1. He won't beat McCain.  Why should she hook herself to a loser?

2. If he miraculously beats McCain, why do you assume he'll be around for 8 years?  Many of us think he'd be an utter disaster - so bad, in fact, that there will be a Republican sweep in 2012.

3. 2016?? You think a WOMAN who will be 68 will get elected?? As it is, we hear about her laugh, her thick ankles, her pantsuits, etc.  You think with 8 more years worth of wear and tear, that's going to change?

...
Here now, this week, and next week, Barack Obama, the presumptive Democrat nominee, will have lost every election since February except North Carolina and Guam, and lost nearly two thirds of the vote in West Virginia, and yet the media will sweep it all under the rug, flailing about wildly to find burning crosses and white sheets instead of recognizing Obama's significant general election
vulnerabilities.

Hillary is still done for in the media's mind, but Barack still can't win. The media will ignore that. After all, West Virginia and Kentucky and Indiana and Puerto Rico are all racist.
...

  BTD, are you buying Obama at this point yourself, for November, with all that we know now re his strength now before the usual vetting that even Hillary would not do?

I ask, keeping in mind, that Howard Dean has said that the focus will be on the last 6-8 races and the momentum there, and electability will be the focus.

It's very possible that KKKarl Rove is actively encouraging and propping up Obama's candidacy.

Think about it.

If McCain wins - great, they've got at least four more years than they thought to rake in the cash for the super-rich. Plus, he gets to appoint the Supreme Court Justices and further their conservative agenda.

If Obama wins - great, he's in their pockets anyway.

If HRC wins - not great, but expected, and they'll just hang all of Bush's failures on her with the media in their pockets to prevent the complete and total death of the Republican Party. Doesn't matter, they'll come back again in a few decades and they're ready for that too.

Supposedly it isn't about the parties --these mobsters support both, it's about money and corruption, both in the U.S. and in Iraq.  There are a number of Arab figures involved, including Hadhmi Auchi, a international crook who can't come into the U.S or France because he would be arrested. It was his money, lent to Rezko, that helped Obama buy his house.  

I know this all sounds like tinfoil hat stuff, but you really should read it.  I will never vote for Obama because I think he's a trojan horse, meant to destroy the Dem party and take it over in the same way that the Republican Party was taken over by the Neocons and Rove  (who Pringle says is also involved in this, along with the Carlyle Group).   They want free rein and don't care about the American populace.

Just a few days ago, in the Wall Street Journal, a front page article  (May 5, 2008), title "Obama Says Teamsters Need Less Oversight," says that Obama won the endorsement of the Teamsters this year "after privately telling the union he supported ending the strict federal oversight imposed to root out corruption, according to officials in the union and the Obama campaign." He wants to get rid of an "independent review board set up  in 1992 to eliminate mob influence in the Union."

This is hardly the only thing out there on him.  He scares me, frankly. Once these creeps take over both parties, they will have complete control over our government and continue to shut third parties out.  There's a reason why the MSM is trying to shove him down our throats. They are owned by five corporations who do NOT have the public interest at heart.

I'm not sure they even want McCain. It's possible this is a ploy to get McCain elected, but McCain's fund raising problems and Obama's limitless supply of money make me think they WANT Obama to win and are determined to make it happen.

"What makes you think he's capable of reaching out now? We can only look at Obama's past to predict future actions (or inactions).  What has he done during this entire camapign that would indicate he has any notion of doing any of the things Armando listed?"

the key word here is 'capable'.  While I think Obama has the capacity to ask Clinton to be VP, and the capacity to get MI and FL seated, I don't think he has the capacity to repair the damage he's done with not just "working class" voters, but seniors, Latin@s, women, LGBTs, etc.

Obama can inspire people, but thats about it. And once you've seen "the man behind the curtain", the image of the Great and Powerful Oz loses its capacity to inspire.  Obama can't convince anyone of anything, as far as I can tell -- they either take the leap of faith required to support Obama, or they remain skeptical.

Obama can't just "take a page out of Bill Clinton's book", because you can't teach empathy... you can acquire it (or a reasonable facsimile of it) but that takes years to do -- not weeks or months as BTD seems to suggest.

I really admire and appreciate BTD's analytical skills, but I don't think he gets it quite yet.  The vast majority of the people who say they want Clinton in the number 2 spot will wind up voting for Obama regardless of who is in that spot -- and to those of us who support Clinton, FL/MI is more important as a symptom than as a problem per se.  I think that Obama can win Michigan even if its not seated, and can't win Florida even if it is seated.  Treating the symptom does not address the real problem -- Obama's political short-sightedness.