home

Open Thread

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Blog Related
Posted on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:00:27 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg This!! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

By Big Tent Democrat

More thread.

(Comments now closed.)

< Open Thread | Hillary and McCain's Passport Files Also Breached >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Open Thread | 224 comments (224 topical)
    more thread more thread (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:02:40 PM EST
    chomp chomp chomp
    slow day for me today.

    over at MyDD they are trumpeting the comments of some anonymous "high placed clinton campaign official"
    saying Hillary only has 10% chance of taking the nomination.
    think it was Dick Morris?

    10% is still a chance.
    excuse me while I cling tighter.

    I suspect the (5.00 / 4) (#40)
    by standingup on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:25:38 PM EST
    latest onslaught of press and blog posts that suggest Hillary has no way of winning was in the pipeline waiting for the MI and FL re-votes to be shot down.  The timing is right and there are too many articles, talking heads on cable and bloggers all on message for it to be coincidence.  


    [ Parent ]
    a pair of threes is a pair of threes. (none / 0) (#221)
    by cy street on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:48:21 PM EST
    it does not take a conspiracy to call out a bluff.  i just used my common sense.


    [ Parent ]
    Joe Trippi (none / 0) (#224)
    by tek on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:51:13 PM EST
    was on CBS saying that Clinton could take the nomination but she has to win PA and NC and IN.  PA and IN no problem, but I don't know about NC.

    [ Parent ]
    The race fundamentally changed... (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by Exeter on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:45:36 PM EST
    ...when the Wright videos received more coverage than any other event this campaign season. The reality is that most voters first introduction to Obama was from his preacher saying God D##n America.

    Instead of asking who should tell Hillary to drop out, it should be who is going to tell Obama he should step aside for the "best of the party."

    Even before this, he still hadn't won white democrats in a SINGLE state.    

    When the poll numbers continue to show Obama tanking, the super delegates will drop him, especially after all the media lemmings start running the other way after Clinton blows Obama out of the water in Pennsyvania.

    [ Parent ]

    He did win them in Wisconsin though (5.00 / 1) (#173)
    by lilburro on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:21:40 PM EST
    right?  He really did well, demographically, in WI.

    I really appreciate your second paragraph.  When people say "best for the party" it usually just means "the best for Barack Obama."  "Best for the party" is usually just a guise for pushing the other candidate out of your way.

    [ Parent ]

    Best for the party of O(ne) (5.00 / 1) (#180)
    by Practically Lactating on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:24:18 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    he peaked in Wisconsin (5.00 / 1) (#211)
    by diplomatic on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:42:31 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    No (5.00 / 1) (#222)
    by Shawn on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:48:34 PM EST
    Wisconsin was 51/48 Clinton among white Democrats. He did win them in Vermont and Illinois though (53/46 in IL - shockingly narrow, if you ask me).

    Of course, Hillary hasn't won the black vote anywhere, even in Arkansas or NY. Both sides of the coin are fairly depressing.

    [ Parent ]

    Obama (5.00 / 1) (#228)
    by tek on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:53:42 PM EST
    is from IL, that's why he won.

    [ Parent ]
    Uh yeah (5.00 / 1) (#232)
    by Shawn on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:56:03 PM EST
    I heard.

    [ Parent ]
    Oops... (5.00 / 1) (#239)
    by Exeter on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 06:06:52 PM EST
    You're right, he did win Illinois and Vermont and white Democrats.  Illinois doesn't really count because its his home state -- although, it still should give everyone weak knees that he still lost white democrats in southern Illinois. That was his home state where he supposedly is loved and adored by 110% of the population.

    [ Parent ]
    That was about the odds I gave (none / 0) (#4)
    by jes on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:05:13 PM EST
    the campaign over the last weekend. But Bowers cheered me up on Monday or Tuesday and gave her 15%. The Clintons are trying to lower expectations yet again. So evil.

    [ Parent ]
    yeah, a high placed campaign officail (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by NJDem on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:09:17 PM EST
    would say that and then post it on mydd.  Are people that stupid?  I think not.  

    Remember when there was that article in the NYT about low campaign moral and then they refused to publish a letter by the HRC camp flatly denying it.  Sheesh Louise.  

    More Wright fodder--today in an interview BO said he didn't know about the incendiary remarks made by Wright.  So which is it?  I can't even follow the double-speak at this point...  

    Obama (none / 0) (#22)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:18:54 PM EST
    knew of and heard "controversial" sermons but not the 3 sermons on 9/11, G-D America and Hillary.   As an example, Obama has said that he heard Wright talk about adultery in a crude way....No doubt, Obama heard some of the sermons that wandered off into discussions of white oppression....

    So, when Wright occasionally was close to the edge Obama was there, and the 3 times Wright fell off the cliff he was not there....

    Three sermons have fueled the entire controversy....And, from what we know now, those three sermons were not typical at all....  

    [ Parent ]

    Could he have been talking about (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by nycstray on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:23:50 PM EST
    the Clinton smear when he says he heard Wright talk about adultery in a crude way?

    I have a hard time believing he only fell off the cliff 3 times (I've seen more than 3). Especially since he had no problem with including those sermons on a DVD for sale to the public.

    [ Parent ]

    I think we need to be (none / 0) (#59)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:34:38 PM EST
    specific....Right now everyone assumes Wright was all G-D America all the time...

    There are three sermons so far:  9/11 tin foil hat sermon, G-D America sermon, and the anti Hillary sermon, which is very recent.....

    There was a fourth sermon on June (perhaps July) 22, 2007 that Hannity was going to showcase via Newsmax, to show that Obama was lying that he was not present during really, really bad sermons.   Newsmax had published an article last July making the accusation.  But Obama was giving a speech in Florida that day--on tape.  Ooops.  Retraction.....Bill Kristol had to amend his NY Times editorial....

    The wingers have been looking for more bad stuff and sermons and proof Obama was there...They have been going through the tapes for at least two weeks now.....Only 3 of the really bad ones so far....

    If it is only 3, and the rest of the "controversial" tapes are just race grievance sort of stuff, this issue will die down.

    [ Parent ]

    not sure where you are getting your info (none / 0) (#65)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:37:24 PM EST
    but there are hundreds of hours, not only of video but of audio, and if you think you have heard it all.
    well
    you havent.


    [ Parent ]
    I've seen 2 different 9/11 ones. Can't decide (none / 0) (#88)
    by nycstray on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:45:25 PM EST
    which was more offensive. You don't seem to have seen the Bill Clinton smear, and a few others. Fox has shown about 6 videos I believe.

    The Right has been on this for at least a year, iirc. I think this is just the tip of it.

    You do know that Wright was uninvited to Obama's running for President event right? For a good reason . . . Alexrod said something along the lines of 'they didn't want to expose him to the voters'. OY!

    [ Parent ]

    So, uninviting him (none / 0) (#100)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:51:03 PM EST
    was a good thing, right?  

    [ Parent ]
    probably (none / 0) (#107)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:53:05 PM EST
    it might also have been a good idea to develop a strategy for this this bites him on the ass.
    which he clearly did not do.

    [ Parent ]
    But it means that -- well , what did Obama (none / 0) (#132)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:03:18 PM EST
    really mean that he didn't realize until recently that being in Wright's church would be an issue?

    [ Parent ]
    Depends on how you look at it (none / 0) (#140)
    by nycstray on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:06:48 PM EST
    It says they definitely knew he was a problem. Not good if this 'problem' would have reared it's head in the GE.

    Imo, he should have been more upfront. Hiding the issue really goes against what he says he/his presidency would be. I would have liked to see him do something more pro-active about it during the last 20yrs. He's supposed to be a leader who can unite. I call it a missed golden opportunity.

    [ Parent ]

    Best predictor of future behavior (none / 0) (#74)
    by Virginian on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:41:00 PM EST
    is past behavior

    If you catch someone doing something once, it is natural to assume that it was not the first (or the last) time...

    The 3-times seems to be total bull...especially considering that the congregation was into what he was saying...otherwise you'd have probably heard crickets...

    good ministers know their flock, they stick around because they preach what their congregation likes to hear, so it is very hard to believe that Wright just wandered off a few times

    [ Parent ]

    well (1.00 / 1) (#99)
    by Kathy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:50:16 PM EST
    John Wayne Gacey only killed a handful of times.

    Are we to judge those isolated incidents as indicative of how he lived his entire life?

    And then he had that photo with Rosalyn Carter!

    [ Parent ]

    You really (none / 0) (#103)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:51:52 PM EST
    think that analogy is apt?

    [ Parent ]
    The analogy (none / 0) (#241)
    by Kathy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 06:24:23 PM EST
    is apt because it proves how ridiculous the original statement is.

    Would have us believe that Wright is some sort of split personality who one day screams "G D America," then humps his podium another to humiliate a former first lady and current US senator, then posits that AIDS was created to kill black people (I suppose the gay people were guinea pigs?) then at another time screeches about the "U-S of KKK-A" ...yet, because on other days he talked about helping the poor and the homeless, those inflammatory statements are somehow negated?

    Lookit, you could say the same thing about David Duke.  He supported a charity to help single mothers and homeless vets at some point.  Does that make him a good guy?

    [ Parent ]

    Absolutely (none / 0) (#121)
    by Virginian on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:58:20 PM EST
    after murder #1 you can reasonably start digging into his past and say "are there other things we don't know about" and if it is found that he has done it before, it is not reasonable to be surprised by it

    So absolutely conclusions can be drawn...

    with that said, of course there are always exceptions, but the exceptions don't make for good controls

    [ Parent ]

    And 33 (none / 0) (#129)
    by Virginian on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:01:10 PM EST
    is hardly a handful...

    but it was suspicion about one murder that lead to the evidence of the others...so the analogy is completely apt

    [ Parent ]

    Murder = Wright sermon? (none / 0) (#159)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:12:10 PM EST
    You are saying Wright is guilty of murder?

    [ Parent ]
    You do have to wonder (none / 0) (#150)
    by Practically Lactating on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:10:18 PM EST
    about someone that humps the pulpit no matter how isolated the incident. That gyrating and dirty riding left me reaching for the holy water and I am about as blaspheming as they come.

    [ Parent ]
    that is also the one (none / 0) (#160)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:12:32 PM EST
    that most offended my religious relatives.
    and there is a LOT of that sort of stuff.
    I have seen at least a half dozen just as bad.

    [ Parent ]
    This is a must-read! (none / 0) (#93)
    by echinopsia on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:47:54 PM EST
    The Obama Bargain

    by Shelby Steele

    Bargaining is a mask that blacks can wear in the American mainstream, one that enables them to put whites at their ease. This mask diffuses the anxiety that goes along with being white in a multiracial society. Bargainers make the subliminal promise to whites not to shame them with America's history of racism, on the condition that they will not hold the bargainer's race against him. And whites love this bargain -- and feel affection for the bargainer -- because it gives them racial innocence in a society where whites live under constant threat of being stigmatized as racist. So the bargainer presents himself as an opportunity for whites to experience racial innocence.

    This is how Mr. Obama has turned his blackness into his great political advantage, and also into a kind of personal charisma. Bargainers are conduits of white innocence, and they are as popular as the need for white innocence is strong. Mr. Obama's extraordinary dash to the forefront of American politics is less a measure of the man than of the hunger in white America for racial innocence.

    More at the link...

    [ Parent ]

    Shelby Steele (none / 0) (#116)
    by waldenpond on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:56:28 PM EST
    has some interesting analysis. CNN used to have him on until they decided to back Obama.  Steele was on Dobbs yesterday and is supposed to be back on as Dobbs wants to continue 'the' conversation.

    [ Parent ]
    I saw that yesterday -- it was fascinating stuff (none / 0) (#135)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:05:00 PM EST
    so thanks for the reminder to watch when he's back.

    [ Parent ]
    I have a hard time believing he was selling them (none / 0) (#95)
    by nycstray on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:48:27 PM EST
    to the public if they were not the norm.

    I don't know too many people who willing sell  'mistakes' online. Especially in relationship to their livelihood  ;)

    [ Parent ]

    All were sold (none / 0) (#155)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:11:07 PM EST
    is what I heard....The good, the bad, the ugly....

    [ Parent ]
    I still don't get why. (none / 0) (#186)
    by nycstray on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:26:07 PM EST
    He makes his money off his work, etc. I don't think he thinks there is anything wrong with what he said. If he did, there wouldn't be repeat incidents and he certainly wouldn't be selling a message he didn't think was right. Imo anyway :)

    [ Parent ]
    And what was on Obama's tapes (none / 0) (#139)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:06:32 PM EST
    from Wright that Obama took with him to Harvard?  I haven't seen anything more about those tapes -- of other sermons, I presume -- noted in Obama's book.

    [ Parent ]
    Presumably talks (none / 0) (#149)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:10:15 PM EST
    about Christ....

    There are a lot of Wright sermons.....Only a few offend....

    [ Parent ]

    Here's an interesting (none / 0) (#144)
    by Warren Terrer on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:07:59 PM EST
    take on the whole Wright affair from Orcinus.

    His point is that the media completely ignores the anti-Americanism of conservative minister and power broker Sung Myung Moon.

    [ Parent ]

    Yes (none / 0) (#233)
    by tek on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:57:29 PM EST
    but Americans know about that guy and it certainly influenced our opinion of Bush.  Really, I don't find it particularly effective to say we should ignore Wright because the MSM didn't cover some other egregious preacher.  The media is not fair, but Obama still showed bad judgement and the worst part of it is that this is apparently how he really views white people.

    [ Parent ]
    She only had a -7% chance... (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Marco21 on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:10:37 PM EST
    of winning New Hampshire and a -45% chance of winning California so I am not so worried.

    yeah (none / 0) (#13)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:12:20 PM EST
    a more interesting question might what are Obamas chances of self immolating.


    [ Parent ]
    Politico says it would take meteor (none / 0) (#15)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:14:20 PM EST
    striking him.

    What do you think are the odds the Obama fam. will be at Trinity UCC Easter Sunday?

    [ Parent ]

    meteor (none / 0) (#17)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:16:36 PM EST
    It could happen!

    [ Parent ]
    Except the U.S. Navy might implode (none / 0) (#21)
    by oculus on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:18:33 PM EST
    the meteor in mid-air as a tactical exercise.

    [ Parent ]
    Sshhh Captain... (none / 0) (#24)
    by kmblue on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:19:11 PM EST
    Hillary has Bruce Willis on a shuttle as we speak!
    ;)

    [ Parent ]
    Bruce Willis (none / 0) (#36)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:23:57 PM EST
    is a Republican....

    [ Parent ]
    Uh oh! (none / 0) (#49)
    by kmblue on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:28:49 PM EST
    Foiled again!   :0

    [ Parent ]
    How I wish I had a job (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by waldenpond on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:11:46 PM EST
    Watching teevee... MSNBC: Richardson is the nail in the coffin, train has left the station, Hillary it's over.  Richardson called for Clinton to drop out.  Political heavy weights all together, makes Tweety so proud, telephone calls are rampant.  It's clear that with MI and FL not counting Clinton needs to get out.  Here's a good one,...  Hillary has run off a cliff and is hanging there in the air (like a cartoon)

    Now, they are going after Bill.  Per Tweety, only one way to read, these two are the only ones who love their country.  Mike Allen appears to be a prophet today.  He's getting quoted all over.

    I got sick of working more than 60 hour weeks for two years, but now it doesn't look so bad.

    hanging there in the air (like a cartoon) (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:19:42 PM EST
    so the only real question left is who is the roadrunner and who is the coyote.

    you have to admit some of Obamas recent tactics have had "ACME" written all over them.

    beep beep

    [ Parent ]

    ACME, I like that (none / 0) (#45)
    by waldenpond on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:27:27 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    honestly (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:32:50 PM EST
    cant you just imagine that photo of Bill and Wright coming out of a box marked "ACME CAMPAIGN DIRTY TRICK #5"

    [ Parent ]
    I think this sums it up (none / 0) (#91)
    by Practically Lactating on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:47:11 PM EST
    Acme Campaign Dirty Trick #5

    [ Parent ]
    my mental visual esactly (none / 0) (#112)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:55:59 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Yes, that's it (none / 0) (#118)
    by waldenpond on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:57:56 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    MSNBC daily finds a new "nail" (5.00 / 2) (#85)
    by Virginian on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:43:26 PM EST
    in the coffin it is amazing how many nails Hillary's coffin...it never seems to be enough...every time "she's done, and should drop out" is rationalized, it is for a different reason...

    [ Parent ]
    What I think the problem is . . . (5.00 / 3) (#110)
    by nycstray on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:53:57 PM EST
    they forgot to put Hillary IN the coffin.  ;)

    And I don't think they can since Obama can't knock her out. So, they can nail all they want, the coffin is empty at the moment.

    [ Parent ]

    Funny line! Yep, it's just carpentry (5.00 / 1) (#142)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:07:39 PM EST
    because it's certainly not journalism.

    [ Parent ]
    They (none / 0) (#145)
    by sas on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:08:39 PM EST
    have been trying to get her to drop out before.

    They forget one thing - the voters want her to stay.  They keep saying it over and over in primary states.

    She will kick Barack's arse in the upcoming primnaries.

    [ Parent ]

    WOW! That's pure mental illness you just described (none / 0) (#18)
    by diplomatic on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:17:05 PM EST
    No other way to put it.  The MSM has moved on to industrial grade Kool-aid now.

    [ Parent ]
    just like 2000 (none / 0) (#33)
    by magisterludi on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:23:14 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Yeah except that this time... (none / 0) (#56)
    by Maria Garcia on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:32:33 PM EST
    ...they are going to flip to McCain...all except Olbermann who will still be in Obama's pocket but no on will be listening to his "special comments" against John McCain.

    [ Parent ]
    But I'll be watching (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by waldenpond on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:00:25 PM EST
    with the volume off, bowl of popcorn by my side and a beer in my hand.

    [ Parent ]
    Obama has had 3 giant chances to seal this deal. (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by hitchhiker on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:12:11 PM EST
    Once in New Hampshire
    Once on Super Tuesday
    Once on March 4th

    He couldn't do it.  He's ahead in delegates by virtue of wins in states we won't carry next fall--a great primary strategy, but not enough to carry him into the "clear choice of Democrats" category.

    If it were not so close, she'd be gone by now.  If it were impossible for her to win enough popular votes to have a good case to bring to the SD's, she should give up and ask her supporters to help Obama win.

    But with so many Democrats preferring her to him, and with so much at stake in the GE, there's every reason to let it play out.  The MSM should hold its freaking tongue and let the people decide.

    Obama's inability to close (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by andgarden on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:19:08 PM EST
    is really concerning. Raise your hand if you think PA will be any different.

    [ Parent ]
    didya see these (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by jes on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:25:00 PM EST
    pretty maps at mydd?

    [ Parent ]
    why do you think they want to stop the game? (none / 0) (#41)
    by diplomatic on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:26:00 PM EST
    I am getting pretty angry at the disrespect and disregard the media shows to over half of their Democratic audience.  Don't they realize that Clinton is leading nationally right now, meaning that MUCH of their viewership is not interested in non-stop Obama adulation??

    They can't be serious if they think Clinton is going to drop out now after re-gaining momentum and is on the way to victory...  It's surreal and frightening what is happening.

    [ Parent ]

    heres the good news (none / 0) (#47)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:27:50 PM EST
    Hillary has been dealing with the surreal frightening MSM for decades.  if anyone can beat them it is she.

    [ Parent ]
    true enough (none / 0) (#215)
    by diplomatic on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:43:53 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Easy (none / 0) (#79)
    by badger on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:41:56 PM EST
    They're looking at losing big in blowouts in PA and WV, and probably not doing too well in the remainder of the primary schedule. The momentum of the campaign is about to shift, and Obama may not have any big wins in the late primaries leading up to the convention.

    That in turn makes the Wright problem seem even worse and makes Clinton's 'big state' argument stronger.

    [ Parent ]

    Media trying to reduce those "blowouts" (5.00 / 2) (#153)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:10:28 PM EST
    by telling voters in those states (along with the rest of us, but they're the targets) that voting for Clinton will be a vote wasted because she can't make it, she'll have to drop out, etc.  You can bet that's the message on the ground there, in the calls to voters there.

    We have to do our part to blow that back -- to do phone-banking with solid figures, to write letters to the editor to get another message in the media, etc.

    This is not just reporting the news.  This is media attempting to shape and make the news.  Fight it.

    [ Parent ]

    That's what bothers me also (none / 0) (#48)
    by nycstray on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:28:16 PM EST
    He spent how much on the 3/4 primaries?

    He can send his surrogates out all he wants to try and smear Clinton as dishonest etc, but I think they don't even know how to get that message to her voters. And if he can't get his message or his smears to be effective with her voters, how the heck is he going to do it in the GE?

    [ Parent ]

    Hillary's wins on 3/4 (none / 0) (#78)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:41:52 PM EST
    were quite emphemeral.  Before 3/4, Obama had a pledged delegate lead of about 159.  He now has a pledged delegate lead of 171.

    Because she is behind, every state that she does not win by landslide is one more missed opportunity.  In some ways, by not winning Ohio big enough, and by losing the delegate contest in Texas, Hillary actually lost on 3/4.  She is not catching Obama, whose lead in the popular vote has remained very strong.....

    Hillary is running out of chances to put Obama away......She might yet pull it off but she has come nowhere near that so far....

    [ Parent ]

    if she had actually lost in Ohio and Texas (none / 0) (#101)
    by diplomatic on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:51:11 PM EST
    we wouldn't even be blogging about a Hillary Clinton campaign right now or her leading in the polls as we head to Pennsylvania.

    We may have not even heard of Jeremiah Wright until it was way too late after the convention.

    [ Parent ]

    The bar to measure him by (none / 0) (#63)
    by independent voter on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:37:09 PM EST
    is whether he can overcome a 19 point deficit?
    If he cannot, then he has no chance? How do you rationalize that?


    [ Parent ]
    He has been unable to win (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by andgarden on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:39:44 PM EST
    a seriously contested primary in a big state. You can pooh-pooh that, but it's a problem.

    [ Parent ]
    He shouldn't be facing a 19 point deficit (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by diplomatic on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:41:57 PM EST
    Do you see why?  His campaign and supporters are begging, demanding, shouting all over the place that Hillary needs to quit.  But here he is facing a 19+ point deficit in Pennsylvania and 25+ deficit in West Virginia.

    Has Obama's campaign been conducting itself like an inevitable frontrunner for the past 2 weeks?  Be honest.  The math is supposed to guarantee his nomination, but yet all these worries and insecurities keep bubbling up.

    What is there to be afraid of?  Just go back to Chicago and relax and wait for the convention.

    [ Parent ]

    This is from frontloading in his favor (none / 0) (#163)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:14:47 PM EST
    -- frontloading the primary calendar with caucuses and with states likely for him, because he was supposed to cinch it by now.

    Now, with no more caucuses and with states good for Clinton, we see the desperation in the calls for her to quit.  Tough on him, but we and the super-delegates need to see how the rest of these states do to get better predictors (because caucus states and red states aren't useful) of how each candidate could do as our nominee in fall.

    That's what the primary season is supposed to be for -- not playing us as pawns in a pre-scripted game plan written by Axelrod, Dean, Brazile, Kerry, Kennedy, Durbin, et al.

    [ Parent ]

    Who frontloaded the schedule? (none / 0) (#230)
    by MKS on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:54:07 PM EST
    Hillary was quite comfortable with a frontloaded schedule, which was designed to finish off pretenders such as Obama, when she assumed and said publicly she would have it all sewed up by Super Tuesday on February 5, 2008.

    She was outperformed by a rookie....

    [ Parent ]

    DNC -- and I imagine you can see (none / 0) (#236)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:59:03 PM EST
    who has been getting all its support, now that we've been able to watch Dean, Brazile, et al., at work.

    [ Parent ]
    He (none / 0) (#147)
    by sas on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:09:34 PM EST
    will get pounded in PA.

    [ Parent ]
    Obama is ahead (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by Josey on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:38:41 PM EST
    because of "Dem for a day" and Repubs who won't vote for him in Nov.
    But hey - let's trash the candidate attracting the Democratic vote - and make her bow out NOW due to Obama winning by encouraging voters to break the law.


    [ Parent ]
    look at it this way (none / 0) (#14)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:14:18 PM EST
    every instance of them saying this will make any possible victory that much sweeter.

    [ Parent ]
    MSM is loving (none / 0) (#53)
    by waldenpond on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:30:50 PM EST
    this.  Clinton/McCai...eh, yawn.  Obama/McCain ....yeeeeehaw!

    Now excuse me, Obama is uh-ing.

    Someone snoops in Clinton's data. No Action.
    Someone snoops in Obama's data.  Fired.
    Someone snoops in Obama's data.  Fired.
    Someone snoops in Obama's/McCain's data. Suspended.

    [ Parent ]

    The Clinton info... (none / 0) (#143)
    by kredwyn on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:07:51 PM EST
    was used in a training session...or so I heard on the radio coming home from work.
    "Wit has truth in it; wisecracking is simply calisthenics with words." Dorothy Parker
    [ Parent ]
    Comcat TV's to start watching you (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by DandyTIger on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:20:28 PM EST
    Here's a nice, but scary topic. Apparently comcast is working on set top boxes with cameras in them, so they know who's watching what. Of course they're only to make the system easier to use and to know who's preferences to use while watching. See the article here. They'd never use it to monitor anything or collect data otherwise. And of course they'd never let the authorities tap into that sort of information. Not comcast.

    Another Reason (none / 0) (#58)
    by dissenter on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:33:11 PM EST
    to get Direct TV.

    [ Parent ]
    AMEN (none / 0) (#61)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:35:07 PM EST
    hate cable.  I have dish which is even better.
    more HD.


    [ Parent ]
    digital cable and IPTV (none / 0) (#83)
    by DandyTIger on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:42:52 PM EST
    are two way. As are many DVR based systems and all Video on Demand systems (either on those transports or over the phone for satellite). Analog cable and satellite are nicely one way. The new revolution going on with TV over the internet (watching TV direct from networks, youtube, etc.) is two way, but can easily be made one way with free anonymous proxy servers out there.

    I'd like to see some legislation that makes you have to opt in for this clear privacy loss (or at least able to opt out). Because that's my information; I own it. I'm not holding my breath.

    By two way I mean, data is collected for every service selection (channel change) and duration, and any interactive transaction. Yep, pretty much everything. And that data is associated with the paying client ID.

    [ Parent ]

    The overused adjective "Orwellian" (none / 0) (#92)
    by badger on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:47:47 PM EST
    definitely applies here.

    [ Parent ]
    Tin foil (none / 0) (#138)
    by waldenpond on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:06:30 PM EST
    over my comcast box.

    [ Parent ]
    Is it just me, (5.00 / 3) (#28)
    by NJDem on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:20:30 PM EST
    or every time the media says HRC is done, she rises from the dead.  I'd take these new charges that her campaign is over as good news.  Seriously.  

    bingo (none / 0) (#31)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:21:55 PM EST
    it always the desperation weapon of choice

    [ Parent ]
    Very appropriate comment (none / 0) (#39)
    by blogtopus on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:25:30 PM EST
    on Easter Weekend.

    Do you think they're trying to set up the 'she was dead on Friday, was out Saturday, and came back Sunday' narrative?

    Hey, if Obama can be compared to JC, what's wrong with a little holiday fun? :-)

    Anybody know a good Easter Joke? How about this:

    Q: Why can't Jesus eat M&M's?
    A: Because they keep falling through the holes in his hands. (alternate answer: He can eat them, but they keep slipping out of the hole in his side.)

    [ Parent ]

    just wait till the grownups get home (none / 0) (#50)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:29:35 PM EST
    mister

    [ Parent ]
    My favorite Easter joke (none / 0) (#115)
    by echinopsia on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:56:25 PM EST
    Hey, did you hear they canceled Easter this year?

    No, why did they do that?

    They found the body!

    Ba-dum-dum.

    [ Parent ]

    I'm telling.. Moooommmm (none / 0) (#154)
    by waldenpond on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:11:02 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Yes, only that this time she's not even dead (none / 0) (#44)
    by diplomatic on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:27:11 PM EST
    She is in the lead in the polls and Obama is the one who just had a near death experience.  But you know, momentum only exists when it's for Obama.

    [ Parent ]
    And taking the weekend off (none / 0) (#52)
    by dissenter on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:30:12 PM EST
    Hillary is smarter yet again. While these windbags keep pumping this stuff out they should realize nobody is listening. It is Easter. March Madness is in high gear. The weather is nice..at least where I live. The only real discussions will be at the family dinner table when people say, "ya, did you see those videos."

    Whatever. And go Kansas Jayhawks.

    [ Parent ]

    You got it. March Madness to the max (none / 0) (#170)
    by Cream City on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:19:55 PM EST
    in this house, making my spouse cheerful even while shoveling (nooooo, not more!) another foot of snow that marked the first day of spring here. . . .

    Why cheerful?  He's a Hoosier.  Indiana plays tonight.  He can't even think about politics.

    Btw, did I see someone here writing about Bruce Pearl?  Is he still a jerk?  Used to coach in my town.  We could tell you stories, oh my, yes we could.

    [ Parent ]

    But look at the timing (none / 0) (#113)
    by standingup on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:56:14 PM EST
    MI and FL re-votes go down in flames.

    Richardson comes out to endorse with rumors that more are coming soon.

    Big push on meme that there is no way for Clinton to drop out now.  

    All with the hopes that Clinton will drop out at which time they can seat the FL and MI delegates for Obama and everyone can unify in Denver behind Obama.  

    [ Parent ]

    They (none / 0) (#158)
    by sas on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:11:56 PM EST
    can kiss my you know what on the "unity" in Denver thing.

    [ Parent ]
    Josh Marshall (none / 0) (#201)
    by standingup on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:33:59 PM EST
    has an interesting post up suggesting something similar. Snarky title - Step 8: Acceptance? - is his presumption that Clinton supporters are accepting the end is near.  His inbox wasn't flooded with the expected number of emails when he noted the end was near.  (of course it could be that fewer supporters are reading his site but he didn't consider that in his post)  

    Yet this afternoon, just before going to a meeting, I posted a link to The Politico article on Hillary Clinton's chances of winning the nomination and expressed my agreement with it.
    ...
    This is, I grant you, a highly unscientific measure. But I wonder whether the collapse of the revote negotiations, the revelation that the campaign is  in debt and the Richardson endorsement together are collectively forcing a moment of realization.

    I tend to think it is more wishful thinking on Josh's part.  I don't see Clinton supporters accepting that it is time for her to toss in the towel, especially without the FL and MI re-votes or getting some portion of their vote.  This could get very nasty for the Democratic party.  

    [ Parent ]

    CNN people staying home (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by waldenpond on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 04:39:57 PM EST
    CNN having a discussion with two supporters in PA...

    Q: real character issues

    Clinton Supporter: Issues, records, accomplishments, economic development etc. talk about real issues that affect real people.

    Obama supporter: Plouffe was not attacking, merely stating how many people feel about Clinton.  Rendell, Ferraro, this is not about race.  Obama moves people.

    Q: Why aren't Dems ahead of Repubs?  

    Clinton supporter: don't have one candidate yet.  Come Nov. the choice will be cut and dried.  Well all work our backsides off to make it happen.

    Obama supporter: don't underestimate Repubs.   Obama has leadership.  Clinton is not direct, she didn't address Rendell and Ferraro.  Obama took   higher ground, sticks and stones etc.

    I notice a significant difference in the face of the candidates and it is not attractive.

    Why don't Hillary lovers write Josh anymore? (5.00 / 2) (#157)
    by MarkL on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:11:40 PM EST
    Gosh, I have NO idea:
    Hillary's campaign is DEAD, I tell you!

    Here is what I wrote to JMM:


    ....

    It's because they've given up on YOU, since you are so in the tank for Obama. We might as well post at DailyKos.
    Frankly, the main thing you'll find on pro-Hillary blogs are two things: first, total rejection of Obama as a dangerously unqualified candidate; second, a belief that his campaign is finally imploding, both from the gaffes he is making, and from the information that is coming out. Yes, he's still a favorite for the nomination, but for November? The prospects look bleaker and bleaker.
    You're probably going to mention McCain: if the choice is between dangerously unqualified and dangerous, it's hard to say which is worse.
    You're probably thinking that Obama has a lot of accomplishments. Sure, but not in areas relevant to being President. He's no more ready to be President than Paul Krugman is.
    For me, the last straw with Obama was learning that his vaunted accomplishments in the IL Senate were part of a package dropped in his lap during his last year, to pump up his resume for the Senate run. Then, once elected to the Senate, he couldn't even be bothered to do his job.
    By the way, speaking of interpreting silences, the lack of any coverage on Kerry's and McCaskill's racist gaffes says a lot about TPM.
    McCaskill said she was glad there was finally a black candidate who is not a victim, and this merits zero coverage?
    Kerry says that Obama is uniquely qualified because he is black, and no coverage?
    Say it ain't so!

    I guess you're just a typical Jewish man. Oh well.
    In my view (5.00 / 1) (#168)
    by rilkefan on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:18:22 PM EST
    That's not very helpful.  The tone will just make him happy to continue with his current views.

    FWIW my email:

    Perhaps the reason you haven't gotten a lot of emails from HRC supporters on this question is because many of them have come to the conclusion it's not worth the effort to respond to TPM anymore.  I for one assumed that you're familiar with the counterarguments on liberal blogs to the Politico calculation but can't be bothered to discuss it or the related issues.

    But I certainly expect most HRC supporters are aware that the Obama-approved disenfranchisement of the FL and MI voters makes her likelihood of clearly winning the popular vote very small, despite her large and increasing poll leads in several coming states, and that her chance of winning the nomination is correspondingly low.


    [ Parent ]

    He may not like the tone, but surely (5.00 / 1) (#174)
    by MarkL on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:21:49 PM EST
    he will have SOMETHING to say about Kerry and McCaskill.. it's pretty telling TPM won't discuss those.

    [ Parent ]
    Oh MarkL. That last line was baaaaaaaaad. (none / 0) (#166)
    by Angel on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:17:57 PM EST
    Shame on you.  /snark

    I gave up on JMM a long time ago.  Personally emailed him about his bias and he had the audacity to tell me that he wasn't for BO!  We had several correspondences over the matter and the way he disses Hillary with sexist remarks.  I am sickened because I was an early visitor to the site.  We had some nice conversations through email for several years, but no more.

    [ Parent ]

    Likewise I've been reading TPM since (5.00 / 1) (#187)
    by MarkL on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:26:09 PM EST
    2001, before 9/11, and had many email exchanges with Josh.
    Basically, I think he has been lost in the weeds for  a long time, discussing the "political implications" of everything without discussing the policy.
    For example, when one of Hillary's advisers said something quite nasty about Obama in a  conference call on health care, Josh was all over that... but he had NOTHING to say about whose policy was better.
    That is what I care about.
    Likewise, I just don't care what Andrew Cuomo  or Bill Shaheen say, and I don't care MUCH about what Jesse Jackson Jr. says---there is very little information contained in those statements about who is the better candidate, or even the more 'upright' one.

    [ Parent ]
    Please post his response here (none / 0) (#204)
    by Practically Lactating on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:35:33 PM EST
    if you don't mind

    [ Parent ]
    I second the motion. (none / 0) (#207)
    by Angel on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:38:01 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Well, I doubt I will get one. (none / 0) (#209)
    by MarkL on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:38:10 PM EST
    We have had a couple of testy exchanges recently. If he recognizes the email, he won't reply.


    [ Parent ]
    Nice selective quoting (5.00 / 1) (#167)
    by badger on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:17:58 PM EST
    The WaPo piece is about "Top Ten Flip-Flops" - 5 for Obama and 5 for Hillary. Of course you're not outraged about the 5 for Obama, all of which are on substantive policy issues, which the Clinton-Balkan item is not.

    Selective quoting like this makes people look like dishonest shills. You don't want to be one of those, do you?

    Heh, well (none / 0) (#192)
    by otherlisa on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:28:33 PM EST
    HP Sauce is the guy who said earlier today that Clinton supporters would be back to stirring Mucinex in their ice-cream after Obama becomes the nominee.

    So I've already got him on "ignore."

    [ Parent ]

    Couldn't Obama step aside (5.00 / 2) (#189)
    by JerseyBeth on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 05:26:54 PM EST
    gracefully in June and not force a brokered convention if Hillary had the momentum and was the one with at least a shot at winning in November.    I can't believe Obama would want to subject himself to what could be  a resounding loss in November, especially when half of his own party could be complaining about buyer's remorse.

    I have concerns about Obama,  and I am a loyal democrat who leans left.  Everyday of Hillary Clinton's life has been officially recorded since her husband's Presidential campaign in 1992.   We know where she has been every single day.  Almost TMI.  At this point I don't feel I know enough about Barack Obama to vote for him for President.  No one I know even heard of him before he gave his 2004 keynote address.   And  I am a loyal democrat who leans left.  If I have trust issues with him, imagine how more mainstream Americans feel and how they would be likely to vote in November.  

    And it seems there is more vetting is to come.  Not much was made of the ABC News retrospective of 11 or so uninhabitable slums Rezko built in Obama's district.  There is also Michael Ayers and some questionable family connections in Kenya which have received little or MSM attention.  Seems those issues will be given more attention too.  Also,  Obama said he didn't retain his sched