Rosa Said:

NOW who DECLARED Obama the nominee?

We Answered:

I couldn't have said it better myself.

Is it merely coincidental that of the 30 members of the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee, 11 were Clinton Supporters; 9 Obama Supporters; and 10 were uncommitted (who were known Obama supporters just unannounced at the time)

How is it that these superdelegates came out in mass on the day on the final primaries, slowly lowering the delegates he needed as it became more clear from exit polls that Obama wasn't going to win SD like expected. Coincidental? I think not.

The guy lost about 66% of the primaries over the last 3 months. She won two to every one that he won. That by itself says "something" and his electability is clearly less than hers according to state-by-state general election polling.

This whole thing is a scam on the American public.

We STILL see media outlets say "she may have won the popular vote" as if the math is so complicated that it's hard to see her lead -- and as you pointed out, that even plays in his favor by giving him votes he can't legally count (MI) and by using the WA caucus results for him instead of the primary results (where he got 49,000 less votes).

I'm not a McCain, Obama or Clinton supporter so I don't really care who is nominated but I certainly expect it to be a fair process. It has been anything but fair..

The fact that a Democratic representative for Florida (Rep. Wexler) went before the RBC knowing that the GOP shifted the primary date and screwed the state. didn't even attempt to fight for those voters or that delegation. Why? He's part of Senator Obama's campaign and a full seating/pardon due to GOP manipulation of the date would HURT his candidate. So, he sold out the people of his own state to help his buddy. CLASSY!!


But hey, that's probably a good thing. Maybe more people will open their eyes and question the importance of party affiliation and loyalty after this. It would be healthier for America if we stopped this party vs party nonsense and explored more candidate options.

Arnold Said:

why do so many red states have Democratic senators?

We Answered:

Because red states is an invention of the modern election where we try to break people into their consumer status.

Jeanette Said:

Who will be the next US Congressman to end his career with a plane clash.........?

We Answered:

Ted Stevens didn't end his career in a plane crash



He ended it when he started taking bribes.

Monica Said:

Is OBAMA winning?

We Answered:

Are you kidding me? There is so much crazy in this thread, I don't know where to begin.

"Ok, she can't win the African American, but they are a minority. So, it won't have that much of an effect."

That is 12% of America's voters that religiously go 80% Dem. Look at Kerry's results. WITH Black voters Hillary could win that and Ohio. That is her absolute best result.

With black voters not turning out, there is absoutely no way she wins and more importantly, there is a negative impact in most Dem congressional races ---- meaning... the DNC is not eager to go that route. You don't piss off your loyalest voting block when you don't have to, and the DNC doesn't have to.

What a lot of Hillary supporters forget is that the Dems can run Obama and ---just like if they run Hillary ---- lose the presidency, but Obama has coattails that will likely allow them to capture a lot more congressional seats on his strength in more states than Clinton. Evangelicals and anti-war Republicans are feeling pretty dissatisfied with McCain. Their turnout will be low and frankly they might in some signifigant amount vote for Obama. (My father is a white anti-war Rep voting for Obama.) Even if they just don't vote, it redraws the maps and allows Obama a real shot in non-racist red states. (The west and along the mixed middle of the east coast.)

I mean take a look at the SW.

vs. McCain
state Obama Clinton
AZ -20% -28%
NV -5% -11%
NM +3% -3%
CO +3% -11%
UT -11% -38%

If the Dems run Hillary, it is likely that they are hurt in congressional races all over blue territory by low turnout of African Americans. It is likely that they are killed in congressional races in red territory. Finally, you are running the one candidate who can unite all of the Republican tribes. Evangelicals will vote McCain and frankly even some anti-war Reps might. These folks have been conditioned by Fox News for years.

In other words, it is going to have to be a slam dunk case to go with Hillary. I don't think her winning the popular vote alone will change the DNC's mind. Their worst case scenario is simply much better with an Obama candidacy than with a Clinton one. A near supermajority in congress can moderate an already pliable McCain. The status quo will get run over by McCain just like they have been by Bush.

"As far as ELECTORAL vote goes, she has over 280 electoral votes in this nomination process, while he has like 215. Again, BIG states add up."

Again. Not true. You are assuming that she will win every state in the general election that she won in the nomination process and that Obama, if he won the nomination would lose California and New York. Come on now. How stupid is that arguement?

The ONLY way to accurately predict how a candidate will do in the general election is to look at the most recent head to head state polls vs. McCain and see who wins. I have tracked all of that information and am trying as best I can to update it daily. As it stands THIS MORNING:

Obama is leading in head to head polls with McCain in 21 states and tied in a 22nd totalling 240-255 electoral votes. Additionally trails McCain by less than 5% in another 11 states totalling an additional 134 electoral votes.

Clinton is leading in head to head polls with McCain in 16 states totalling 198 electoral votes. Additionally trails McCain by less than 5% in another 6 states totalling an additional 76 electoral votes.

It takes 270 electoral votes to win.

Forgetting for a second that, if you look at the numbers, the nomination is pretty much decided, it is still obviously apparent that in the general, Obama has a VERY good chance of winning, while Hillary's chances are minimal at best.

Finally about the crowd that point to nationwide polls and say Obama is 9% behind ... Rassmussen showed Obama with an 8% lead over clinton nationally yesterday while Gallup showed Clinton by 1%. Rassmussen showed Clinton trailing McCain by 3% nationally and McCain tied with Obama monday. On Saturday Newsweek showed both Dems with a 3% lead over McCain.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/…

Don't you guys get it? Public opinion polls that handle the nation as a whole are totally invalid. They are trying to sample too large of a pool with too small of an audience.

Deanna Said:

Democratic Sen. Tim Johnson?

We Answered:

HOLY SH IT IM A DIE HARD DEMOCRAT ,AND I HAVE ALWAYS THOUGT OF REPUBLICANS AS HEARTLESS PEOPLE WHO BACKED BIG BUISSINESS AND TRAMPLED LITTLE PEOPLE ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ BUT THIS REALLY TOUCHED ME !!!!!! I AM SERIOUS AND GOD BLESS YOU ALL AND PRAY FOR SEN. JOHNSON AND HOPE THAT HE DOES RECOVER EVEN IF IT MEANS HE FEELS HE HAS TO STEP DOWN AND A REPUBLICAN IS APPOINTED MAYBE THIS WHOLE IRAQ THING WILL END AND IN 2008 WE WILL GET A FRESH START WHETHER IT BE A REPUBLICAN OR A DEMOCRAT