So Obama will need to win - and I think that PA will need to be it.

I am at the "pox on all their houses" stage.  I am not happy with Hillary's campaign, how it is being run - and I am not happy with Obama's inability to put this issue away/win.

So where is Gore when I need him.

The fact that Obama's people cannot wait for the voting to end is a sign of weakness and fear, in my opinion. They wanted Clinton out before New Hampshire, Super Tuesday and March 4th; when she won big contests then, they wanted her out even more desperately. Each time Clinton has a good showing at the polls, the Obama fanatics get even more desperate for her to drop out. Without exception, every good development for Clinton (or bad development for Obama) is immediately followed by shrill demands that she concede the race. Why would that be true if Obama has already wrapped up the race and Clinton's efforts are futile?

it smells like..................victory!

sen. clinton is going to clean sen. obama's cleats in the rest of the primaries. sure, he'll get the AA vote in philly, so what? philly isn't the entire state of PA, last time i checked. she'll pound him by double digits there, probably elsewhere too.

the more sen. obama and his cohorts whine, the less "inevitable" he looks. his campaign is starting to tank, at the worst possible time. it appears to be "amateur night" with him and his supporters, versus the grizzled veteran that sen. clinton is.

While noting that party elders like Carter and Gore are wisely calling for the party to not prematurely bury Clinton's candidacy, the story goes on to repeat every tired meme about Clinton's attempts to destroy the party in the name of bringing down Boy Destiny--including the specious claim that Clinton is helping a McCain win in November so she can run against him in 2012.

<sigh>

I've resigned myself to the fact that the national press will do everything it can to promote Obama at the expense of the party's (and country's) longterm interests. And since the majority of voters don't want to back a perceived "loser," this heavy drumbeat of bad press and toxic talking points has started to affect her standing in national polls, which to some degree will trickle down to the results in the remaining states.

What is wrong with the calculations.... record numbers of voters in the DEM primaries.  The calculations do not factor the increase.. like in PA alone......

"It's the first time we know of that a party in Pennsylvania has gone over 4 million."

A total of 4,044,952 people are now registered to vote in the Democratic primary; a total of 3,215,478 are registered for the Republican primary.

He's like the Anna Kournikova of politics.

If he wins, it is no longer likely he will do so looking like a hugely popular candidate. Forcing Clinton out is the only way to maintain the illusion that the excitement hasn't actually been mostly drained from what was initially an extremely exciting candidacy.

I believe that if he hadn't been seduced early on by the media negativity heaped on Clinton (thinking it provided a bigger advantage for him than it actually does) and had instead acknowledged the obstacles to, and the huge gap that remains to be closed before, women can be considered to have achieved anything close to equal participation and representation in the political life of the nation, and celebrated the genuinely historic nature of Clinton's campaign (instead of insisting, ludicrously, that she was running from, as if any woman, no matter how famous her husband's name, at this point in our history could run from, some unusually advantaged position of "entitlement") he would have put the nomination away long ago. (I know, I know, there's that supposedly all powerful "Clinton machine" -- but Obama started out with a machine just as, if not more, powerful; the combined financial, staff and organizational resources of Kerry, Daschle and Gephart and, shortly thereafter, the support of the Kennedys. Obama started his campaign as the best financed primary candidate in HISTORY, with more initial funding than anyone before him, long before he got his internet fundraising effort up and running.)

Woman aren't willing to vote for a woman just because she's a woman. But many think it foolish to vote for a man who so consistently gives the impression he doesn't genuinely respect the important, additional responsibilities women have shouldered over the last 30-40 years, the important contributions they have made and make to the welfare of their families, to the economy, to the public life of this country -- and to his party -- or understand the still unequal and often difficult environment in which they, especially those outside the elite circles in which he dwells, work to meet those responsibilities and make those contributions.

Even if Clinton doesn't win in the end, she will have shown that nearly half of the Democratic party is behind her, which in itself shows that Barack barely has a majority.

It also makes a case that Obama and his supporters should be begging for Clinton's support from her and her constituency, instead of demanding her resignation from the race.  If they don't start asking nicely, Clinton's base is going to feel cheated and make a show to teach Obama a lesson about what happens when you are arrogant.

BEFORE Ohio and Texas. They are saying almost verbatim exactly the same thing that they are saying now. And I told a class full of men that the more they do this the more money I give her. The more times they act like misogynist fools attempting to bully her out I react.  I had the 10 women in the class talk to me after and tell me they felt the very same way.  

Granted, my experience was generally with the grassroots type supporters who don't understand you have to persuade the voters. There seems to be some sort of group think that you can shame the voters (the voters, not the candidate) into thinking your way.

I saw it on DailyKos too (before I decided I was now a Hillary supporter and joined the boycott).

Maybe it's a function of extreme anger. Maybe it's a function of the level of people I've dealt with, and a certain lack of, shall we say, tolerance for other people's thought processes, but it was one of the reasons I decided for Hillary and not Obama when Edwards dropped out.

After Obama gets the nomination they seem to think Hillary supporters will simply fall in line and realize what a great guy this positive, politics of hope candidate is, even though they are running an extremely negative netroots campaign. And that leaches into the mainstream press.

Excuse me? We are talking about Blue Dog Reagan Democrats. These are the people you have to persuade, and they are far more likely to think that if the campaign is immature, the candidate is as well.

I held my nose and voted for Carter in 1980, I'm that loyal to the Dems, but I got a serious feeling Obama supporters are leading the way to defeat in November.

I know there's a lot of male entitlement out there, but are guys like Leahy and Olbermann so used to getting their way that they cannot even see how it looks to have a bunch of men telling Hillary to be a good girl and step aside?  Do they think there will be no negative effect among Hillary supporters, especially women voters?  Because, if so, WOW.  

It seems to me that there are only two things that could really damage or split the party:  1) FL/MI and 2) trying to force Hillary out of an essentially tied race so that Obama can be annointed.  Everything else is easily fixable.  I suspect the Obama people are willing to risk 2, to try to avoid the issues around 1 (which I'm beginning to suspect they fear losing if Clinton pushes the issue, which is one of the reasons they want her out of the race - Obama isn't ahead by much if FL/MI are seated).

None of that is good for Obama.  

obama is not in control of leahy anymore than he is pelosi.  the supers are starting to close ranks and if super tuesday forward is a guide the house of clinton is about to fall.

it was only a matter of time.  when you base your case to the nomination on a half baked idea of super delegates are free to choose regardless of the results, which they are technically.  you are relying on technically, and technically's will not get it done.  

sooner or later the supers had to speak up.

when you insinuate they are in it with you, well you have a problem if they are not.  

1.  Concern of the animosity of Republicans towards Hillary.
   
2.  Obama attracts indies.  
   
3.  The AA vote.  

When will people get it, there is no clear winner.  There is no runaway train.  And whoever wins will still have to battle McCain and frankly, what made us all collectively giddy, the woman and black man option, makes the other third collectively nauseous.  

Doing that makes it seem like the room is filling with smoke.  It will indeed alienate Clinton supporters for the GE.  If that happens, a nice little pocket of small donors will be out of reach to Obama for the GE...and most likely in THE MOST IMPORTANT AND CLOSE STATES IN THE RACE!  I also feel as though it reflects badly to the public on the part of Dem Congress(wo)men as they scramble to undermine the campaign of one of their own.  10 years from now (or whenever), I hope we will not be saying, oh he or she was an OBAMA SUPPORTER or a CLINTON SUPPORTER therefore they are no longer fit to serve.  

Sen. Obama should start urging his surrogates and supporters to put their energy into to voter turnout instead of inserting themselves into Sen. Clinton's decision to drop out.

Obama said Clinton "obviously believes that she would make the best nominee and the best president, and I think that she should be able to compete and her supporters should be able to support her for as long as they are willing or able."