<p>If HRC weren’t a Clinton, she’d be gone by now. People would have prevailed upon her to leave. But it’s a moot point I guess, since she’d never have gotten this far with her personality – even with her great abilities – were she not a Clinton. I don’t hate her – and haven’t until this election thought ill of her – but she’s just flat and uninspiring.</p>
<p>Obama closed the deal. He went from nowhere to beat the entrenched favorite in Super Tuesday. She had so much of an advantage and he undid it all. Not winning Pennsylvania by 7 points – that is my prediction – doesn’t mean Obama hasn’t kicked butt or can’t close the deal. That’s ridiculous spin. Pennsylvania is not the US. What’s been amazing is that in a state that is widely viewed as so strongly favoring her in great numbers, polls indicate he’s peeled away a lot of support.</p>
<p>If HRC weren’t a Clinton, she’d be gone by now. People would have prevailed upon her to leave. But it’s a moot point I guess, since she’d never have gotten this far with her personality – even with her great abilities – were she not a Clinton. I don’t hate her – and haven’t until this election thought ill of her – but she’s just flat and uninspiring.</p>
<p>Obama closed the deal. He went from nowhere to beat the entrenched favorite in Super Tuesday. She had so much of an advantage and he undid it all. Not winning Pennsylvania by 7 points – that is my prediction – doesn’t mean Obama hasn’t kicked butt or can’t close the deal. That’s ridiculous spin. Pennsylvania is not the US. What’s been amazing is that in a state that is widely viewed as so strongly favoring her in great numbers, polls indicate he’s peeled away a lot of support.</p>
<p>As far as McCain’s numbers go, he’s not running against anyone yet. He’s pathetic on Iraq – which has been visibly going south (not that it was ever substantially going north). He’s pathetic on the economy which is still faltering mightily. And he’s a lame campaigner. The fact that I and a lot of people like his personality will be tested through a real campaign.</p>
<p>What we are waiting for now is for Hillary to realize that she has now guaranteed that this would be her only shot at candidacy – and she lost this and her reputation in the process. Bye bye Hillary.</p>
<p>“If HRC weren’t a Clinton, she’d be gone by now.”… “she’d never have gotten this far with her personality – even with her great abilities – were she not a Clinton.”…</p>
<p>But, I guess no one is allowed to say that Obama wouldn’t be where he is now if he had not been black. Gotta love it.</p>
<p>If he closed the deal than why is she still in, why aren’t the dems voting 2 to 1 for him, why is she still in and winning PA? Losing in NC is not surprising, since it is a more rural area</p>
<p>Look at McCain, Huck stayed in, but with each state he kept losing until the point he had to leave…Hillary is expected to win PA, so he doesn’t have the united party…the party is still disenfranchised.</p>
<p>PA is a good state to look at as an overall America. They have Philly, which is populated, educated Urban city, they have Pittsburgh that has been declining, they have Scranton and Wilkes Barre which is suburban. They have major universities (UP, Drexel, Villanova, PS) which would show the young vote. They have the rural areas such as Penn Station (coal mining) similiar to WVA.</p>
<p>I strongly disagree. Pennsylvania doesn’t have the demographics of an “overall America.” Its population is older, whiter, less educated, and not as affluent. </p>
<p>As James Carville once said: “Pennsylvania is Philadelphia and Pittsburgh with Alabama in between.”</p>
<p>So Philly is city/urban
Pittsburgh is a declining city/urban
and everything in between is rural</p>
<p>How is that not the overall make up of America.</p>
<p>You have metropolitan cities, declining cities and rural areas —translation TX, FL, CA for densely populated
OH and MI for areas that people are leaving due to jobs
IO, KS, MS for rural farming areas</p>
<p>A few months ago, it was predicted that Hillary would win the PA primary by 20+ points.</p>
<p>At that time, she was favored in PA because of her husband’s popularity in that State. I can’t imagine that if she wins by a much smaller margin that anyone could declare this a major victory.</p>
<p>Is Obama ‘spending 4- 1’ or does he have that amount of money available? I heard on MSNBC today that she is in the red, while he has $42 million in the bank to spend.</p>
<p>Yes, Sen. Obama is flush with money. The Clinton campaign is broke and OWES numerous small business’ and school districts all across the country, over 10 million $$$'s. This article should help explain it.</p>
<p>Thanks Celtic so Obama spent $31 million and Clinton spent $22 million in PA. I hope she does pay all her creditors. It would make me nervous to have her owe me money. Or to have her husband near my daughter - even though I don’t have one.</p>
<p>Query: What happens to Obama’s contributions if there is money left after the election?</p>
<p>Simba, if you truly by into this “large state theory”, you, my friend, are an idiot. </p>
<p>The party isn’t “disenfranchised”, If Hillary doesn’t win by a huge margin in the one state that is MADE of her demographic, she really should win 2 to 1, that just shows that Obama IS electable and that the people WILL elect him. </p>
<p>And no Hillary supporter is in any position to call ANY campaign negative. Have you seen her fear-mongering Bin Laden ad?</p>
<p>I have to admit. This is an all time low, even for the Clintons. Yes, it is time for them to get out! Talk about a last gasp of desperation. :eek:</p>
<p>Wow. Check out Michael Moore’s endorsement of Sen. Obama and his outright disappointment in the sleaziness of Hillary.</p>
<p>"This sleazy attempt to smear Obama was brilliantly explained the following night by Stephen Colbert. He pointed out that if Obama is supported by Ted Kennedy, who is Catholic, and the Catholic Church is led by a Pope who was in the Hitler Youth, that can mean only one thing: OBAMA LOVES HITLER!</p>
<p>Yes, Senator Clinton, that’s how you sounded. Like you were nuts. Like you were a bigot stoking the fires of stupidity. How sad that I would ever have to write those words about you. You have devoted your life to good causes and good deeds. And now to throw it all away for an office you can’t win unless you smear the black man so much that the superdelegates cry “Uncle (Tom)” and give it all to you."</p>
<p>Thanks Hondu I liked Mr Moores reference to the Kansas governor who may (finally) be our first woman president. I hope to see this in my lifetime. Sadly, Hillary isn’t the right one in my opinion.</p>
<p>Just curious if anyone has ever been contacted by a polling service. </p>
<p>Further in this regard it seems this year’s polls are more out of touch than ever. They have not kept up with the times. Polling calls are made exclusively to land lines at homes and not to cell phones. So the typical demographic being polled is the matriarch of the home. Younger people typically do not have land lines, but cell phones, so they are not polled. The huge increase of newly registered and/or first time voters are not known to the pollsters and so they are not polled.</p>
<p>I think the polls are becoming essentially worthless as this primary has shown their increasing lack of credibility. The polling process needs to be revamped.</p>
<p>But the Bullwinkle poll says things will be great if you vote Obama in 08.</p>
<p>I’ve talked to polling services many times. And yes, I am the matriarch of the house. I’ve also been exit polled after voting in the morning (at the polls) and over the phone (mail-in voting here in WA). </p>