by kos
Tue May 20, 2008 at 11:20:20 AM PDT
Check this out:

              Clinton  Obama
SUSA, 3/28-30:   58      29
SUSA, 4/12-14:   62      29
SUSA, 4/26-28:   63      27  
SUSA, 5/03-05:   62      28
SUSA, 5/09-11:   62      30
SUSA, 5/16-18:   62      31  

Note that Clinton has essentially camped out in Kentucky all week (and the region for several weeks), while Obama has made nothing but a perfunctory visit or two. Clinton's numbers haven't budged for a month. Support for both sides in the state have solidified, and it seems as if nothing could ever pry additional numbers loose in Clinton's direction.

He may not be able to unify you because you have made this into a woman's issue, not a presidential issue. So many woman will never go to Obama because the woman lost.

I have serious question. I really mean serious. I am a woman as well and I want to have a female president one day myself.

My question is this and I would like to have an intelligent conversation about it. Maybe you can change my mind about my views on this, I don't know.

If two people agree prior to the start of a race and there are three flags, one blue, one yellow, and one white, on both sides of the road and the participants must pick up each flag when they approached it along the way and keep it until the finish line. They have a predetermined amount of time in which to make it to the finish line with at least two flags in hand.

Both participants agreed that the yellow flag marks the halfway point of the race. So they are running toward the finish line and prior to getting to the mid point one of the participants drop the first flag they've picked up. Remember the rule is to keep the flags and bring them to the finish line.

So that person has to run back to get their flag and the other keeps going, just prior to the finish line the participant that had to go back and get the first flag he/she dropped says it is not fair that the other participant is winning because they had the flag, but dropped it and had to go back to get it. He/she seems to feel that it would be more fair to add extra time to the clock because its just not fair, after all he/she had to go back to get the flag and that is the only reason the other person is winning.

Should rules be changed because of this? If so, why? If the rules were changed what effect would that cause? And what would happen the next time this same race is repeated again, and the same thing happens? Would changing the rules that both participants agreed to initially, in the middle of the game, be fair to all of the cheerleaders of the one that played by the rules have and won?

I say this because it seems that we have lost something really important in this process and I am not sure that it is fair, just because one's supporters want it that way. Does treating people fairly have any place in this process? Is that not an important part of our having rules and laws to abind during such technical races?

They may well change on May 30/31st (though we don't know how - it's conceivable that the delegates are seated at 50%, for example), but as of the end of today Obama does have an absolute majority of the pledged delegates that are in play.

As for Obama's alleged "narrow base of support" and Clinton's "broader base of female, Democratic and Independent voters", consider this: http://www.gallup.com/poll/107407/Obama-Surge-Fairly-BroadBased.aspx

Obama now leads Clinton -

among women: 49% to 46%
among Hispanics: 51% to 44%
among high-school graduates or less: 47% to 46%
among Easterners: 52% to 43%

and is even among non-Hispanic whites: 47% to 47%

You may also be familiar with the recent SUSA poll in PA (http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=162d4baa-59af-4ec5-9d9b-eb6e658e86c5), which shows Obama leading McCain by 8 points... in a big swing state.

Part of their calculations will be, not unreasonably, that it's a damn long time from the end of the final primaries to the convention (nearly 3 full months) time in which they would want our party united and decided on a nominee.

The only way plausibly for HRC to counter this constant drumbeat to step aside and concede will be for her team to really pick up the pace in the media discussions and very aggressively take that case to the public.  From what I've seen lately, her surrogates and backers have been sending mixed signals about this, at best, certainly they've been lukewarm about taking the campaign that far.

Yeah, like the RNC is really going to listen just cos he says it.