Good for him..
Hopefully he decides to really start pounding on this issue. Especially the difference between the two candidates and him on Iraq.

This is one of about three reasons why i have always supported him over her.

In the general it electability stupid..

Hillary can not engage McCain on his Iraq War and Occupation stance, since she voted for it with him.

To this very day, Hillary still has not admitted that her vote to authorize the Invasion and Occupation of Iraq was a Reckless and Catastrophic mistake. Since she clearly feels her vote was correct, on that issue she is on the same side as George W. Bush, and John McCain.

How the hell is she going to turn that into being the anti Iraq War candidate! She can't, but she will have to try, which will allow Bush/McCain to flip flop, and surrender monkey her to fare thee well. Since she claims that her vote was correct, then she can not counter the Republicans' Flip Flop Surrender Monkey barrage. Her vote to attack Iraq, and her refusal to call it a mistake has her trapped.

She is the Republican's dream opponent.

Haha, "disliking to the core", that is a nice way of saying conservatives loathe Hillary and think she is the antichrist. Hey, this is what I've been saying since McCain won NH and Florida. He is going to be the nominee, and Hillary is a losing bet in that matchup. I'm so glad they are officially pushing this FINALLY, because no matter what you think of the candidates, only one of them can beat McCain, and that is based on both polls and common sense, and this memo includes both. I've spoken to tons of people who know moderate Republicans or even hardcore Republicans who like Obama, it is amazing. These same people hate Hillary with a passion, and they would rush to the polls to defeat her, but Obama is a totally different kind of leader, and they can see that. Sure, they don't agree on policy issues, but the importance of that kind of leader extends beyond policy issues, and may not make sense to a lot of us, but it is nonetheless true. He can rake in Independents, he can grab moderate Republicans, and even some stray real conservatives if they hate McCain enough, Hillary will do the opposite. We need to go with the one that makes sense (and who also happens to be the much better candidate regardless of electability).

Heh, FountainHead.

Lookingforhome- I, for one, have never said a word about Republicans complimenting Clinton. I do, however, think it takes a person in denial to believe that the conservative base won't be far more galvanized to beat Hillary, a candidate who they have HATED (with or without reason) for 16 years. I also believe that Hillary will have a very difficult time with independents (again, with or without reason) based both on polls and anecdotal evidence.

My mother, who is an independent, has donated $$ to Obama, but has said she will vote for McCain over Hillary (I am strongly opposed to this position as a democrat - but independents do not have party loyalty). My father, who is strongly republican, voted for Barack on Tuesday but won't consider Hillary.

He's right. I think there are few very people out there who would argue Hillary has a better chance to beat McCain than Obama. I do think Hillary is still likely to win, but it won't be easy and it will partially be because McCain won't be able to bring right-wingers home. But Obama could get a real majority and have a terrific effect on down-ticket races. She won't be allowed into many red/purple states, whereas they'll be begging him to hold rallies in those states.

Bottomline with Obama is that he is well liked across party lines.

You may not agree with his policy positions as a Republican, and you may not ever consider voting for him, but you can still like and respect him as a person and a candidate.

This fact alone is going to make it hard for McCain to attack him (it's not just about being black). When someone who is well liked is attacked, it can reflect more negatively on the attacker, as the Clintons learned the hard way.

Without the ability to effectively attack, the Republican campaign machinery is rendered nearly impotent.

Is there any difference with Hillary supporters claiming his lack of experience will hurt him?

In the county proclaimed by the local Repub machine the “reddest county in the country” DuPage County IL there's this:

http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/napervillesun/news/781425,6_1_NA07_TURNOUT_S1.article

“State Sen. Dan Cronin, chairman of the DuPage Republican Party, pointed out that some of the Democratic ballots may have been cast by Republicans hoping to select the Democratic candidate easiest to defeat.

“I know Republicans who voted for Hillary because they would prefer her as the Democratic nominee since the common position is she would be the easier one to beat,” Cronin said.”

Cronin is wrong. For the first time in history more Dem ballots than Repub were taken in this primary (132,000 to 109,000) and Obama beat Hillary in DuPage 61.43% to 36.93%. There was no surge no Hillary votes, it was all Obama and the indies and Repubs came over in droves to vote for him. He got 81176 votes and McCain 57428.

They're right. I'm one of those independents. I like Obama a lot, and I want him to win. I don't particularly like either Clinton or McCain.

I think that mistake that a lot of Clinton supporters make is thinking that if somebody is forced to pick between the two, more will pick Clinton. But, that misses the point that disaffected voters may just sit it out entirely and not have to pick between two distasteful alternatives.

I just don't particularly like or dislike either of them enough to have a preference for one or the other, and I don't want to vote for either of them. If I hated one or the other enough, I might vote for their opponent. The only reason I voted for Kerry was because I hated Bush. I don't hate either of them enough to vote for the other one though. I think there are more people who hate Clinton than hate McCain or Obama though, so that's a point to her disfavor.

Now as to liking one or the other, I don't like either. McCain is affable and personable, but he's a hothead, so I don't really like all war all the time platform.

Then again, I don't really trust Clinton to get us out of Iraq. She says all the right things now when that's a popular position to take, but it will get less popular once we start actually withdrawing troops. She's shown that she'll vote for war when she thinks she needs that to get elected. With the amendment that would have prevented the US from using cluster bombs in civillian areas, she showed that she's OK with little kids getting their arms blown off as long as she doesn't look weak on defense (I know she'd probably characterize it differently, but that's how I see it). I just think her position will change if the polls change, and I strongly suspect that once we start withdrawing, the polls will change.

Clinton is not affable or personable like McCain. In fact, I have a palpable dislike of her. I'm sure she's better in person, and I know she's smart and accomplished, but I just don't like her. I didn't like Bill either.

Maybe it's the impact of the right wing using them as a punching bag for so long, but I think it's more that their chief attribute seems to be their ambition. I understand that anybody running for public office like this has to be ambitious, but with the Clintons, it feels like it's nothing but ambition. That was the same problem I (and I think other voters) had with Kerry by the way. They seem all too willing to sacrifice anything and everything to that ambition. I feel like they lie to me when they speak, and that makes me think that they think I'm stupid.

Clinton would probably make better supreme court nominations that McCain, but that's the only plus in her favor, and compared to everything else, it's just not enough to make me vote for her. So ultimately, between those two it's a wash for me.

Other people hate her more than I do, and they will vote for McCain even if they don't particularly like him because they dislike her more. I suspect many of those people look at McCain v Obama the same way I look at McCain v Clinton. They don't really want to vote for one versus the other, but they don't hate either of them enough to cast an anti-vote. So, in that match up a lot of them stay home.

So, I think it's very likely that Clinton gets a lot of democrat support, but that's off-set by a lot of anti-Clinton McCain support. Where as Obama gets a lot of democrat support, and that's magnified by a lot of new voters and a lot of disaffected republican voters who break for him or just sit it out entirely.

sancho -

If Obama wins the nomination, Hillary Clinton will almost certainly throw her support behind him. If she doesn't she will look only like a sore loser.

The democratic base will move to Obama if Hillary is out of the picture.

Obama's across-the-board popularity is not due to personal magnetism alone, though that surely sways some. I'll give you an example of another factor: Obama displays a better grasp of how markets work than Clinton.

Clinton's remedy for the subprime loan crisis is an interest rate freeze and a foreclosure moratorium. Now, that may not phase some of you Dems, but my reaction as a libertarian-leaning independent is "Price controls?? What is this, the Soviet Union?"

Obama's remedy is much more carefully thought out: a fund to help overstretched homeowners get through the toughest periods. It balances the moral hazard introduced by a bailout of unwise loans with the well-known benefits of keeping homeowners in their homes. Now, hard-core free-marketers might not like Obama's plan, but it's a lot better than Clinton's. It's economically savvy, creative and humane.

Policies like these say to me that Obama is capable of dealing with problems like income inequality without killing the golden goose, and that he can absorb critiques from the right without compromising his principles.

Polls aside, Obama has about as much chance of beating McCain as Romney did. It ain't going to happen.

If you think that Obama doesn't have a chance at beating McCain, then Hillary really doesn't have a chance.

MMason

It is true--a united Dem party should win. But when has that last happened? I am skeptical that many of those voting for Hillary will want to vote for Obama. The tacit sexism of his campaign (his calling Hillary the victor in a "beauty contest" or saying when he challanges the status quo, "the claws" come out) may leave many women at home election day. Also, many hispanics will likely go to McCain b/c they are traditionally pro-America in the sense that civic loyalty obligates one to support one's country in a time of war. And McCain's stance against his party at the time they see as brave. If Obama campaigns for Hillary, then the dems win. It is up to him. He knows that and it is one reason he and his supporters threaten civil war if he does not get the nom "fair and sqaure." As for myself, I'm voting for the dem. nominee, but the way I see it now is that short of Republican party implosion (which is possible), there is no way Obama wins in November. I understand that Obama supporters don't want to see his defects in a GE but we dems have rarely chosen well. Humphrey-McGovern-Mondale-Dukakis-Gore-Kerry-Obama.

MMASONM, maybe silly to you but seriously, can you imagine first, Obama standing toe-to-toe McCain for a debate? For a discussion on any number of topics such as national security, and so forth? On experience? When Obama is not be rude or at a loss of words and a clear answer, he's a pretty faced alternative to Clinton with ideas but no substance. I'm sure the under-30 crowd craving for 'change' will go for him but the rest of us would prefer a grown-up, ready for the presidency. We are just finishing 8 years of Bush Jr., do we need another go around with another candidate not ready for presidency?

BTW, I figure Obama's hope is about on par with Bush's passionate conservatism.

Straw Man--is that some kind of Republican code for "Obama"? Because with no substantive record but his compelling personality and hopeful promises, they will dress him up as they please. Brooks was warming up in NYTimes today and he is one of the "nice" voices. Please explain how Obama beats McCain in Florida, Ohio, and California (with Arnold at his side), especially once his brand has a chance to be undermined by interests who do not care about Deomcrat unity?Which demographics does he get that allows him to win in those states?

If Obama wins the nomination, the race will be over by the time he ends his acceptance speech at the national convention.

Obama has plenty of substance and plenty of ideas. But what he understands that Clinton supporters don't seem to, is that talking ad nauseum about policies is not how you energize an electorate.

Call it empty rhetoric if you want. Call him an empty vessel. But the effect Obama has on people is real. He knows it. They know it. The ability to rally people to a cause is the fundamental capability of a great leader. And what America needs more than anything else right now is leadership.

Didn;t need Matt Dowd to point to the obvious. Many people, nearly more than not, hate Hillary Clinton. Many people, more than not, like Barack Obama. Barack Obama pummels her in independent voters and this election, as with every election is about winning the independents. This really is a "duh" moment. Obviously, we need to choose Barack Obama to take on McCain, he is the only path to the White House. Wake up Clintonites, your time has come and gone.

It is interesting how the two sides see this issue so very differently. It seems as obvious as the sun at noon to me that Obama is the stronger candidate against McCain. I gather from Matthew and Sancho's posts that they consider it equally obvious that Clinton is. It is a pity that we cannot run two elections, one McCain vs Clinton and the other McCain vs Obama to see who would actuall do better, because it would be very satisfying to see one or the other side actually vindicated in their mutually irreconcilable intuitions.

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Limbaugh_wants_to_raise_cash_for_0207.html

I fear the Republicans' dream candidate is an inexperienced, anti-Iraq war, first-term Senator running against a war hero. Happily, McCain has problems with his party. But the people he has problems with are the old pre-1964-Democrats-who converted-to-being-republican-types. That demographic may well turn out en masse to vote against an African American before it turns out to vote against a woman. Pat Buchanan has said if "we can't beat a woman or a black, we deserve to lose."

The "hasnt been vetted" claim means that he has never faced an unfair, nasty, stereotype-laden repuublican attack. To believe that he can win that war is to underestimate his oppenents and to overestimate the American public's desire to elect candidates who have lived in Indonesia. The Obama fans may be right--he may buck the odds. The fact that Hillary beat the attack machine in New York and right now attracts core demcoratic voters are two strong marks in her favor. Obama is an unknown quantity--we don't know how high or low he can go in a GE. Hillary's negatives are clear and known. She is no sure bet either. Obama has never won a tough election with loads of money coming at him. It may be that having no substantive record helps him. He makes 2000 George Bush look experienced.

To say that you'd rather vote for "hope," than realpolitik sounds like the mindset of a Nader voter. I happen to think that Obama has a lot of realpolitik too (he's brilliantly used the already existing anti-Clinton bias to his favor). Maybe he'll surprise me in the GE as well. Maybe the youth vote will do it this time (it did not in '72). If he wins against a united Republican party, it will be the end of the forty years of democratic wilderness that LBJ predicted when he signed the Civil Rights Acts. That would be glorious.

I agree--it would be interesting to be able run both elections and see who does better. Hillary or Obama.

I'll settle either for winning but we should think about what we are getting before we leap. The Hillary is unelectable theme begins with the Republicans and needs to be (re)-thought through. The Obama is unbeatable theme has not yet been thought through, imo. I wish he had won California. Maybe he'll win Pennsylvania or Ohio. That would help.

They don’t sort of dislike him to there core like they do Hillary Clinton."

So a strategist for Bush uses the word "there" instead of "their"...?

Team Bush, America's 'Best and Brightest' at work.

I left the Dems when Bill thought blowjobs in the Oval Office were cool beans. The man had no honor. Still doesn't. And I have HAPPILY NOT voted for a Dem for president since.

I am an independent. Hillary leaves me ice cold; just more of the same old shit. McCain leaves me cool - he's just LESS of a chameleon-like opportunist than Hillary is. AND he served his country admirably. And THAT carries a great deal of water with MANY of us, Reps, Dems and Indeps alike.

Obama makes me dream of an America governed by the angels of our better nature.

Look, again, this is easy, folks ...

McCain is EASILY beaten IF:

1) The Dems win the independents (like me);

2) The Dems frame the attack on McCain NOW!; &

3) The Dems avoid a civil war (which Dean is desperately trying to avoid right now).

How do we absolutely ensure that the progressive wing of the Dems prevails? Split the ticket.

I will NOT vote for Hillary UNLESS Obama is on the ticket. Ain't gonna happen otherwise. I don't care if the fate of the republic hangs in the balance or not. I don't have to care. I'm well enough off that I can continue to weather the fascist storm. So are many independents.

This is not an installation of a new emperor. If so, then McCain looks more like royalty and Hillary merely the court jester. While McCain put his life on the line; Hillary triangulates. McCain can point to heroic deeds; Hillary has only empty rhetoric. No contest.

Obama MUST be on the ticket for the Dems to win this one.

I think Hillary Clinton would be a fine VP.

Hillary has significant support among Catholics. We know this from her overwhelming support in the Hispanic (e.g., CA and NY and NJ) and blue collar communities (e.g., Buffalo, New York). If Catholics are forced to choose between Obama (nice speech, young guy) and McCain (war hero, sensible on immigration, proven ability to work across the aisle (McCain-Feingold), proven ability to take on the White House (torture policy)), McCain will be our next President. Hillary can keep much of the Catholic bloc, Obama can't.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/09/nyregion/09about.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&ref=politics&pagewanted=print