They should also have asked why she's stiffed so many small business owners who performed services or provided goods for her campaign. I mean, she's really in touch with average folk, right? That's another issue that has yet to be "vetted," George.

Posted at April 18, 2008 1:47 PM in response to The gaping hole in George S's defense of last night's debate.

Having done some recent canvasing in Philadelphia for Obama's campaign, I must agree that "electability," slippery devil that it is, actually has been cited by a number of voters. Several have told me that they are hamstrung, trying to figure out which Democrat has the best chance of winning. So to some extent, I agree that it's fair for debate moderators to highlight questions that address candidates' likely vulnerabilities. HOWEVER, there was a way-f***ed up assumption that Obama had several vulnerabilities to address but Clinton only had one. She should have been asked about Bill and Penn and Wolfson's shilling for Colombia -- isn't THAT guilt by association? She should have been asked about stiffing numerous business people -- isn't THAT out-of-touch with ordinary folk? ETC. So it's fair to ask the candidates to address their vulnerabilities, but there was an outrageous imbalance last night.

Posted at April 17, 2008 10:32 PM in response to Debating Electability

You folks are unreal. Hillary says it would be wrong to deprive voters in PA and nine other states the right to have their voices heard. But her supporters say her opponent should step out. Isn't that convenient, as the church lady herself would say.

The more reasonable people know about Obama, the more they tend to support him. That's how he eliminated her "inevitability." In December, she was ahead in the national polls by double digits.

The fact that a few folks say they'll never vote for him is irrelevant.

How do you spell sore loser? Sisyphus Jones.

Posted at April 7, 2008 11:29 AM in response to Why Obama Can't Win

Some states will go McCain's way, no matter what. Kentucky be one. Much ado about bupkiss.

Posted at March 31, 2008 9:52 PM in response to SurveyUSA: Hillary Ahead 2-1 In Kentucky Primary

I think she was referring to the Farakhan endorsement of Obama. Yet, intriguingly, she didn't reject and denounce Ferraro.

Posted at March 11, 2008 10:49 PM in response to Wolfson On Ferraro's Latest: "We Have Made Clear That We Reject Her Remarks"

hrebendorf -- hysterical. thank you. i needed a good laugh.

Posted at March 10, 2008 10:43 PM in response to Rasmussen: Obama Ahead By 14 In Racially-Polarized Mississippi Primary