Update 2:45 MT: Looks like we've fixed the problem. Let us know in comments if you're still having problems. And welcome to our new readers.

***

There have been many e-mails from readers since Monday saying they are having problems creating accounts at TalkLeft. They get a message that their IP has already been registered for an account and there's a limit of two per day. We just changed the limit to five and the same message comes up (with five rather than two as the limit.)

We went to a new caching system over the weekend so some pages now load statically rather than dynamically (or something like that) to speed up the site, and since then, we've been getting these emails.

Colin, our webmaster, says it may be related to the new caching system and he hopes to have a solution shortly.

Thanks for your patience, and please use this thread for any issues or questions related to TalkLeft.

I'll be at work and the jail the rest of the day, so here's an open thread. I'll be back tonight.

Is anyone thinking about things other than Spitzer and Michigan and Florida? If so, please weigh in.

Update: Comments now closed.

With most of the progressive blogosphere seemingly behind Barack Obama, Tom Watson lines up the list of those favoring Hillary.

To be a Clinton blogger in the progressive blogosphere is to be hated, shunned, passed without notice in the street. .... We're not welcome at all the best dKos parties - if we show up, we're cursed with the universal epithet of those who challenge the Obama hegemony: "troll," they call us. ... Oh, the pain. The pure pain.

Give the gift of traffic. Here's Tom's list of bloggers writing favorably about Hillary: [More...]

By Big Tent Democrat

As we wait for Mississippi to vote, I find no news on MI/FL revotes, my new obsession. So in the meantime, Ezra points us to this interview with David Simon, the creator of an obsession of many bloggers, including me, The Wire.

Add your own obsessions in this Open Thread.

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only.

Over at Daily Kos, a front page post includes this:

[I]f Obama and Clinton split the remaining pledged delegates 50/50, Obama would need only 35% of the unpledged delegates (aka superdelegates) who haven't yet committed to a candidate, while Clinton would need 65% of them.

I am not sure on the math or the assumption that the remaining pledged delegates will be split 50/50, but I do appreciate the honest admission that it will be the Super Delegates who decide the nominee. The candidates understand this of course, and are spinning hard for reasons why the Super Delegates should support their respective candidacies. The rules are the rules and wooing the Super Delegates seems to be a part of them.

Let's hope people are not shocked by the fact that the candidates are trying to win the Super Delegates. This is an Open Thread.

NOTE- Comments are closed.

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only

"I think what America feels about a woman becoming president takes a very secondary place to Obama's campaign - to a kind of campaign that it would be hard for anyone to run against," she said. "For one thing, you have the press, which has been uniquely hard on her. It's been a very sexist media. Some just don't like her. The others have gotten caught up in the Obama campaign.

So far so good. Insightful even. Then she goes off the rails:

By Big Tent Democrat

Wolcott. This is an Open Thread.

Note - Comments are now closed. A note of thanks to Flyerhawk for being a very good sport while we picked on him. Note to all of us, we should not have done that.

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only

. . . the following?

Clinton loses among men by five points or more in 43 states. Clinton does better with women than men in every state, with the biggest gender gap of 31 points in Colorado.

And if it is not, why would it then be racist to point out that Obama does much better with African Americans and Clinton does much better with whites, as Chris Bowers does, and as I did this morning?

By Big Tent Democrat

Watching ABC This Week, George Stepanopoulos's show, George and his panel fully understand and explain two things: one, that Hillary Clinton is ready and eager to do revotes in Florida and Michigan and Barack Obama will try and squirm his way out of them and; two, that there has to be a unity ticket, Clinton-Obama or Obama-Clinton. They also properly said that not only will there be pressure on the nominee to pick the other as the VP candidate, there will be pressure on the "not nominee" to accept the VP slot. Exactly right imo.

Face The Nation discusses Michigan and Florida at the top of its broadcast. Howard Dean on to discuss it. Dean says the "rules will be followed" but speaks encouragingly about a revote. Particularly about a mail in primary. Even says it is a "great party building exercise." Discusses raising money for funding it. Bill Nelson coming up. I'll update on the flip.

This is an Open Thread.

By Big Tent Democrat

What Tristero said, mostly:

I'll say it only once. I don't have a favorite between Obama and Clinton. They are both excellent [NOTE: I do not think either is even a particularly good political candidate but both will be good Presidents, but I think Obama is more electable] candidates (which is not to say I'm necessarily in favor of a joint ticket). Neither are manufactured manly-men-with-their- straight-shooters-shooting-straight-at -you-can-you-take-it. By comparison with St. John - all image to obscure his consistent behavior as a rightwing operative - both Obama and Clinton invite critical examination (please read the first clause of this sentence before ranting about Candidate X's deviousness and willingness to hide his/her true agenda/earnings/actions). So I think it not surprising, nor terribly important, that I find it easy to support them both while at the same time often disagreeing with the particulars of their platforms. The point is that even when I think they are wrong, I recognize they are both serious people, not clowns who want to inherit the dubious mantle of George W. Bush's codpiece.

By Big Tent Democrat

Your turn again. But I have bashed enough bloggers today for all of us. Let's leave that out of this Open Thread. Anything but that. Deal? If not, your comments might be deleted.

Have a good evening. Hasta luego, as we pesky Latinos say.

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only.

I tell you, today is quite a day in the blogs. Look at what Chris Bowers writes today:

Clinton's primary coalition thus far has been largely kept afloat by older Reagan Dems who also tend to be white southern Baptists. And yes, they also tend to be older, as exit polls have shown. . . . I don't care if Democrats never make up any ground among Reagan Democrats ever, as long as we lock up the support of expanding groups like the creative class, white non-Christians, Latinos and Asians for a generation. . . . While Clinton's advantage among Latinos and Asians does not make it a perfect match, Obama's primary coalition is far closer to the coalition we need for an expanding future of the Democratic Party, while Clinton's primary is a lot more like the coalition we have been chasing after for the past twenty-five years or so. . . .

Yep. Except for those pesky Latinos and, of course those older women, and white working class men - I hate the Clinton coalition and I love the way Obama does not make appeals to Reagan Democrats. Why yes, that is what I really love about Obama - the way he is sharply partisan against the Republicans and has not run one of those Unity Schtick campaigns to appeal to Reagan Democrats. Heck never would Obama even say a word of praise of Reagan EVER. And Republicans? No where to be seen in that Obama coalition. Nosirree.

Some things can not be parodied. More