"Sen. Obama's support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again...whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me." Hillary Clinton, May 7, 2008.

Obama cannot win without these Clinton supporters. I think Hillary will get Obama voters much easier and in much greater numbers than Obama will get her voters.

I favor Obama, but I haven't seen any answer to Obama's problem among white voters from any of Obama's backers.

I told the woman that I wasn't very happy with the democratic party and to try back later in the election cycle.  You know how fundraisers keep making their pitch after you say no?  This woman didn't.  She seemed completely unsurprised and simply thanked me. I got the feeling I wasn't the first person to hear from her.

If the party wouldn't race to nominate someone who only leads California by 7 in the last SUSA poll, then maybe it could be raising money for state and local candidates.  And before everyone tells me that Obama will win California, his lead is less there than McCain's is in Virginia one of those states Obama is supposed to turn blue.

I am now on the McCain express as an independent.  He is actually the most qualified to lead this country.

McCain stood up for Hispanics.  I feel I can trust him.  He has the experience.  Likeable enough.

Now that the Democratic Party has found its new  "John Kerry" it is truly a trainwreck. Too much hypocrisy, double standards, backstabbing, disenfranchisement, and lack of spine.

Enough is enough.

Buhbye Dems.

Here is an argument that the sports fans may understand.  Everyone always thinks their favorite team will be better than last year.  And the reason is that their thinking always goes like "okay, we've got last year's team, and we've added player X, and player Y has more experience, etc..."

But in fact, half the teams are better and half the teams are worse.  And the reason is that you don't simply get to start with last year's record as a baseline, and then add positive things to it.  Some changes are good and some changes are bad.

I won't be there for Obama, and won't be fearmongered, pre-blamed or thugged about SCOTUS, McCain or Roe. Dems spat on me for caring about all of the above when it was inconvenient for them to get their asses out of their seats and some of that spit got their dry powder wet.

The media hasn't mentioned it at all, but she stands to pick up at least 400K in net votes.

That's why Obama and the media want him to declare victory on the 20th, to prevent Hillary from winning Puerto Rico and overtaking him in the popular vote.

How Obama declares victory on the 20th after getting blown out by 30 in WV and KY in successive weeks will be interesting to see.

The key will be Hillary's victory speeches in WV next week and in KY the week after.  In WV she'll have the night all to herself.  She will have blown Obama's doors off.  She needs to make it clear in that speech that she's staying in through June, emphasize the vote in KY, and emphasize the popular vote.  Then on the 20th she needs to do the same in KY.  Because of time zones, her speech will be a few hrs before Obama's in Oregon.  She must reiterate that she is staying in through June, that the race isn't over, emphasize FL and MI, and let everyone know that she's not going anywhere.

Then...On the morning of June 2, she will lead Obama in the popular vote by at least a few hundred thousand votes.

What Kerry forgot to emphasize was that on returning home to the states he became a radical antiwar protester.  As a leftie I see that Hero and subsequent Protester biography to be noble and human, even epic.

Centrists  found  that contradiction in persona confusing and hypocritical.

Conservatives saw it as apostate malevolence.  

Teh post racial Obama identity is self contradicted Obama's probably agrees/d with a lot of what Wright had to say at the time of the sermons. In his first book Obama shows that he's creating a black racial identity for himself in an obsessive manner.  It seems that Obama also had a penchant for radicals, militants and terrorists--  Alinski, Kalidi and Ayers respectively.

The GOP can drive a truck through the gap between Obama's presentation of himself and his biography.

For me it's a matter of form.

But, I think I'll get a pass here, because I'm in (partial) agreement with the HRC folks.  I saw that at dKos and I had a reaction similar as BTD, i.e. this isn't the greatest news for BO.

But, I realize that polling is completely useless this far out.  So, I'm not worried.  BO will win because he's the right messenger for a time when fear politics has been seen and will increasingly be seen as political trickery that allows the government to quietly focus on the needs of the powerful, while diverting attention from government's failures to be answerable to the concerns of most citizens.

And, as I've stated before, all this talk about HRC's claimed lock on white voters in a GE isn't based on rigorous evaluations.  Even beyond the fact that polling this early is useless for the GE, I know that this exit poll based white voter conversation is completely frivolous: there is never any attempt to calculate GE correlations or (most importantly) causations.  Instead primary exit polls are combined with technical ignorance resulting in baseless assertions turned into deeply felt conclusions.  I'm constantly amazed by how few people understand the limitations of standard political polling.  But, the worst polling ignorance is still ten times better informed than the Willy-nilly conclusions that result when primary exit polling is extrapolated to the context of a GE.

In 1958, Wallace ran for AL gov w/ the support of the NAACP.  His opponent, John Patterson, was supported by the KKK.  After losing, Wallace vowed that he would never be "outni****ed" again.

When we was elected in 1962, Wallace proved to be true to his word, and he took his act nationally 2 years later.  His campaigns were reminiscent of what HRC's campaign has become today.  He pushed anger, anti-elitism, and race while not doing anything substantively for his purported constituents.

The Crown Royal Kid is doing the same thing this year.  She never challenged Charles Gibson on capital gains taxes, nor did she vigorously challenge much of the other prevailing economic orthodoxies.  Instead, she premised her whole argument around McVain's gas tax gimmick.

It will only get worse in the coming weeks.  Team Clinton cannot win w/o taking the battle to Denver, and keeping the bloodletting going that long is a nightmare scenario for all of us.  This cancer must be excised soon.

Will there continue to be 2-6 Obama-bashing threads per diem, or will there be a transition to McCain-bashing?

Polls indicate that upwards of 40% of clinton's supporters will vote for McCain, though he is anti-choice, etc.

I'm asking this sincerely- what has Obama done that has been so antagonizing and alienating to Clinton's supporters?

Obama has an entire election cycle to grow from here.  Certainly any candidate withiin the ranges described in this poll is electable.

1. Race Baiting. Obama's people have damaged the reputations of the Clinton's and many of their supporter's by claiming that they were manipulating racist sentiment in order to win the campaign. This is hateful and divisive.  I can't in good conscience vote for a candidate who has refused to denounce this technique. Clinton, imo, has run a clean campaign based on her experience relative to Obama's. S. Carolina, Ferraro, "Shuck and Jive", and the MLK comments were not racist and did not deserve to be attacked any more than Clinton's recent comments about Obama not getting white votes. They were inserted into the conversation to gain Obama support among people who hate racism.  

2. Inexperience. Obama has two freaking years in Congress and has not shown that he has the intellectual curiosity necessary to overcome that deficit.

Believe it or not, illegal aliens don't vote and among the Hispanics that do, there is a significant number that are not all that excited about having illegal aliens flooding this country.
This is especially true of Mexican Americans in nonunion states who can't get a decent wage because the market is suppressed by illegals and they are competing for many of the same jobs.

Having said that, the main problem is not USA policy, but Mexican policy over which we have no control.  They will keep coming, by hook or crook, given their plight in Mexico.

We may empathize with them to a great degree, but the biggest gripe a lot of us have is that building walls is just a huge waste of money.  And the idea of sending them all back to Mexico is a pipe dream concocted by idiots that don't live on the border. Enforcement is a farce on every level and absent putting up barbed wire and machine gun nests, it ain't gonna work.

BTW, it might be instructive to go see the movie, I believe titled "A Day Without the Mexicans".