It seems to me that Obama supporters have a candidate who is fighting and winning ... against an "inevitable" candidate no less. More delegates is winning.
I'm happy to support a campaign that DOES NOT believe it has only a 10% chance to win the nomination.
The Mark Penn strategic blunders that included ignoring the word "caucus," failing to jump in earlier in Iowa, not implementing solid ground organizations until it was too late, failing to use the internet wisely, also included the failure to request re-votes in Florida and Michigan in a timely fashion.
Are the strategic blunders noted in the paragraph above those of a "winning" campaign? [ Parent ]
It's like baseball, when the pitcher has to record the last out in the bottom of the ninth. Absent that last out, the game will continue. Only difference is that you don't short-circuit the election process and call the election on account of rain. [ Parent ]
This is the big leagues and only she decides when to call it, or not call it.
What are Obama supporters so worried about? Getting their clocks cleaned the rest of the way? If so, some candidate. [ Parent ]
I am too. In fact, I'm happy that I'm smarter than to mistake a paraphrased, unattributed quote in a RW online rag for what the campaign of my candidate is really thinking.
Do you realize what you do to your credibility when you repeat this as though it were established fact? [ Parent ]
Make a new account