The stupidity of Dem "Party Elders" is a remarkable thing sometimes. But this bit takes the cake:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Thursday that he may try to force undecided superdelegates to make their decisions in the Democratic presidential race if it stretches into June. Reid said he would consider writing a joint letter with Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) demanding that superdelegates make their endorsements public.

“The three of us, we may write a joint letter [to superdelegates],” said Reid. “We might do individual letters. We are in contact with each other.”

Here's a thought, let Obama defeat Clinton, if he can, instead of angering the Clinton Wing of the Democratic Party. Are they incapable of just being quiet?

By Big Tent Democrat

Indiana's largest newspaper, the Indianapolis Star, has called for a Democratic debate:

[T]he candidates need to engage Indiana voters and one another in a forum that stretches beyond glossy TV commercials, showy campaign stops and rote speeches delivered in city after city. In short, the candidates need to meet for a debate in Indiana in the next few days.

Why another debate toward the end of an exhausting campaign? For starters, the last debate, in Pennsylvania, was heavily criticized for delving into side issues rather than centering on topics such as the economy, health care and foreign policy. Well, then, let's have a debate here that digs into the many serious issues facing the nation and this state. . . .

I, for one, would love to see further discussion of Hillary Clinton's "umbrella of deterrence" proposal.

By Big Tent Democrat

One of the more infuriating pieces of "head in the sand" syndrome that I see is the denial of the obvious - Hillary Clinton, right now, looks to have a better chance of winning states like Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida (which is NOT to say Obama can not win those states, well, except Florida) than does Barack Obama. Of course she does. But Obama has more appeal in the West, some midwestern states (Iowa, Wisconsin) and in other reddish states (Virginia, etc.). To re-coin a phrase, he "expands the electoral map." These are two competing electability arguments that are perfectly consistent.

Josh Marshall plays the ostrich game and then strangely cites Peter Hart in support basically contradicting him:

Hillary goes deeper and stronger in the Democratic base than Obama, but her challenge is that she doesn't go as wide. Obama goes much further reaching into the independent and Republican vote, and has a greater chance of creating a new electoral map for the Democrats.

Hart is right. And Hart understands that there are two competing electability theories. Not inconsistent theories. Just different. Is this that hard to understand?

By Big Tent Democrat

The generally astute and fair Charlie Cook buys the Obama spin on "the Rules:

The Clinton folks shouldn’t be faulted for the arguments they are making: In the big states that will determine the final outcome in November, she has done better than Obama, and she holds on to downscale white voters better than her opponent does. Beyond the fact that both assertions are true, I’d make the same arguments if I were in Clinton’s shoes, as would most of Obama’s strategists if they were working for Clinton.

But you can’t change how the game is played once it has begun. The Democrats have decided that the nominee will be determined by the number of delegates won, not by the popular vote, and that primaries held in direct violation of party rules (in this case, Florida’s and Michigan’s) don’t count. End of discussion.

(Emphasis mine.) There are two problems with Cook's statement. First, the nominee will NOT be determined by the "number of delegates won," (Cook's phrase for the pledged delegates) but by reaching the magic number of TOTAL delegates (Pledged and super), 2214. Second, trying to persuade the Super Delegates to pay attention to the popular vote is NOT changing the rules. Indeed, that is why there is a discussion of the popular vote - to sway the Super Delegates. It is surprising and disappointing to see Cook get spun like that and get the story completely wrong. And a bonus error from Cook - not ALL the contests held in violation of the DNC rules were punished (Iowa, NH and S. Ca also violated the rules, and there is a strong argument that Florida did not) nor did the rules require complete stripping of the delegations).

By Big Tent Democrat.

How sick are you of hearing politicians -- all of them -- talk about change?

The New York Times reports for Indiana voters, talk of change may fall flat. [More...]

My own view is that Hillary Clinton is the stronger candidate in November because she is more likely to bring a win in Ohio, Pennsylvania or Florida, she wins in the big states, and she wins with rural, blue collar and women voters. Her win in PA yesterday was a mirror of her win in Ohio.

Barack Obama simply is not connecting with these critical groups of voters.

Lanny Davis today gives his reasons. The New York Times will have this article on who can better win the swing states in tomorrow's paper -- and this one on electability.

Why do you think Hillary is stronger -- or not-- against McCain in November? The superdelegates need to know.

Here's the latest electoral map for Obama. Here's the map for Hillary. (Hat tip to My DD.)

What does John McCain really think about Hillary Clinton's Pennsylvania win? Here's the memo his campaign sent out today (no link, received by e-mail.)

To: Interested Parties
From: Rick Davis
Date: April 23, 2008
Re: Pennsylvania Democratic Primary Results

The race for the Democratic Nomination will continue.

Hillary Clinton's victory in Pennsylvania last night has extended the primary to the next round of contests (Indiana and North Carolina on May 6) and has maintained the competitive nature of the race.

With her 10-point victory, we should expect her poll numbers and resources to increase in the coming days. Primary wins, especially in the 2008 election cycle, have had a direct impact on the national polling numbers for the candidates and when national polling numbers increase, so do campaign donations.

[More...]

The North Carolina Republican party unveiled an ad today against two Democratic gubernatorial candidates. The ad attacks Barack Obama because he remained in Rev. Wright's church. You can view it here.

John McCain and the national Republican party are calling for it to be removed. But, it's nothing compared to the Willie Horton ad by the 527 group the National Campaign Fund (Floyd Brown)attacking Obama for refusing to vote for a bill that included the death penalty for gang members. You can view it here.

Brown says the initial effort, a 60-second spot called "Victims" will be aired later this month in North Carolina and e-mailed to between 3 and 7 million conservatives this week, with a plea for more funding to further spread the message. "All of the efforts I have ever done in my life have been significantly funded," Brown claimed, though he declined to describe the size of the purchase. "This is going to be the most Internet-intensive effort for an ad debut ever."

Barack Obama should be praised for his vote against the death penalty for gang members. Similarly, I praised him for his vote against the federal anti-gang bill here. ABC News reviews his objections to the Illiniois bill:

Since I was one of the first proponents of a Unity Ticket and I was hooted off the stage by both Obama and Clinton supporters for even suggesting it I have to ask; anyone change their mind and agree with me yet? February 8 post calling for a Unity Ticket:

By Big Tent Democrat

Via Kos and Todd Beeton:

On MSNBC a few minutes ago Terry McCauliffe announced the Hillary Clinton campaign raised $10 million online "with 50,000 brand new donors" since the polls closed in Pennsylvania last night. "The biggest day we've ever had." An impressive amount by any measure and, as I wrote last night, a clear sign that people do not want this primary to be over.

BTW, and speaking for me only, Kos is right that it is ridiculous to claim Clinton is winning the popular vote right now. Excluding the caucus states and giving Obama zero votes for Michigan is absurd. We can get an exact count if Iowa, Nevada and Maine release the numbers they have in their possession.

By Big Tent Democrat

John Aravosis links to a Dr. Jeffrey Lewis of the New America Foundation on the Clinton "umbrella of deterrence" proposal. Aravosis quotes Dr. Lewis saying things that strike me as not only wrong, but nuts. Dr. Lewis provides three rules: [More...]

Tom Hayden's wife does not like Hillary Clinton. Because of that, Tom Hayden wants Hillary to quit the race. And he wants the Democratic Establishment and others to join him and his wife in the screaming:

Since no one in the party leadership seems able or willing to intervene against this self-destructive downward spiral, perhaps progressives need to consider responding in the only way politicians sometimes understand. If they can't hear us screaming at the television sets, we can send a message that the Clintons are acting as if they prefer John McCain to Barack Obama. And follow it up with another message: if Clinton doesn't immediately cease her path of destruction, millions of young voters and black voters may not send checks, may not knock on doors, and may not even vote for her if she becomes the nominee. That's not a threat, that's the reality she is creating.

Some progressives believe in talking at the ballot box. With votes. 2.3 million Democrats in Pennsylvania did their talking yesterday at the ballot box. Hillary Clinton beat Barack Obama by 10 points and over 200,000 votes. I am sorry that the Democratic voters of Pennsylvania giving voice to their views sends Tom Hayden and his wife into childish temper tantrums, but the Democratic voters of the country will not be cowed by the screaming of the Elites. Let the people vote.

By Big Tent Democrat