I don't really buy this. I think a lot of partisans want to up the stakes so that pressure is brought to bear on the super-delegates.

"Ooh, look! If we don't end this soon for XXXXX, all hell will break loose!"

Come November, no Democrat will stay home and allow John McCain to have a chance to further ruin our country.

Attention, superdelegates, are you reading this?

What a shock. Who could ever possibly have guessed this. And I'm sure it's only PA. No voters in other states feel the same way.

(Isn't this primary fun? We're so energized, and in the news, and organized. We're just unbeatable!)

Public Policy Polling has Obama up 21% in North Carolina. Is that right?

Despite his lies about wanting to be a Uniter,Barack Obama and his advisers have conducted a divisive "full assault" on Hillary's character. While talking a lot about the politics of hope, change and unity, Sen. Obama and his campaign have been conducting a relentless and singularly personal assault on Hillary's character. They have blanketed big states with false negative mailers and radio ads and have described Hillary and her campaign as "disingenuous," "divisive," "untruthful," "dishonest," "polarizing," "calculating," "saying whatever it takes to win," "attempting to deceive the American people," "one of the most secretive in America," “deliberately misleading,” “literally willing to do anything to win,” and “playing politics with war."
This "full assault" on Hillary's integrity and character has reached a new peak since Hillary's victories on March 4th. One of Sen. Obama's top surrogates equated President Clinton with Joe McCarthy; another called Hillary a "monster;" and his campaign manager held an angry conference call (audio) claiming that Hillary is "deeply flawed" and has "character issues." That's neither unifying nor hopeful. If Sen. Obama really is the prohibitive favorite some say he is, these negative attacks make absolutely no sense. Why would a frontrunner seek to attack and divide? If Sen. Obama can't unify Democrats in a primary, how can he unify Americans in a general election? Answer he can't. Obama should drop out immediatly and apologise to the Nation.

From the same poll:

McCain is viewed favorably by 55% of voters nationwide and unfavorably by 42%.

Obama’s reviews are 46% favorable and 52% unfavorable.

For Clinton, those numbers are 45% favorable, 52% unfavorable

What a stupid poll. Ask people, before they've voted, if the person they REALLY want to win loses, would they back the other.

What do you THINK they are going to say?

I agree with Unabogie. This is being hyped, probably in part because the media feed on conflict to boost ratings. Remember, Bill Clinton didn't win the nomination for his first term until June, and he won the the presidency.

I think even if this goes all the way to the convention, that still leaves a few months for the Dem nominee to paint a striking contrast between themselves and McCain. Some people will still be bitter if their candidate isn't nominated but I think people will cool down when they realize how much is at stake in the election. Certainly a lot more than 55% of Clinton/Obama supporters would back the other Democratic candidate.

Some of this is so stupid.

I'm as big an Obama guy as it gets. And I could not be more disgusted with the Clinton machine.

That said, I'm used to voting for politician who disgust me, so voting for Hillary over McCain wouldn't be that different than voting for Bill over Dole, or Kerry over Bush. (Well, Bush is a bad example).

Now, if there were any viable progressive alternative to Team Clinton, I'd choose it. But there won't be. So even if Hillary steals the nomination from Obama, I'm still voting for her against McCain. And then I'm returning to my cynical hole, finally certain that politics and idealism don't mix.

On the other hand, if it is Hillary v. McCain, all my conservative friends and relatives will be so happy that my vote will do little to stop anything.

The longer Hillary stays in this the more I'm convinced she's positioning herself for another attempt in 2012 as opposed to making a good faith effort to win it this year. I don't see a path to her claiming the nomination that doesn't feature a deeply divided party, and I don't think she does either. She knows Obama's the likely nominee, so a divided party this year only increases the chances she'll get another shot in 4 years.

I don't think the numbers are nearly as troubling as the underlying reality.

Polarization, partisan rancor and demonizing have become our template for dealing with political differences. We literally no longer know how to react to disagreement other than to choose sides, dig in and lob mortar shells across No Man's Land - even among our own party.

Another gift that keeps on giving from RoveBush.

I think the poll is misleading in that most (but certainly not all) Democrats will come around in November regardless of who the nominee is, simply to avoid "100 Years In Iraq" McCain; but that doesn't alter the fact that this bitter primary contest is hurting the Democrats nationally.

McCain's numbers versus both Dem candidates have risen quite a bit lately, and IMO that is primarily because he's been able to sit back and look like the good guy while the Dems fight it out. This may not be permanent damage, but it is unnecessary damage. This race should have been over in February, and if Hillary's last name weren't "Clinton," it would have been.

On the other hand, perhaps we shouldn't discount the bitterness within the Democratic Party. The Carville-Richardson war of words is a good example of rifts in the party that may never be repaired. And with Clinton now pushing the racially divisive aspects of the Wright story in PA--a story McCain vowed not to pursue--even more Democrats will be alienated.

I'd say that the Clintons have lost the African-American vote for good at this point, and they're losing the good old "latte liberals" like me as well. The Clinton campaign may sneer at those voting blocs now, but they can't win a national election without them.

My ideal scenario for the Democratic Party is that the Clintons, knowing they can't defeat Obama, concede and provide their full and active support helping him and their party win the presidency. My second best scenario is, that despite the fact the Clintons know they can't defeat Obama, they continue to praise McCain, and through omission and or comission, try to damage Obama as much as they can. Next, Obama defeats the Clintons and wins the Democratic nomination for the presidency, and without the Clinton's full and active support defeats John McCain and wins the presidency. This would leave the Clintons exactly where I've come to beleive they deserve to be; on the outside looking in. Obama will forgive and forget for the sake of party unity, but never again will the Clintons be in a postion to place their personal amabitions ahead of the best interests of the Democratic Party.

Here's what reasonably minded Obama supporters (I assume there are some) need to digest.

If at the convention neither candidate clinches the nomination even after several rounds of voting, and their difference in delegates (since that is the only thing that matter in the actual nomination process) is less than the typical margin of error in polls, say 2-3%, then both side must agree that it is a statistical tie and the DNC must adopt some rules on the spot that allow the delegates to revote with no commitments or pledges.

That is the only fair way that a nominee can be selected without the latent animosity that will ensure a McCain victory.

If that fails then a coin toss really is the only sure fire way to end this thing fairly.