I don't know...I've been a staunch supporter of Obama NOT putting Hillary on the ticket, but the virulence of the comments on NARAL's blog surprised even me. I was appalled at some of the things these Hillary supporters were saying, it was absolutely mind-boggling.

You're right that we'll get the 90% of the women's movement that is rooted in reality, but that remaining 10% may not be something we want to write off.

Posted at May 14, 2008 7:50 PM in response to NARAL Endorses Obama -- Hillary Spokesperson Is "Surprised"

You mean like the margin Obama had in NC where they called it the second the polls closed? I just fail to see how this is that big of a deal, she can't make up that much tonight even when she wins by a sizable margin...

Posted at May 13, 2008 8:00 PM in response to News Orgs Instantly Project Big Win For Hillary In West Virginia

Finally. I'm so glad. That is more than feasible, and not too far away. Way to go Barack, let's reunite this party.

Posted at May 6, 2008 9:23 PM in response to Obama Campaign Aide: Tonight's Results Make It More Likely That May 20th Will Be Our D-Day

If you are seriously arguing that we shouldn't nominate him because he's black I have very little left to say to you. Your argument is repulsive.

I'm going to assume you aren't a racist and answer some things.

Obama has already proven that he will turn out young people at rates that the United States hasn't seen in generations. Riddle me this, do you think any of those people turn out if their candidate wins the most delegates, most states, and most votes (her "popular vote if you count MI which didn't count" rubric won't even hold). The answer is no, they don't.

Now, if you're fine writing off the youth and African American vote all so Lady Clinton can ascend to what she believes is her destiny, so be it. She'll lose, and you'll do irreparable damage to the party for a generation.

You are still missing the point of the state internals. Look, her argument is that she wins big blue states, right? If you look at the actual numbers he's winning the blue parts of those states, she's winning the red parts of those states. What that means is that she is less likely to actually carry those states in the general, got it? An example, Obama carries the areas that gave Rendell a win, just not by the same margins Rendell got. The point is, that she will lose those states, because she's getting her support from counties/precincts that will switch once the GOP and Independents get in the race.

This race is convincing me that Hillary supporters are incapable of nuance and reason, for the record. Don't even get me started on math.

Posted at April 23, 2008 7:13 PM in response to Hillary On Track To Raise $10 Million Since Polls Closed Yesterday

I don't know where you get your ideas from, but it isn't the data. Hillary runs worse than Obama in Michigan. Also, if you've looked at internals at all you'll see that Washington (and pretty much anywhere in the Mountain West/Pacific that isn't California) is a complete stretch for her. I don't know what it is, I've never teased it out, the Clintons are despised out here. The areas she does well (with Latinos in NM, Cal, & AZ) will be taken out by McCain (exception Cal--but either Dem will take that state).

Also, don't count PA just yet. The areas she "won" to beat Obama in were the GOP leaning areas. Obama won the Dem strongholds. If even 6 or 7% of those people stay home because they are pissed the Super Dels stole the primary process she will lose PA.

Furthermore all of your concerns about Obama are coming as he's fighting a 2 front war. Give them man some actual institutional backing, have the Clintons come out and say they support his candidacy and have lost, factor in a convention bump and we're fine again. But for God's sake do it soon, I'm a political junkie and this is making me want to tear my eyes out.

Posted at April 23, 2008 6:06 PM in response to Hillary On Track To Raise $10 Million Since Polls Closed Yesterday

Word.

Welcome to the party destor. It's nice to have you on board.

Posted at April 7, 2008 5:30 AM in response to Okay, I Was Wrong and I'm an Obamanoid Now.

I'm personally quite concerned she'll run as an independent. She has that same sense of entitlement that Lieberman does.

Oh, and Picard, all the way.

Posted at March 30, 2008 4:04 AM in response to The Lieberman Maneuver

I've had a similar concern. She seems to feel the same sense of entitlement and scorn towards the uppity left of the party that inspired Lieberman to do the same last cycle.

It wouldn't surprise me at all.

Posted at March 26, 2008 8:08 PM in response to Obama Camp Hammers Letter To Pelosi As "Inappropriate" -- Demands Hillary Reject It

Any chance someone has the video for this?

Posted at March 23, 2008 4:30 PM in response to Richardson Defends Bill Clinton From McCarthyism Charge — But Blasts Carville

Seriously. Care to comment on the double standard, Eric?

Posted at March 22, 2008 5:30 PM in response to Obama-Supporting Retired General Compares Bill Clinton To Joe McCarthy