It is a terrible shame that Obama's supporters won't follow his lead and treat Hillary's supporters with respect. As a poster noted above, groups like Move On and DFA have virtually pushed us non-Obamaites out the door.

I think the party has a MUCH bigger problem than any of you are recognizing. I have never voted for a Republican in my life, I have contributed to and hosted parties for Move On and DFA, and I [used to] be active on left-wing blogs until non-Obamaites were essentially thrown out.

Yet I am at a loss re how to vote in November. I truly believe that Obama is the Democratic version of George Bush -- charismatic, inexperienced, and running on slogans that are impossible to quantify, much less govern by. What does a government of hope do? I don't have a clue -- and I'm a wonk who has read the website and watched the speeches.

So. John McCain will nominate judges who will almost certainly turn back Roe v. Wade. That's a problem for me. But, aside from the judges, when you compare the two candidates based on experience, McCain wins hands down. Do I vote to put the country into the hands of another inexperienced dreamer because of my pro-choice position? I truly don't know.

And, for the record, in addition to being a life-long Democrat, I'm a college educated card carrying member of the ACLU with an income well over $50,000. You're kidding yourselves if you think the problem is a few racists in the rust belt. This country is in a world of trouble and all the hope in the universe is not going to change that. We need people in charge who know how to govern... and before you tell me that running a great campaign and raising lots of money makes Obama a proven leader, can I remind you that George Bush was also a great campaigner and great fundraiser.

The bottom line: many of us are truly troubled by the decision we have to make. And calling us racists, cry-babies, sore losers, and whining women does not make that reality go away. No matter how you count it somewhere near half of the Democratic primary voters voted against Obama. I'd suggest that his supporters lay off the immature taunting and mindless repetition of empty slogans. (Give me an H! Give me an O!..) Spend your time helping the rest of us see why Obama deserves our vote.

Obama can't win a general election. He is a leftist & has always been a lefty liberal. Obama has leaned even futhur left for this Democratic primary. No way he can possibly stake out the middle ground now. Although, he will try to do just that for the general election. McCain has the middle: moderate Republicans, moderate democrats & independents. Hopefully, conservative republicans will also come out to vote for McCain & he will be easily be the victor.

Leichtman: He must be the nominee because he has won the most delegates, it's a delegate race.

Oh, he also has won more superdelegates, twice as many states and the popular vote.

"Where in my post do I disparage the people of Kentucky? I am pointing out demographics, nothing more.

So take your distortions and give them to Hillary for her next talking points."

Sorry jefro I meant "Leichtman"

Jefro3000: Where in my post do I disparage the people of Kentucky? I am pointing out demographics, nothing more.

So take your distortions and give them to Hillary for her next talking points.

Its kind of pathetic that every O supporter including jr have nothing positive to say about yesterday's results other than what low esteam they hold the citizens of W. Va and Kentucky.

We have also been told that Sen O must be the nominee b/c of his string support in places like N Carolina and Missouri. And this is what that strong support looks like thia in N Carolina, New Hampshire,Florida, Kansas, Missouri, Ohio and Texas where his supporters claim he is competitive:

North Carolina: McCain vs. Obama SurveyUSA McCain 51, Obama 43 McCain +8.0
Missouri: McCain vs. Clinton SurveyUSA McCain 46, Clinton 48 Clinton +2.0
Missouri: McCain vs. Obama SurveyUSA McCain 48, Obama 45 McCain +3.0
General Election: McCain vs. Clinton Democracy Corps (D) Clinton 49, McCain 47 Clinton +2.0
General Election: McCain vs. Obama Democracy Corps (D) Obama 48, McCain 46 Obama +2.0

Virginia: McCain vs. Clinton VCU McCain 47, Clinton 38 McCain +9.0
Virginia: McCain vs. Obama VCU McCain 44, Obama 36 McCain +8.0
Tuesday, May 20

General Election: McCain vs. Obama Rasmussen Tracking Obama 44, McCain 45 McCain +1.0
General Election: McCain vs. Clinton Gallup Tracking Clinton 48, McCain 44 Clinton +4.0
General Election: McCain vs. Obama Gallup Tracking Obama 47, McCain 44 Obama +3.0
Ohio: McCain vs. Clinton Rasmussen McCain 43, Clinton 50 Clinton +7.0
Ohio: McCain vs. Obama Rasmussen McCain 45, Obama 44 McCain +1.0
McCain 53, Clinton 36 McCain +17.0
Minnesota: McCain vs. Clinton Star Tribune McCain 40, Clinton 49 Clinton +9.0
Minnesota: McCain vs. Obama Star Tribune McCain 38, Obama 51 Obama +13.0
Saturday, May 17
Race Poll Results Spread
New Mexico: McCain vs. Clinton Rasmussen McCain 41, Clinton 47 Clinton +6.0
Friday, May 16
Race Poll Results Spread
Kansas: McCain vs. Clinton Rasmussen McCain 53, Clinton 39 McCain +14.0
Kansas: McCain vs. Obama Rasmussen McCain 55, Obama 34 McCain +21.0
Arkansas: McCain vs. Clinton Rasmussen McCain 39, Clinton 53 Clinton +14.0
Arkansas: McCain vs. Obama Rasmussen McCain 57, Obama 33 McCain +24.0
Thursday, May 15
Race Poll Results Spread
Iowa: McCain vs. Clinton Rasmussen McCain 45, Clinton 42 McCain +3.0
Iowa: McCain vs. Obama Rasmussen McCain 42, Obama 44 Obama +2.0
Georgia: McCain vs. Obama Strategic Vision (R) McCain 54, Obama 40 McCain +14.0
Democratic Presidential Nomination Quinnipiac Obama 45, Clinton 41 Obama +4.0
General Election: McCain vs. Clinton Quinnipiac Clinton 46, McCain 41 Clinton +5.0
General Election: McCain vs. Obama Quinnipiac Obama 47, McCain 40 Obama +7.0
Race Poll Results Spread
West Virginia Democratic Primary Suffolk Virginia: McCain vs. Clinton Rasmussen McCain 47, Clinton 41 McCain +6.0
North Carolina: McCain vs. Clinton PPP (D) McCain 46, Clinton 38 McCain +8.0
Virginia: McCain vs. Obama Rasmussen McCain 47, Obama 44 McCain +3.0
North Carolina: McCain vs. Clinton Rasmussen McCain 43, Clinton 40 McCain +3.0
North Carolina: McCain vs. Obama PPP (D) McCain 49, Obama 42 McCain +7.0
North Carolina: McCain vs. Obama Rasmussen McCain 48, Obama 45 McCain +3.0
Kentucky Democratic Primary Research 2000 Clinton 58, Obama 31 Clinton +27.0
Michigan: McCain vs. Obama Rasmussen McCain 45, Obama 44 McCain +1.0
Michigan: McCain vs. Clinton Rasmussen McCain 44, Clinton 44 Tie
Kentucky: McCain vs. Clinton Research 2000 McCain 53, Clinton 41 McCain +12.0
Kentucky: McCain vs. Obama Research 2000 McCain 58, Obama 33 McCain +25.0
Race Poll Results Spread
Oregon: McCain vs. Clinton Rasmussen McCain 40, Clinton 46 Clinton +6.0
Oregon: McCain vs. Obama Rasmussen Obama 52, McCain 38 Obama +14.0
Saturday, May 10
Race Poll Results Spread
General Election: McCain vs. Clinton LA Times/Bloomberg Clinton 47, McCain 38 Clinton +9.0
General Election: McCain vs. Clinton Hotline/FD Clinton 46, McCain 43 Clinton +3.0
General Election: McCain vs. Obama Hotline/FD Obama 47, McCain 43 Obama +4.0
Texas: McCain vs. Clinton Research 2000 McCain 53, Clinton 38 McCain +15.0
Texas: McCain vs. Obama Research 2000 McCain 52, Obama 39 McCain +13.0
Thursday, May 08
Race Poll Results Spread
Missouri: McCain vs. Clinton Rasmussen McCain 45, Clinton 43 McCain +2.0
Missouri: McCain vs. Obama Rasmussen McCain 47, Obama 41 McCain +6.0
Georgia: McCain vs. Clinton Rasmussen McCain 48, Clinton 37 McCain +11.0
Georgia: McCain vs. Obama Rasmussen McCain 53, Obama 39 McCain +14.0
West Virginia Democratic Primary TSG Consulting (D) Clinton 63, Obama 23 Clinton +40.0
Wednesday, May 07
Race Poll Results Spread
Wisconsin: McCain vs. Clinton Rasmussen McCain 47, Clinton 43 McCain +4.0
Wisconsin: McCain vs. Obama Rasmussen McCain 47, Obama 43 McCain +4.0
Tuesday, May 06
Race Poll Results Spread
North Carolina Democratic Primary Insider Advantage Obama 47, Clinton 43 Obama +4.0
Kentucky Democratic Primary Rasmussen Clinton 56, Obama 31 Clinton +25.0
North Carolina Democratic Primary Zogby Tracking Obama 51, Clinton 37 Obama +14.0
Indiana Democratic Primary Zogby Tracking Clinton 43, Obama 45 Obama +2.0
Kentucky Democratic Primary SurveyUSA Clinton 62, Obama 28 Clinton +34.0
Democratic Presidential Nomination Ipsos Obama 40, Clinton 47 Clinton +7.0
General Election: McCain vs. Clinton Ipsos Clinton 47, McCain 42 Clinton +5.0
General Election: McCain vs. Obama Ipsos Obama 46, McCain 42 Obama +4.0
Monday, May 05
Race Poll Results Spread
North Carolina Democratic Primary Insider Advantage Obama 48, Clinton 45 Obama +3.0
Indiana Democratic Primary InsiderAdvantage Clinton 48, Obama 44 Clinton +4.0
West Virginia Democratic Primary Rasmussen Clinton 56, Obama 27 Clinton +29.0
North Carolina Democratic Primary Zogby Tracking Obama 48, Clinton 40 Obama +8.0
North Carolina Democratic Primary PPP (D) Obama 53, Clinton 43 Obama +10.0
Indiana Democratic Primary Suffolk Clinton 49, Obama 43 Clinton +6.0
Indiana Democratic Primary PPP (D) Clinton 51, Obama 46 Clinton +5.0
Indiana Democratic Primary Zogby Tracking Clinton 42, Obama 44 Obama +2.0
North Carolina Democratic Primary General Election: McCain vs. Clinton USA Today/Gallup Clinton 46, McCain 49 McCain +3.0
Texas: McCain vs. Clinton Rasmussen McCain 49, Clinton 43 McCain +6.0
Texas: McCain vs. Obama Rasmussen McCain 48, Obama 43 McCain +5.0
Sunday, May 04
Indiana Democratic Primary Zogby Tracking Clinton 41, Obama 43 Obama +2.0
Favorable +21.0
Clinton: Favorable/Unfavorable USA of New Hampshire McCain 49, Obama 43 McCain +6.0
Friday, May 02
Race Poll Results Spread
North Carolina Democratic Primary Rasmussen Obama 49, Clinton 40 Obama +9.0
North Carolina Democratic Primary InsiderAdvantage Obama 49, Clinton 44 Obama +5.0
New Hampshire: McCain vs. Obama Rasmussen McCain 51, Obama 41 McCain +10.0
Ohio: McCain vs. Obama Quinnipiac McCain 43, Obama 42 McCain +1.0
Florida: McCain vs. Clinton Quinnipiac McCain 41, Clinton 49 Clinton +8.0
Florida: McCain vs. Obama Quinnipiac McCain 44, Obama 43 McCain +1.0

What is all the talk about Obama trying to disenfranchise MI and FL voters? Were you people paying attention when all the candidates agreed to the rules and sanctions imposed on those states before the primaries started? Of course, at the time HRC was the inevitable nominee and had nothing to lose. Now that she's hopelessly behind, she suddenly wants to change the rules, essentially disenfranchising voters in states which FL and MI tried to preempt. It seems that HRC has a problem playing by the rules - even the ones she helped write!

"The O supporters here have absolutely no idea or care how difficult this election has been and how so many of us refuse to sell out our most cherished right to vote to support"

Looks like the above supporter doesn't know that it is not your "cherished right" to vote in the Democratic primary.

The world is laughing at us as we bicker at about who will be the next president. We are fighting a war against the US Dollar and american business and losing every day. Our President looks like some street begger to other world leaders and we are off pretending we are again on our way to the land of Oz or is that Camel-ot. I was told I get my history wrong by some one who chose to speak from the heart and not the reality of the events We, I regret, are at the cross roads of our future and no one is minding the store.

Kennedy could of shut Vietnam down but chose to escalate it. He needed that macho image and was going to show the world just how strong we were. Look into his documentaion on why he chose to do this and don't gag when you read it for yourself.

I met President Johnson and as a man I liked him very much. Even though he could not always understand why as president he was not the King of the USA. He left almost a broken man because he could not understand why he no longer had the support of the American People. He had given them everything he was and it was not enough.

I cannot ever call Jimmy Carter Mr. President! If you take the time to understand the damage he did to our Intel
and security angencies and then count the bodies he left around the world from abandoning our suppoters. He can never make up for the harm he did to this country. No matter how many houses he builds.

Mr. Bill proved that we must have a really capable group of government employee's because they did an outstanding job as he dodged the press and his legal problems.

I'm tired of the mess that has been created by both parties and I think it is time for us to demand only the very best. Only the very best is what we should have during this very challenging period of our history. Why are we not demanding and expecting from them only the very best and most capable candidates.

Yes I can say "America" right or wrong because I still believe in all that America has to offer each and everyone of us.

President Johnson I think I now understand
what is was you meant. When I found you setting in the dark on Air Force One that August afternoon in 1965. He said "I no longer know my friends or who my enamies are but I do know that I am alone now and have to answer for it all. You would be Presidents should think everyday about those words of wisdom.

We need to take the time again to become one people and all pull together for our common good. Take the me and I out of the conversations and use instead us, we and all because that is who we are. America is a country of its people and always has been.

So take the time to stop calling each other names and being concerned only about ones party. Let us all look after America
together and build for a better future.

There is greatness here, so take the time to find it.

The results in WVA, PA, KY and OH shoukd concern Democrats only if they cannot somehow convince Clinton supporters that, no matter how they feel about Obama, any Democrat is preferabale to McCain or any Republican. I home that ther is not enough sore loser attitude among Clinton's female supporters to prevent them from voting for a man and not enough blind racism and fear among the rest for them not be able to summon the courage to vote for a black. What have white men in the Oval Office done for us lately?

The demographics in Oregon say more about the nation as a whole than the demographics in Kentucky.

Kentucky = mostly poor, uneducated whites.
Oregon = A balance of demographics

Obama won the vote in Oregon in every demographic including whites who make less than 50k per year and did not graduate from college.

Like bugs-bunny used to say: Chris Cizilla, what a maroon!

We all know what inexperience has gotten us into (by the way I did not vote for that idiot!) So my question to you is Why would you want another inexperienced idiot running the country? I'll vote for the one who has more experience even though I am not a Republican.

They WILL seat the delegates from FL & MI...probably at half of votes...with 'uncommitted' votes given to Obama in Mich, because he wasn't on the ballot (this option favors Clinton HEAVILY). Which makes the magic # 2131 delegates.
As of today the count is:
----Current Count---FL---MI---Supers---Total --Votes needed to win
Obama-1680---41---28-----308-----2057--- 74
Clinton-1518---52---36-----280-----1886--- 245

This is a BEST case scenario for Sen. Clinton....and yet, Sen. Obama is still in the lead by 171 votes.
There are only 4 primaries & 138 pledged delegates left in the nomination process.
TAKE NOTE: 114 of the undeclared super delegates are in states that Obama won & only 85 are from states that Hillary won.
Obama will be our nominee.
Seriously, Obama winning the nomination is the ONLY way the Dems will win in the general election. Hillary has a VERY strong Dem base...but the swing votes WON'T vote for her. Obama will get the majority of Dems, the Independents & the crossover republicans. And don't forget the millions of new voters Obama's campaign helped register...the Dem party is bigger and broader than ever. It's a no-brainer on the national scale

I hesitate to join in this discussion given its decidedly immature tone, but I just want have a couple things noted about Obama's so called failure to secure working whites (or whatever I'm called these days). First, Kentucky and West Virginia are wonderful places I'm sure, but the likelihood of them going for a democrat is small, regardless of who the nominee is. 30% of dems voted for Bush over Kerry in both states (precisely the number of Clinton voters that said they would not vote for Obama). And both Clinton and Obama lose this white working class vote to McCain nationwide by about 7 points. As someone said, dems haven't carried (majority) this demographic since 1964 or something.
So the real question is whose can bring together the collation to make up the difference? Obama draws significantly from voters under 40 (or maybe 30), college educated and independents not too mention that he'll run up record numbers in the African American's vote as well. He wins large margins in all these categories so if he can win 40 percent (where he is at now I think) of the white working class vote, he can win in states that Clinton can't while winning those she will. For example, under that premise he will be able to hold Michigan and Penn, make Ohio close (I think he loses Fl). He'll win Colorado, Virigina, and Iowa (and maybe with Richardson's help - New Mexico) and perhaps even North Carolina (or at least make it close). I'm sorry but Clinton cannot win those states - everyone seems to forget her high general election negative numbers and how polarizing (motivating) she is to republicans. The idea that she carries this white working class vote in the general any better than Obama is questionable.

It's disheartening to read the comments of Democrats responding to articles such as this, when I thought the number 1 goal all along was to get the Republicans out of the White House and to give the new Democratic President large majorities in Congress. Let's face it, either Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton would make a great President. But, we can only have one President and hopefully that person will be the one who wins the Democratic nomination according to the rules. I simply cannot believe that anyone interested in the survival of our country would vote for a man, who has made it clear that he will continue the failed policies of George Bush for another four years. Is that what any of you really want? I don't think so. Thus, it's past time that we quit arguing among ourselves and unite behind the Democratic nominee for President. Otherwise, the nightmare will continue, and we'll have only ourselves to blame for it.

MSU don't be bullied. The O supporters here have absolutely no idea or care how difficult this election has been and how so many of us refuse to sell out our most cherished right to vote to support a lightwight State Senator many of us feel is totally unqualified to be the most powerful person in the world.We take our civic responsibility seriously sir, just like you.

GO HILLARY!!!!!!!
ONLY the media/mysogynists/sexists/neo-cons/Karl Rovians, etc, etc!!!! (Obama included with the "SWEETIE" comment that SO EASILY rolled out of his mouth) want you to believe that Hillary is this total evil......Over 17 milliion voters know what Hillary represents!!!

Obama can NOT carry electoral votes to win the general election. THAT!!!! already shows!!.......It is AMAZING considering ALL the money he has spent.......We're not talking about just a few people in this country not drinking the Kool-Aid.
The WORST part of ALL!!!! is that Obama has split the Democratic party ......THAT!!! alone just goes to show that he is not really running because he really cares about this country.......
Yes, a perfectly INEXPERIENCED nobody is going to come in and fix everything, even though he has not said ONE THING about HOW he will DO ANYTHING!!!......Just FOLLOW me, it's ALL in the Kool-Aid. And anybody that thinks his millions upon millions came from all the little guys is down-right stupid. Come on!!!, this (Obama) is a well-oiled machine.

By the way, the race is NOT OVER!!!!
HILLARY WILL WIN AND CARRY OUR COUNTRY OUT OF THIS MESS WE HAVE!!!!.....HILLARY WILL MAKE HISTORY!

To those who would say that Obama has not offered comprehensive solutions to the issues that we face as a country, I would say: You haven't been listening.

Go to the candidates websites. All the information is there. The notion that Obama is all talk and no substance and does not have the experience to lead the country is the propagation of Clinton campaign rhetoric.

Neither one of them has presidential experience. Yes, Hillary lived in the White House, but this is not direct experience, in my opinion. Bill had no Washington experience and he did just fine because he is smart, politically savvy and genuinely cared about America...all the things that the inexperienced Bush was/is not.

So, again, as many other posters have submitted, if you are a Clinton supporter that chooses not to vote for your legitimately selected Democratic candidate, then I question why you were supporting a democrat in the first place. The policies between Clinton and Obama are so similar as to be inconsequential.

I am a Hillary Clinton supporter who worked in her NH campaign and who has donated $$ to her campaign twice. I'm extremely disappointed that she will not be the Democratic nominee unless some extraordinary situation arises.
I am also a 65 yr.old white male college graduate and resent being told by other commenters that I must suck up my displeaure with Sen. Obama and vote for him whilst I hold my nose. The last time I checked, this is still the USA, and I can vote or not vote for whomsoever I please.
I could not, in good conscience, vote for Sen. McCain as he, in my eyes, represents a continuation of the Bush failed policies and a prolonged Iraq martial quagmire. He is a fine American but has chosen the wrong path politically and morally.
This leaves me with Sen. Obama or no one to vote for. I've waited to be inspired, to hear a comprehensive plan to leave Iraq, get the economy back on its' feet, and reform health care in a meaningful way so that all citizens may benefit. So far, none of these messages have been forthcoming from the the Illinois senator. Vague promises of unity and happy days once the elections are over seem to be the substance of his great promise. Why should someone, as ancient as I, be convinced by empty slogans and a charismatic personality that he is the one to lead the country.
I must admit that I'm not. Therefore, I've decided that if the best candidate of the three won't be running in November, I'll refrain from voting for president and cast my vote for the Democratic aspirants to Congress to keep Pres. McCain in check and to accomplish the Democratic party agenda. Senator Obama will need to show me and the voters of this country a great deal more than he has if he expects any other outcome.

Excuse me, when did HRC get religion? I never recall her saying religion was so important before. Why is she in such debt, lack of supporters or poor organizational skills? If you want to talk about spouses, Bill Clinton has shamed the presidency during this campaign and already spent any political capital he had. One thing I will say, please don't take Jim Webb away from Virginia, we need him in the Senate! Dems will never carry West VA or Kentucky but we will carry Oregon!
Sharon

"I don't care about issues at all. I feel bad for po' widdle Hillary, so I'm gonna vote against the meanines that beat her."
Obviously you must be about 10 years old.

You and nancy making comments like "Seems to me the so called support she has is weak at best " seems to over look that your great campaign lost Ca by 10%, W. Va by 41%, Ky by 35% and Pa by almost 10%. Not something you should be so bold to brag about and insult.

Go ahead and keep trashing your opponents and everyone over 25 years old mason and nancy, that should work well for you and your campaign in Nov.

I have to do this correction every so often.

Chamberlain went to negotiate over the Sudetenland knowing that the Torys (with plenty of liberal help) had gutted the British Army after WWI. However weak Hitler actually was, Chamberlain nknew that Britain was weaker. Essentially Chamberlain sold out the Czechs to buy time to rearm Britain. His stiff upper lip on his return was just an ineffective poker face. Britain, first under him and then under Churchill (one of the disarmers, by the way) began feverishly rearming. Itis unlikely that ANY of Britains leaders really bought the "Peace in our time" rhetoric.

This version was throwing hamburger to a pit bull to distract him till the Dog Wardens can come get him.

Obama hasn't ever offered meat to the dog, merely decided that if he doesn't attack the dog, the dog won't attack him. Talking to Ahmadenijad sure beats watching Ahmadenijad gain political clout by sinking opur carriers, cruisers, frigates, and stores ships in the Persian gulf and bragging in the Islamic world about how he defeated the uncircumcised crusaders. Roosevelt has still under the assumption that Japan was willing to talk when he was informed of the fourteen part message that meant Japan had decided to drop all pretenses and attack the U. S.

As long as our enemies will talk, we should talk. Monitor their communications, watch their military's maneuvering, try to guess their intent, but talk any way.

About what Obama actually calls for.

Regarding someone's suggestion of Senator Webb as VP on an Obama/Webb ticket - hopefully, Senator Webb has something larger in mind for the future. Going down with the ship in 08' may not fit with his plans. Senator Obama should choose someone the Democrats can afford to lose, maybe Senator Kerry, Leahy, Rockefeller or McCaskill.

what a bunch of CHILDISH comments & taunts---from those who support Barack AND those who support Hillary. some of you sound like you're still in elementary school. it is unfortunate that these two are running at the same time. they both bring incredible strengths, and we are lucky to have both. i have been wavering between them because they do offer so much. but a HUGE KEY to how i will vote in november is: what kind of judges will the next president put on the supreme & federal courts? those judges will have a much longer impact upon our lives than the next president will!

My vote is still McCain if not Hillary. My opinion of Obmama is not going to change in the next few months. His church, his associations, his wife, his financial dealings. Nope. I and my husband are going Independent next month and voting Republican for the first times in our life. So, call us Racists or uneducated or worse. He is to inexperienced to run this country.

jansjay and other O worshippers: Where in the world to you think you are instructing us to support your guy. Why b/c you tell us to just as likely the same way you talk to your parents. All of your bullying tactics which has gone on here for months is counter productive and in fact making many of us less likely to march to your orders.

And this comment: But we shouldn't kowtow to the right wing of our party whose presence hinders our ability to achieve our goals.

And neither shpould we be forced to kowtow to the extreme left wing of the party. Many of us who were founding members of moveon and DFA received the same message. We were instructed to support Sen O and threatened with expulsion if we refused. Perhaps many of you O supporters just don't get it. Many of us are socially liberal and economically conservative, that makes us moderates not right winge so are you are so fond of labeling usMany of us don't agree with Sen O's plan to double cap gains taxes and think HC's plan of raising it 33% is just fine. Many of us are professionals and investors and don't think lifting the payroll tax from $107,000 to $250,000 is such a great idea eitehr or cowtowing to genY and genX supporters by allowing them to opt out of healthcare as Sen O has advocated and let the rest of us pick up the tab for them by paying higher premiums then necy under his plan.

You can call us names, yell at us and describe us as right wingers, but just remember, the last time the D party was taken over by the extreme left of the party and acted as many O supporters here, pushing moderates out of the party, our nominee lost 49 states. If that is the attitude of your new party, congrats, that may well be the same outcome in the fall.

So far all I have heard is that exact same message from Sen O and his supporters.

New York City Secession 2010

Don't put my city in greater danger with John McCain because you have to make a point.

Mary & Michelle,

Yeah, it must be terrible for you guys. Let's all get under the covers and sob. Honestly, Barack Obama is not a bad guy. I regret that your candidate didn't win. Hillary is my senator, I live in New York. I voted for her in '06. But, I supported Obama in the primary. We can all have our pride, That much I understand. But don't write the guy off. He's so much better than John McCain. PLEASSEEE! Stay. Or, if you really can't, don't sandbag us. I know you think we sandbagged Hillary. And let me just say, as both a Hillary Clinton & Barack Obama supporter and a New Yorker, we have to be team players. Come on. Don't join the other side.

Until we know how many Republicans in those states crossed over to vote for Hillary the question is almost moot. In my mind the fact that Obama supporters are contributing to Obama...if Hillary has so many supporters...why is she over $20 million in debt for her campaign? Seems to me the so called support she has is weak at best and they would probably not vote for her or any Democrat in November.

And by the way, all you POORLY INFORMED Obama supporters, 1964 is NOT the last time KY or WV went Democratic, and they don't ALWAYS vote Republican.

Bill Clinton won those states in 1992 and 1996, by not calling them stupid names or offending them with arrogance.

Now, if the Obama campaign or the MSNBC retards told you 1964 was the last time, the MISLED you.

They must think you're too poorly informed to know better, and easily led. You know, kinda like Bush wingnuts or Limbaugh dittoheads.

For all who say that a democrat who states that if Obama is the nominee, they will vote for McCain, seem to think that we are Repugs.
Well guess again, we are middle of the road Dems who just don't like Obama's politics and the DNC gaming against Hillary Clinton. What we will look at --McCain will be President BUT will have to deal with a Democratic lead Congress, which will force both parties to work together or stall mate each other. The last option will be remembered by the voters,as occurred in the 2006 elections.

These reverse racism arguments are digressive. Come on, guys. If you're not going to vote for Barack Obama fine. But stop acting like cry babies. Why do I have to care what conservatives want my party to look like? I'm the left wing guy, I have to ignore those resistant to change. But stop this reverse racism/affirmative action argument. Stop this I can't vote for Obama because my feelings were hurt that my vote didn't count in Florida, or Hillary didn't win, or "he can't win." Take a chance. And if you're not going to, then shut the hell up. It's tired. You sound tired. And you're going to be on the wrong side of history on this one. But I'm sure you love that. But we shouldn't kowtow to the right wing of our party whose presence hinders our ability to achieve our goals. Besides, "Reagan Democrats" aren't the only voters out there. Enough middle name/pastor nonsense. If I wanted a reaction like that, I'd ask a fifteen year old what they thought. Grow up, America! And stop this reverse racism. As if it's so bad to be white. It's bad to earn less than $100,000 in this country. We're not included in the benefits of a Reagan-Bush economy. So, stop yelling at black people who share the same situation as you. Just vote for Obama and stop telling me you're not comfortable with him. I hate to sound so fascistic, but it looks like some of you guys need to hear it. Christ.

"The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, 'God, I thank You that I am not like other men --extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this tax collector. I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I possess.' And the tax collector, standing afar off, would not so much as raise his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, 'God, be merciful to me a sinner!' I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted."
-Luke 18:11-14.

Think about it.

Kathy:
"Trailer trash" isn't any more of a racial term than "Gangbanger".

They are ignorant, or at least uneducated. Look at the demos.

Vincent:
Webb doesn't want the job, and has said so on multiple occasions.

It's not racism. It's CULTURAL.

These same "Appalachians" (MSNBC's new word for excusing Obama's weaknesses) rejected John Kerry, too.

Hopey/changey la la la la doesn't work with these rugged Scots-Irish people.

They're PRAGMATISTS, but they're not racists.

Saying they are, is a copout, and divides the Democratic Party even more.

So....if Clinton wins hugely in Puerto Rico, will you and MSNBC call them "Appalachians" too?

In response to kathy5's post at 1:44pm:

Hillary Clinton has lost. If you're a Democrat vote your interest and support Obama.

Stop making excuses by accusing his supporters as being raciest, and pointing to irrevelant issues to not support him such as Wright, Michele Obama's comments, and experience.

These excuses are bigger than supporting your party and your economic interest?

Don't be a sore loser, get out there and support Senator Obama!

Poor MJ. Such thin skin.

Sack up, wuss. If you voted for Hillary on issues but then you turn around and vote for McCain because you were disrespected, you're nothing but a foo'. This ain't junior high class president we're voting for here. There are real issues of consequence to consider when making this choice. McCain and HRC are nothing alike, and to say you would vote for the former after voting for the latter makes me question if you aren't one of those Reagan "Democrats". If you're not, you've got one clear choice on the issues. Don't let your pride get in the way.

Why would anyone be so concerned about WV and KKKY when they will most likely vote Repub., in the first place. And who by the way, would want these two states deciding the direction of this great nation. I for one, would place my bet on the majority of the country to decide.

Why would anyone be so concerned about WV and KKKY when they will most likely vote Repub., in the first place. And who by the way, would want these two states deciding the direction of this great nation. I for one, would place my bet on the majority of the country to decide.

Results from West Virginia, Kentucky and several other states show why James Webb is the perfect complement to Obama and the best choice for a vice presidential nominee.

When will Obama supporters get it? It is not that people such as myself cannot be pursuaded to vote for him should be become the victor - after reading his supporters comments regarding ANYONE who will not vote for him or even suggests they will not vote for him I can no longer support him. Now, this may be wrong, it may be right but it is my feeling - I cannot separate him from his supporters and you guys are the worst. You talk about Hillary being racist, you talk about anyone who is white that won't vote for him - gotta be racist and you then have the aducity to make such horrible remarks about Hillary's supporters, calling them ignorant, trailer trash, toothless, inbred - sweet Jesus! Call it what you will but I will call it racist - you seem to think that because you support a man of color you and he are the only ones that can use that term but I'm saying right here and now - RIGHT BACK AT YA!

Further, I'm not a racists in any way, however, I cannot support Obama or vote for him because of a couple of things I simply cannot let go of:

1. Reverend Wright and Obama's 20+ years spent supporting that church (but no longer since it might harm his chances at the presidency)
2. Michelle Obama's proclimation "for the first time, I'm proud of my country" words

Not to mention the fact that I just don't think the man is qualified to be president - not enough experience. He has not paid his dues which attests to his lack of experience.

And YES, it does matter.

There are many reasons for super delegates to go with Senator Clinton; the first being that Senator Obama can not put 270 electoral votes into play in November. This is no small thing if one wants to have a Democratic president. Second, Senator Clinton will have received the most popular votes when the primaries are over. Also, many of the popular votes cast for Senator Obama were from states in which the Democrats don't have a prayer in the general election (e.g., SC, GA, AL and MS) while Senator Clinton has won in exactly the states that will be needed in the Fall.

The true choice is whether Senator Obama would rather win as VP on a ticket with Senator Clinton, or lose as the candidate in top position on the ballot.

Go ahead and vote like that, Gary. Fly your moron flag high and proclaim to all the world, "I don't care about issues at all. I feel bad for po' widdle Hillary, so I'm gonna vote against the meanines that beat her."

I'll be the one saying, "I told you so," after JSMc starts another war, does nothing about the budget or Iraq, and appoints conservative justices to the SCOTUS. Take a chill pill, and look McCain vis-a-vis Obama. If you liked HRC's issues, you've only got one choice. If you didn't, then why are you voting in a Democratic Primary?

Obama has some work to do. What reaaly needs to happen though is that Hillary, if she can bow out without whining endlessly (count on Bill for plenty of that), and work to bring people together, this will be less of an issue.

He will win many over. Going against McCain and his many Bush-same stances, not too many will vote against Obama despite wanting Hillary more. There will be racial lines in some places. There will be those who won't vote for him because she didn't win. But I expect most will vote for change.

mibrooks27 wrote: (among other offensive things):
So, Hillary's "support" amounts to a few aged shrill angry old feminists and a bunch of the same sort of bigots that murdered Martin Luther King, run around with sheets on and burn crosses, and get their news from FOX (where, last Friday, one morning show host compared his purchasing a pet monkey to adopting a black child!). Be our guest, stand up proudly and let everyone know what a complete bigot and generally thoughtless doogus you are. Vote for McCain or stay home, WE DON'T NEED YOU TO WIN.
****************************************
This arrogant drivel & utter disrespect is why I WILL NOT VOTE FOR OBAMA. His supporters don't think they need me? Fine. I will vote for McCain & you can whine over your wine for the next 4 years!
PS I am boycotting all Oregon products, since you don't seem to need my MA millions.

None of the news sources I have seen addresses a key metric of the exit polling data: what percentage of non-college educated white voters actually vote in the Democratic Primaries in WV, OH and PA? If non-college educated white voters constitute 40% of the electorate in those states and 75% of those are Republicans, can any conclussion about the General Election really be drawn from the exit poll of Democratic Primary voters?

"Putting aside which candidate you support, should the results of Kentucky (and West Virginia) be of concern to Democrats looking to win back the White House in November? Why or why not?"

IMHO, earning the priviledge of sitting in the Executive Office is important, but what has been said by the people identified in the media as residents of both states and their reason for not voting for a particular candidate should be a concern to all Americans. And this includes the other communities that has sidelined and voiceless. Maybe by choice.
It could be the black and white communities believe that we are the only members invested enough in this nation that the others opinons and voices are not needed.

It's just strange to read that the only opinions that seems to matter or have greater importance excludes our nation's other citizens. Are they in the back of the bus?

Hillary is the only reason Hillary is losing. We voters know her so well. And we can always count on her to show us that side of her we find so distasteful.

Anonymous at 12:35 PM said
"The military NEEDS YOU if they are going to sustain their current numbers in Iraq! They are having major problems! Record suicide rates combined with declining enlistment."

This is typical of the pathology of those who refer to themselves as the "reality based" community. They base their effusions on a reality that exists only in their own delusional musings. "Record suicide rates" do exist in the Army, but they are well below the suicide rate of civilians in the same age group, and in fact so infinitesimal as to have zero impact on re-enlistment rates. "Declining enlistment" is quite simply counterfactual. All branches of the service are over-fulfilling their recruitment quotas. The awful truth that confronts Anonymous and his/her/its confederates is that the Petraeus-Odierno team is winning the war in Iraq, and "AQ in Mesopotamia" is making its desperate last stand in Mosul. Face it, Anonymous. Your hopes for a disgraceful defeat in Iraq have gone glimmering.

FlaLady - AH, you have put your finger on it! Indeed, most of Cltinon's support comes from those "Hillbillies, aging feminists, blue-collar workers, etc.'. The problem for you is the rest of us are not ignorant fools, we read, we understand history, and those hillbillies and blue collar crackers NEVER vote Democrat in the general eletion. The last time a majority of them voted Democratic in a general election was 1964!!! So, Hillary's "support" amounts to a few aged shrill angry old feminists and a bunch of the same sort of bigots that murdered Martin Luther King, run around with sheets on and burn crosses, and get their news from FOX (where, last Friday, one morning show host compared his purchasing a pet monkey to adopting a black child!). Be our guest, stand up proudly and let everyone know what a complete bigot and generally thoughtless doogus you are. Vote for McCain or stay home, WE DON'T NEED YOU TO WIN.
I live in Oregon. We are not left wing nuts and will not be portrayed as such by some dimwitted Floridian feminist. We elect moderates, Republican's and Democrats. Most Oregon households own guns and shoot, trap and target shooting is the fourth most popular sport here. At the same time, our rate of homocides, of violent crome, is in the bottom 10% nationally. Unlike Floridian's, we don't think of shooting people as some sort of pastime. We respect individuals rights to make decisions for themselves. So we passed our Death With Dignity Law that allows individuals to end their lives, after medical review. We allow parents to home school their children but require minimal academic standards and testing. We have an active referendum sysrtem, which means we commonly undo garbage done by our elected representatives....especially law increases where public employees receive pay and benefit increases that are far beyond what the private sector receives. The average Oregonian is well read, active, and has a sense of humour. Open racism, even amoungst those Eastern Oregon Republican's, is almost unheard of. A black family can vacation almost anywhere in this state and not feel threatened, can move to any community and have themselves and their children received with genuine warmth and affection. Same for Native American's, Hispanics, Asians, anyone.

As for Florida and your lame brained majority vote claims - the ONLY way you twits get Clinton having won the majority of the popular vote is by not counting any votes for Obama in Michigan, where he wasn't even on the ballot (but, Clinton wasn't supposed to be on it either) and by a slight of hand where you don't even count his popular votes in Florida. You people are so dishonest, so unrepresentative, so transparently bankrupt of morals and decency, that it is a surprise to everyone that you can live with yourselves. Go blather elsewhere, go peddle your lies and utter crap to the hillbillies. Better yet, go take up residence with those hillbillie's you crow about supporting you and your foolishness. One thing, stay the h*ll away from Oregon.

I am a former Barack enthusiast who is now supporting Hillary. I did not make the switch lightly, as I believed that an African-American president would symbolize the vision that many of us have for a truly democratic and egalitarian America. However, I have become disaffected as I observed behaviors that were inconsistent with his grand declarations and exhortations. His petulant reaction to questioning, his misrepresentation of his opponent's positions, his use of mockery in stump speeches to diminish Hillary, together with his weaknesses in moving beyond identification of issues to carefully considered solutions have been disappointing. Most of all I have been dissuaded by the impression he and his supporters convey, with encouragement of the press (e.g., the NYT), that he is the anointed one, that it is "his time." This sense of entitlement is obnoxious. In contrast, I have found reassuring Hillary's forthrightness, her mental agility, her populist positions fortified by well conceived proposals for solutions to pressing issues. Especially in these times of economic insecurity, her positive energy, determination, and resilience are great examples for us all. In fact, I have found myself using her as a model in efforts to motivate my sons, granddaughters, and young friends as they cope with disappointments, setbacks, and uncertainty.

It is her sense of optimism, confidence, competence, and ability to connect with all of humanity, that inspire me to support Hillary. My support would be as strong were she male or of another color. By the way, some of Barack's followers whose comments are disparaging of Hillary's supporters for being "less educated" and "ignorant" should be reminded that education and wisdom are not synonymous. I am a retired college professor who is the product of three Ivy League schools. I can assure you that any wisdom I possess did not come from book learning but from dealing with adversity, my own and that of others. Enough of this elitism and sense of entitlement! Instead of mocking the people of Appalachia, you would be well advised to learn about and reflect on their lasting contributions to the history and culture of this country.

Well, now that the race is for all intents and purposes over, and Hillary has lost, I will now support Barack Obama in November.

NOT!!!!!!!!!

The Democrats have rejected Hillary Clinton. Now as a Hillary supporter, it is time for me to reject the Democratic nominee in Barack Obama. Yes, I am pissed off, and I, along with many other Hillary supporters will make our anger quite known come election day. I hate John Mc.Cain with a psssion, but I hate the Democratic party even more because of the smear job Obama supporters and the lame stream media did to her. My