Hillary Clinton's campaign has released a statement today, The Path to the Nomination.

The campaign also notes that since Super Tuesday, it has received more than $13 million online from 135,000 donors (virtually all new).

She also congratulates Sen. Obama on his victories in recent contests.

I've reprinted the statement below the fold:

NOTE: Comments are now closed. (BTD)

By Big Tent Democrat

That's what ABC says:

Though he sometimes aligned himself with Obama — and against Clinton — as a candidate, several Edwards campaign insiders say the former senator began to sour on Obama toward the end of his own campaign, and ultimately left the race questioning whether Obama had the toughness needed to prevail in a presidential race.

"He is much more torn than people realize," said one former aide who has stayed in contact with Edwards. "Honestly, he has serious reservations about both of them."

Me too, John. Me too.

By Big Tent Democrat

What a fine mess Donna Brazile and Howard Dean have created. BTW, she should be removed from commenting on CNN about this primary campaign given the fact she is part of the story, and an ugly part.

Jerome Armstrong has the details:

Speaking as someone who sent Howard Dean to the DNC to decentralize the power of that committee to the states, it was a terrible leadership for him to have allowed the Rules & Bylaws Committee to tangle the presidential nominating selection process by selectively attempting to strip two states of their delegates, while continuing to ignore the fact that Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina broke those same rules.

What's that? Yes, read the rules. . . . Yes, you read that right; under Rule 20.C.1.a., Florida, Iowa, Michigan, New Hampshire, and South Carolina would have all lost their super delegates and had their pledged delegates reduced by half since they all violated Rule 11.A.

However, Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina weren't punished fairly. In fact, they weren't punished at all. And what about Florida & Michigan? Well, we all know what happened to them.

MORE . . .

NOTE - Comments are now closed

I've got a lot of work to do today, so here's an open thread for you. All topics welcome, but remember the commenting rules and keep it clean and civil. And urls must be in html format or they skew the site requiring the deletion of your comment. Thanks.

By Big Tent Democrat

Barack Obama is the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination. He is likely to be the pledged delegate leader at the end of the process. What else does Obama need? To me, one of two thing. He needs to be the clear popular vote winner (which means larger than the Florida spread) and/or he has to win one of the big contested primaries remaining - Texas, Ohio or Pennsylvania. Why?

To my way of thinking, Obama has yet to prove he can win some of the key states' primaries, states Dems need in a general election. And this is not an unprecedented criteria for a potential nominee. Many like to compare Obama to JFK. And this episode in JFK's fight for the Presidency is instructive:

Here's what I'd like to see for Virginia, Maryland and D.C: Delegate apportionment, broken down by pledged to Obama, pledged to Hillary, Uncommitted, Superdelegates.

Then I'd like to see a national total including tonight's results.

I think I just heard John King on CNN say Hillary and Obama are now essentially even, which suprised me. I would have thought Obama would be ahead after tonight, and Hillary would need TX, Ohio and PA to catch up.

Has anyone seen credible counts?

By Big Tent Democrat

Obama is winning Maryland handily but the questions remain the same for me in terms of whether he will win the nomination. The demographics are my point:

(%age of vote) Clinton Obama

White Democrats

(43%) 55% 42%

Black Democrats

(33%) 16% 84%

Latino Democrats

(4%) 56% 44%

That demographic breakdown on voting margins loses Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania handily for Obama. Obama still has a lot to prove in terms of winning contested large primaries. And yes, this is important for the general election as well.

NOTE comments are now closed in this thread

Both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton missed the final FISA vote today -- they were the only Senators, along with Sen. Graham, to miss it. It occurred between 5:30 p.m. and 6 p.m. The vote was 68 to 29, so it wouldn't have mattered had they been there. Both were present to vote with Sen. Dodd against cloture a few weeks ago and Obama was present this morning to vote on the Amendment.

Hillary Clinton released this statement on the FISA vote today:

"I believe we need to modernize our surveillance laws and give our nation’s intelligence professionals the tools they need to fight terrorism and to make our country more secure. At the same time, smart, balanced reform must also protect the rights and civil liberties of Americans. In my opinion, the FISA Amendments Act of 2007 falls short of these goals, and for that reason, I oppose the bill.

More...

Here's a letter Hillary Clinton sent to George Bush today...I'm surprised I haven't read about it anywhere.

Clinton Calls on President to Support Humane and Effective Standards for Interrogation, Urges President to Remove Veto Threat from Intelligence Authorization Bill

Washington, DC—Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton today called on President Bush to remove his threat to veto the Fiscal Year 2008 Intelligence Authorization Bill, which applies the U.S. Army standards for interrogation to U.S. intelligence agencies and contractors, and bans the practice of waterboarding. In a letter to the President, Senator Clinton urged him to live up to the standards that America has promoted around the world.

“Our nation and our President must strongly and unequivocally stand for the rule of law—especially when we are under threat from an enemy that embodies the antithesis of our values,” Senator Clinton wrote. “In the process of accomplishing what is essential for our security, we must hold onto our values and set an example we can point to with pride, not shame.”

The text of Senator Clinton’s letter is below the fold:

Hillary Clinton won several counties in Virginia, some by very large margine. What do they all have in common? They are almost exclusively populated by whites. Virginia's population state- wide is 73% white and 20% African-American.

Here are the demographics for the first half-dozen or so counties she won (all I've checked so far):

• Allegany: 93% white, 5.5% AA
• Bedford: 92% white, 6.3% AA
• Bland: 95% white, 4.4% AA
• Buchanan: 96% white, 3.2% AA
• Carroll: 98.5% white, 0.7%AA
• Dickenson: 98.7% white, 0.6%AA
• Grayson: 96.7% white, 2.4% AA

This is a continuation of the Virginia/MD/DC results thread. Update: Almost 200 comments, time to close here. You can continue on the newer threads.

By Big Tent Democrat

All the networks call it. NBC says the exit polls had the following demo breakdowns, but CNN has different exit poll results:

Clinton win whites 52-48, white women 56-42. Obama wins white men 55-45. African Americans were 29% of the vote. Assuming Obama takes 80% [CNN says Obama took 90%] of that vote, I calculate Obama carrying 62% of the vote.

Update (TL): The county/geographic map is here. Tim Russert says 20% of voters were Independent and 8% were Republcans who crossed over to vote in the primary. More than 70% of these voters went for Obama -- The cross-over candidate. All these figures are exit poll results. Russert says Obama will tout this as a sign of his electability in November, that he can win Republicans and Independents. I take it as another sign he's a compromiser and not a fighter for a progressive agenda.

Update [2008-2-12 20:17:12 by Big Tent Democrat]: Obama Wins DC says NBC.

Update [2008-2-12 20:41:36 by Big Tent Democrat]: Chuck Todd projects delegate split as 49 to 52 for Obama and 34 to 31 for Clitnon. From 15 to 21 delegate gain for Obama.

Update (TL): Comments closing here, you can continue discussion of tonight's primaries here.

Former U.S. Ambassador Joseph Wilson makes some interesting points on why Barack Obama's foreign policy positions show his relative ineptitide in this area.

He also uses a past exchange between Obama and John McCain to show Obama isn't a fighter and may be one who capitulates too easily.

But will Mr. Obama fight? His brief time on the national scene gives little comfort. Consider a February 2006 exchange of letters with Mr. McCain on the subject of ethics reform. The wrathful Mr. McCain accused Mr. Obama of being "disingenuous," to which Mr. Obama meekly replied, "The fact that you have now questioned my sincerity and my desire to put aside politics for the public interest is regrettable but does not in any way diminish my deep respect for you."

Mr. McCain was insultingly dismissive but successful in intimidating his inexperienced colleague. Thus, in his one known face-to-face encounter with Mr. McCain, Mr. Obama failed to stand his ground.

Of Obama's foreign policy pronouncements, Wilson says: [More...]